A quick & dirty look at web traffic trends on AWS, Azure, Force.com, GAE, and IBM Dev/Test cloud

Since the introduction of EC2 in 2005/2006, a lot has happened.  New service providers such as Google App Engine (GAE) and Force.com have emerged.  Existing hosting providers such as GoGrid & RackSpace have transformed to cloudify their service delivery model.  And, existing platform vendors such as IBM and Microsoft have raced to implement or acquire solutions to respond to this fundamental shift. 

Different types of vendors are competing for market positions.  Some are new: Abiquo,  Nimbula, Cloud.com (formerly VMOps)…  And, some are mature: VMware, Novell/Attachmate, CA, BMC, DELL, …  [The vendor landscape is big and complex, and includes other types of vendors including systems integrators…]

As we close 2010, I thought it would be interesting to look at some usage trends of the big names in the Cloud market. 

The statistics come from Alexa.  It uses its own methods for capturing HTTP traffic, and normalizing the data.  As such, it is important to note that it does not include non-web app workload deployed on these cloud services.  In addition, it is common for enterprises to use DNS aliasing (CNAME) to map to a custom URL.  So, it is important to consider traffic to custom URLs would not be included in the following presentation.

Comparing aws, azure, force, gae, and ibm

View more presentations from babak hosseinzadeh.

The intent is to provide some ideas about usage and future trends, as these vendors battle it out for dominance and market share.

Please send me any comments or questions at babakh@yahoo.com.

Wish everyone a Happy New Year!

A brief look at Oracle and its Cloud Strategy

For the last couple of years, Oracle has shown a consistent strategy to Cloud Computing.  It has made strategic acquisitions such as Virtual Iron to gain x86 virtualization management software, and has also made investments in new products such as Virtual Assembly Builder to facilitate configuration and governance of virtual environments.

Oracle has made clear that it intends to be a provider of technology to both enterprise customers and service providers.  That it does not plan to be a public cloud provider/operator like AWS or Savvis.  Instead, Oracle works with public cloud services as a distribution and delivery partner. 

[Note: See AWS/Oracle announcement of  support for Oracle middleware and apps on EC2 using Oracle VM images.]

---------

This post is a brief look at Oracle and its cloud strategy.  First, I will review Oracle business, financial, and what it brings to Cloud Computing.  Next, I will provide a 5-minute SWOT analysis of Oracle Cloud Strategy.

Oracle business

Oracle’s goal is to be the world’s most complete, open and integrated enterprise software and hardware company.  In FY2010, it booked more than $26B in revenue.  The company breaks down its revenue as follows:

• Software
• New software sales
• Software license renewals & support contract
• Hardware
• Hardware sales
• Hardware support & maintenance contract
• Services
• Consulting
• Education
• On Demand

Here is their revenue trend for the last 5 years:

• Oracle made over 32% of its 2010 total revenue ($26,821 million) from database & middleware renewal, and about 16% from Fusion apps renewal.  This is due to the fact that almost 90% of Oracle customers renew contracts.   [Renewal has a margin of 85%, and is the key factor to Oracle’s overall profitability.]
• Oracle’s On Demand, which is where it offers hosted Fusion application, has also contributed to about 3% of total revenue.  This segment has shown steady growth.  In fact, since 2005, it has grown almost 3 times.  [This is a key area to future growth for Oracle especially considering all the investments they have been making to standardize Fusion apps on Fusion middleware and continue to “SaaSify” the applications.]

Oracle Cloud Business Strategy

As stated earlier, Oracle intends to be primarily a Cloud technology provider/enabler as opposed to a service operator.  This was further evidenced as it halted the rollout plans for Project Caroline after the Sun acquisition.

For enterprise customers, Oracle is addressing the needs for private cloud by providing integrated machines such as Exadata and Exalogic.  These machines help customers consolidate workloads and scale up/down as demand grows.  Oracle also continues with new products and enhancement of its middleware and enterprise management solution to enable customers build private clouds on their own hardware.

