I was talking with Brian Kraemer of CRN earlier on the subject(s) of Cloud Computing. We agreed that the buzz word is so nebulous that it has so many different meanings to different people in different industries that its hard to nail down what the most popular cloud computing definitions, subjects, and offerings are. From a practical perspective, "service" offerings via a "cloud" are viewed, defined and even admistered differently. Steve Felice, President of the Dell SMB Group, has defined a compelling model that marries SaaS and cloud computing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM9lNqeEq2k). I like his perspective for small business. What about big business? The traditional concept held cloud computing to be a bunch of motherboards or "chassis-less servers" connected to cables wherein resources are shared by different applications and customers as needed. Brian and I further agreed that we'd like to hear from other partner channel companies on their definitions of Cloud Computing... Steve
Interesting video. Thanks for posting, Steve. I thought the idea of giving customers an appliance (or "pizza box" server") was interesting. I guess I can understand the trepidation of businesses using hosted servers for all their important applications and functions, but I'm not sure how having a couple of dedicated servers ON-site, which are still using the applications hosted OFF-site, will help potential customers get over their fear, especially smaller businesses in the SMB space. But maybe Felice is on to something with the whole plug-and-play idea.
In any event, the trepidation over using hosted applications was a similar issue 10 years ago with ASPs. Remember those? Application service providers were supposed to be the future of the industry because no one wanted to deal with the headaches that came with installing, monitoring, upgrading, and maintaining all these software programs. Well, it turned out 1) ASPs on the whole weren't so good at hosting those applications, and 2) businesses became increasingly concerned over security risks, loss of data and other potential problems that could cut them off from the host.
In terms of comparing cloud to ASPs, software as a service, and hosted servers on the whole, cloud computing actually involves a much larger scale of software/services/infrastructure with an architecture and scalability that can support all of those demands. But hey, that's just how I see it. Cloud computing is, after all, another nebulous buzz word as Steve pointed out.
So let's start trying to define cloud computing. I'll start broadly and then maybe we can begin to narrow the definition down as we go, redefining as we see fit.
So, at it's most basic, cloud computing for business consists of a way to host and deliver storage, applications and information to customers in any environment that doesn't rely on a single instance of a server or storage device that can be modified to be public or private (or a combination of the two) depending on the organizational needs.
How's that for a start?
Rob, good points here. Yes, back when... quality hosting and security were some of the biggest barriers to success and they still are. This draws the lesson that those with the killer app should not be provisioning the hardware and bandwidth only some of the software (if the design requires). So a private cloud within a public cloud where in the infrastructure is shared resource and software is partitioned (see Salesforce.com). But then security still remains.... the psychological barrier is tremendous. So, in the case of SMBs they say "Hey great app. makes sense and I can surely use it and save hard earned money, but who is seeing and touching our information." This justifies the case for slightly higher cost secure managed hosting (e.g. www.NeoSpire.net) and dedicated hardware/software - people are very willing to pay for. Five Nines are absolutely critical. Traditional managed hosting providers can extend their business into an "ASP" style offering as long as security is tight? So, how does a provider share resources but guarantee security?
I like it great start. Most clouds have similar designs, though no one design or architecture is best for every cloud. Naturally there are similarities in hardware and software designs and I think we'll see this most commonly in the public commoditized clouds (e.g. Amazon et al.). So , this sounds a bit easy? I don't think so. The system providers have to come-up with (1) lower cost commodity hardware that is somewhat build-to-order and (2) embedded software hooks and APIs. So, then what is the actual hardware? Surely, you'd want to strip redundancies to keep the physical costs as low as possible. Parts additions and/or replacement components need to be plentiful and lower cost an in plentiful supply. On the software side, virtualization is largely an essential item.
Being an old networking (and standards) guy, I favor the X.25 and Frame Relay definition of a cloud; i.e. - You "see" a service that does requested work for you, without any visibility into the inner workings. As with Frame Relay, individual vendor implementations can vary, but if you follow the rules, you can't tell (and don't care) what's inside - as long as what you expect gets done.
That said however, those networking protocols/services underwent considerable formal defining efforts before being implemented. Cloud computing has not gone through that process, "we" as an industry are still stumbling around. There are many vendors with good ideas, but Vendor A and Vendor B almost certainly require and assume their own model, while the end customer who just wants things done has to fight through the mix.
There is hope and serious progress which should produce better results than the DVD format wars (HD vs. Blu-Ray, etc. or going back a generation - VHS vs. Betamax).
Cloud computing consists of at least the following elements:
That's my $0.02 worth!
Bob
Hi Bob, Thanks for sharing. The SMB side of specialty private cloud solutions is still laregly unexplored. The Amazon model is almost an eBay style cloud for smaller co's and its a bitgeneric and "scary" for some businesses. I would like to uncover what the CRN community thinks are the compelling applications for SMB. What do you think these applications are? Steve
Rob, good points here. Yes, back when... quality hosting and security we some of the biggest barriers to success and they still are. This draws the lesson that those with the killer app should not be provisioning the hardware and bandwidth only some of the software (if the design requires). So a private cloud within a public cloud where in the infrastructure is shared resource and software is partitioned (see Salesforce.com). But then security still remains.... the psychological barrier is tremendous. So, in the case of SMB's they say "Hey great app. makes sense and I can surely use it and save hard earned money, but who is seeing and touching our information." This justifies the case for slightly higher cost secure managed hosting (e.g. www.NeoSpire.net) and dedicated hardware/software - people are very willing to pay for. Five Nines are absolutely critical. Traditional managed hosting providers can extend their business into an "ASP" style offering as long as security is tight? So, how does a provider share resources but guarantee security?