I think Oracle will be forced to change their cloud strategy for the following reasons:

• According to analysts, about 10% of IT budget is spent on external cloud services and that percentage will keep growing (see Gartner’s survey).  Oracle needs to pay attention to this shift in enterprise IT spending, if it plans to increase marketshare and revenue.  Large customers struggle with supporting workloads in the cloud, so they look for a vendor to not only help them move workloads to the Cloud, but also provide support and management.  So, they look for hosted managed private clouds.  Oracle could address this need by leveraging Sun assets such as Caroline to offer such services.  This would position it well for future growth.   
• It is common knowledge that Oracle wants to reach $100B in revenue in the next 10 years.  Cloud Computing, including integrated systems, is a key growth strategy for Oracle.    Oracle needs to diversify to reach that level of revenue in the next decade.  It can’t rely on acquisitions to make that happen.  Let’s assume Oracle acquires CA.  That would only boost Oracle’s revenue by $4B.  

Sidebar: Let’s play the following scenario.  Let’s assume that on average with every Exalogic Oracle charges $1M for hardware and $3M for software. Furthermore, let’s assume a %20 maintenance revenue per box / year.  If Oracle sold 1000 units every year for the next 3 years, they would book a total of $12B in combined new hardware and software + $4B in maintenance.  Everything else constant, by 2014, Oracle’s revenue would grow by $16B to $42B.  Can they do that? 

Oracle Cloud Solution

The following diagram describes Oracle’s cloud solution model:

Oracle models its solutions based on different Cloud service offering.   The diagram is pretty self-explanatory.  At the IaaS level, Oracle Sun hardware,  and virtualization technologies (Virtual Iron + Sun).  Oracle offers other capabilities that are not listed in this diagram such as Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) and Oracle VM Virtual Box.

In the PaaS layer, Oracle uses a combination of virtualization to isolate workloads and management deployment + grid technologies to enable dynamic resources and scaling for applications.

At the top layer, Oracle and non-Oracle apps can be deployed on this platform.  Oracle Fusion apps are optimized for Oracle Fusion middleware. 

Finally, on the right hand side, there is the management layer…The slide is a cut and paste of Richard Sarwal’s presentation at Oracle OpenWorld.  In that presentation, Richard also mentioned that there other capabilities and solution that Oracle will be offering in the next year (i.e. self-service portal, metering & charge-back, etc)

Oracle Cloud SWOT

In terms of integrated systems, Oracle will face competition primarily from IBM CloudBurst and Acadia.  On the middleware side, IBM offers a similar set of offerings based on WebSphere and Tivoli (i.e. WebSphere CloudBurst, WebSphere Virtual Enterprise, Tivoli Cloud Management stack).   Oracle will face competition from VMware vFabric.   IBM has embraced VMware as a virtualization partner (on x86)whereas Oracle decided to acquire its own virtualization.  That has been a source of friction between the two vendors.

In terms of deployment and support, IBM offers more choices than Oracle:

• IBM & Oracle both offer enterprise-owned cloud
• IBM offers managed private cloud services (using customers assets), but Oracle does not.  A customer would have to get a managed services contract from an Oracle partner like Wipro.
• IBM offers IBM-hosted private cloud, but Oracle does not.  A customer would have to sign a contract with an Oracle Cloud provider like Savvis that offers both hosting and support services.
• IBM offers a public cloud where multiple tenants share the same infrastructure. This is useful for certain workloads (i.e. email, public website) and cloud scenarios (development and testing).  Oracle doesn’t offer that.  A customer would have to find a Pay-As-You-Go provider like AWS.

So, here is a quick SWOT of Oracle Cloud:

Let me know what you think? 

Do you think Oracle can reach $100B in the next 10 years through an acquisition only strategy?   What other challenges do you see in Oracle’s cloud strategy, and selling its middleware machine into the enterprise?

A review and analysis of IBM Test & Development Cloud, and opportunities

IBM finally GA'd its Development & Test Cloud last week: http://www.ibm.com/cloud/enterprise
In addition to a public cloud service offering, IBM is also providing an option to deploy such an infrastructure-as-a-service model on-premise (private cloud): http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/index.wss/offering/midware/a1030965

I believe Cloud Computing is critical to IBM’s future growth.  It may even be the only solution to declining revenues in some of IBM’s business segments.    I will share some opinions below after a quick solution review.

The IBM cloud is built on Rational & Tivoli components.  Rational provides design, development, testing, and application lifecycle management & governance, and Tivoli enables automated resource provisioning & service management (self-service request management, performance monitoring, usage metering, billing):

IBM Test & Development Cloud

I think there is an opportunity for IBM’s Cloud to be a huge success for the following reasons:

Virtualization
For IBM public cloud, KVM powers the virtualization layer.  The on-premise solution is virtualization technology agnostic: KVM, PowerVM, and VMWare.

• In a previous post, I made the observation that most large enterprises cannot standardize on a single virtualization infrastructure.  They have to deal with multiple virtualization technologies.   While there seems to be some gaps in IBM’s on-premise solution (ex. no Xen or Hyper-V support), I think IBM is in a much better position than VMWare or Oracle to unify management across different virtualization technologies.   This would be a a big competitive differentiator and value to the enterprise.
• Secondly, in the world of Cloud Computing, vendors are primarily focused on x-86 platform.  All other platforms are ignored.  If IBM can extend their public cloud to support pSeries and maybe even zSeries (mainframe-as-a-service ?), this would also be a huge competitive differentiator.  This would allow more workloads to be moved to the Cloud and benefit customers.  As an example, customers would be able to move some of their mainframe batch jobs to the Cloud to save MIPS.

OS Coverage
The initial set of OS images are limited. In the initial public offering, IBM only offers Red Hat & Novell images.  There are no Windows images (yet ?).  I think it is just a matter of time for IBM to offer Windows images on their public cloud.

As I said above, the on-premise solution can support AIX images now, and maybe zOS in the near future (why not?).  If IBM were to offer AIX & zOS VMs in the Cloud, it would not only be able to realize a new revenue stream and possibly revive that segment, but keep customers from migrating to other platforms.  I think this could open new opportunities.  The challenge is how to do this in a balanced way without cannibalizing the existing customer base, and creating incentives for IBM sales teams to execute after those opportunities.

Pricing
IBM’s cloud “infrastructure pricing” is competitive to AWS.  However, for IBM software, there are different licensing & subscription options:

Customer scenarios	Software	Infrastructure
	Charge	Charge
You "bring your own IBM license" ("BYOL")	Prepaid for software license	Per VM per hour
You own an IBM software license and can use the pre-built IBM images in the portal catalog
You "pay-as-you-go" ("PAYG")	Per Image per hour	Per VM per hour
You choose the desired software, accept the license terms online, and receive a monthly usage bill
You "bring your own software and licenses"	Prepaid for software licenses	Per VM per hour
You bring your own software or software for which you hold valid licenses and install them on the servers you provision
You want to test "pre-release" software	No charge for restricted use	Per VM per hr
From time to time, pre-released software images will be made available on a temporary basis for test (non-productive) use
You are an eligible ISV/SI developer	No charge or by usage	Per VM per hr
You can use selected IBM "development use only" ("DUO") software for development, test, proof of concept and sales demos on the IBM Cloud
Options available vary by software package.

IBM hasn’t published detailed pricing on their software subscription pricing (PAYG), but it would be a fair to assume it will be less than what they charge on Amazon.  [N.B. on AWS, IBM only offers a very small subset of its software primarily targeting ISVs for development & testing as opposed to enterprise customers.]
Now, let’s talk about the market and the opportunity for IBM.

Market maturity, opportunity & customer addressability
Since the recession a couple of years ago, Cloud Computing has gained more momentum in the enterprise.  IDC estimates spending on Cloud services in the range of $42B by 2012. 
If you look at early Cloud providers such as Amazon or Google, while I have enormous respect and appreciation for the innovation and technical design and delivery of the services, I argue they haven’t been able to gain traction in the enterprise space.  The only exception is SalesForce.com [take a look towards the bottom of this post.].  They have done well, because the founder had an enterprise software background.

As an example, if you look at Google’s enterprise business in 2009, it booked around $209M (that includes revenue from their search appliance + Google Apps).  In a previous post, I estimated AWS revenue to be around $200M / year.    If you compare these numbers with IBM SWG, MSFT or Oracle software revenues, I think it would be easy to conclude they haven’t captured a big marketshare in the enterprise space.  I think this is fundamentally due to their lack of business relationship, partnerships, and investments in sales & marketing.

So, I think this is a good time for IBM to enter the market.

In terms of opportunity and access to market, IBM is a global company with delivery centers around the world. It has business segments that align well with customers considering or transitioning to Cloud Computing. To understand the potential opportunity for IBM better, let's look at some numbers. 

IBM Development & Test Cloud is an offering from Global Technology Services (GTS):

The numbers above are in millions.  In 2009, GTS revenue was around $37B with a gross margin of around 35%.

There are several business lines in GTS:

• Strategic Outsourcing (SO) – This segment offers outsourcing services to commercial and public sector.  In 2009, IBM’s SO revenue was $19.3B.
• Integrated Technology Services (ITS) – This segment offers different IT services (project based) from IT strategy –> middleware services –> infrastructure services.  In 2009, ITS’ revenue was $8.7B.
• Business Transformation Outsourcing (BTO) – This segment focuses primarily on business process outsourcing (BPO), and “IT transformation” services.  In 2009, BTO’s revenue was $2.2B.
• Maintenance – This segment offers product maintenance and support services.  In 2009, GTS maintenance revenue contribution was almost $7B.

IBM has C-level relationships in Fortune companies in all industries.   Some of these companies have already entrusted IBM with their IT infrastructure and mission critical systems.  This puts IBM in a huge advantage over other service providers. 

As SO contracts are renewed, and as ITS engages customers in IT strategy and middleware services, IBM should also be able to harvest opportunities for both private cloud as well as public cloud. 

[N.B.  The cool thing about Cloud services is that they are not like SO contracts (i.e. fixed).  Once you sign up a customer, as long as you’re meeting your SLAs, and manage the offering in terms of features/capabilities, you should be able to maintain a profitable recurring revenue stream (i.e. reduced sales & marketing costs, reduced infrastructure costs through efficient multi-tenant delivery).]

Consider this....If IBM were to convert 10% of 2009 GTS revenue from existing base to Cloud, let's say over the next 3 years, they would make about $3B in Cloud revenue by 2013…Now, that’s revenue & marketshare.

Here is another reason why Cloud could help IBM.    IBM Software Group booked $22B of revenue in 2009:

SWG revenue breaks down as follows:

• Cross-brand middleware:  This is combined revenue from WebSphere, Tivoli, Lotus, Rational, Information Management worth over $12B.  IBM doesn’t break down the revenue by brand. 
• Other middleware: This include legacy middleware such as CICS & IMS.  IBM made over $4.6B there.
• Operating Systems: This includes software such as zOS, AIX, AS/400, & TPF.  In 2009, the OS revenue was > $2.1B.  This is dependent on how IBM’s hardware group (Systems & Technology Group) performs.
• Product Lifecycle Management (PLM): I think it is a joint venture with Dassault Systems.
• Other: This includes all IBM Software Group services (aka Lab services).  In 2009, the revenue for this part was $1.4B.

As you can see above, except for lab services, x-brand middleware is the only segment that’s been reporting growth. There are two reasons for this:

• Acquisitions: IBM has made some big acquisitions in this space: (i.e. Cognos for $5B, FileNet for $1.7B, Sterling Commerce for $1.2B…).  Acquisitions help IBM book new business.
• Renewal rates: This is recurring revenue from existing customers.  I was told by a software sales exec, average renewal rates for a successful enterprise software company is around 98% (depending on the product, maturity, etc).   So, this is helping IBM SWG maintain revenue and marketshare.

I haven’t heard of any new notable products out of SWG lately.  So, looking at the above, I think it is fair to conclude acquisitions have been the primary vehicle for growth in SWG.  So, with Cloud Computing, SWG  should be able to develop a new revenue stream.

So, for SWG, I think Cloud Computing can offer the following benefits:

• Use Cloud as a sales & delivery channel for SMB.  This would be very helpful to IBM.
• Offer a viable alternative to clients looking at other sourcing options
• In the beginning, I think Cloud can offer a parallel revenue stream for SWG particularly for WebSphere, Tivoli, and Rational
• Compete with other private cloud vendors and public cloud service providers
• Partners and alliances help IBM realize almost a third of its total revenue.  SWG gains a lot from these GSIs and ISVs.  SWG can offer new solutions to these partners to help grow its revenue.  Also, help ISVs cloudify their solutions.

All of the above should help IBM sustain growth.

[N.B. There is some difference between private and public clouds in terms of revenue.
Software is a high margin business.  In the case of IBM SWG, the gross margin for SWG was 86%.  The reason for this is software licensing & maintenance costs.  With public clouds, this is radically different. It is a volume business.  For IBM to be profitable in the public cloud space, they must sign up more and more customers.  On the private cloud side, they should be able to do better.]
----------------------
IBM is building a good story here.  From SWG side, with WebSphere CloudBurst, the recent acquisition of Cast Iron, and Rational Software Delivery Services, IBM is putting together all the asset to enable Cloud Computing for the enterprise.  On the GTS side, IBM is in a good position to create opportunities, and work with enterprise customers to help transition to Cloud.

Finally, from a competitive perspective, in the enterprise space (as opposed to consumer space), I don’t think IBM needs to worry too much about AWS or Google.  As long as IBM prices its public cloud offerings from GTS, Lotus, etc competitively, and maintain a close relationship with enterprise accounts, I think they should be able to do OK.

In the enterprise space, I think SWG should keep an eye on Oracle and VMWare on one side, and MSFT on the other.  GTS will have to worry about the usual competitors such as CSC, HP/EDS, etc...

IBM POWER7: Smarter Systems for Smarter Planet

Yesterday I attended an IBM event on POWER7 in Los Angeles.  The event was designed to show how POWER7 is a game changer in terms of form factor, massive parallelism and performance, virtualization, workload consolidation, integrated systems management, high availability,  energy consumption, and overall costs.

First, Ross Mauri gave an introduction to POWER series and innovation over the last decade.  He shared a lot of interesting metrics in terms of clients, migration patterns and experiences, key aspects of the system and overall score relative to competition… and he also shared some information on POWER7+, and POWER8 roadmap.  Next, John Shedletsky (VP, IBM SWG) gave a presentation on how IBM software is integrated and optimized on POWER7, and shared some case studies and competitive analysis in terms of workload performance and scalability, and cost.  Finally, Stan Pachura (CIO, The PMI Group) shared his experience with POWER7.  He described how PMI had been able to upgrade to POWER7, and consolidate iSeries & BI workloads without incurring any additional costs.

Some of the vendors mentioned in the presentations included HP, SUN (Oracle), and VMware :-)  Here is a link to the presentations:
https://www-950.ibm.com/events/wwe/grp/grp017.nsf/v16_agenda?openform&seminar=584RYCES&locale=en_US

Oracle, AmberPoint, and the SOA Management ecosystem

Earlier this morning, Oracle announced it had entered into an agreement to acquire AmberPoint.  AmberPoint will be integrated and managed under Oracle’s Enterprise Manager division, and over time will be ported to the EM management framework.

For both existing customers and new prospects, this is positive news on many levels (i.e. broader/deeper capabilities after integration with EM, removing any doubts or concerns over vendor financial stability, product viability, solution’s strategic fit in the enterprise, etc).  AmberPoint will fill the gaps in Oracle’s SOA management capabilities today, and should play a key role for Oracle Cloud management in the future. With Oracle’s sales and distribution channels, AmberPoint will be able to reach new markets and extend market share.

In SOA management business, AmberPoint and SOA Software were the only key niche players left.  This acquisition puts Oracle in direct competition with SOA Software.  It will end the Oracle and SOA software partnership.  Looking forward, SOA Software is likely either going to get acquired – or - has to figure out a different product and partner strategy to compete. 

In terms of acquisition, the usual suspects for SOA Software include IBM, Microsoft, CA, HP, BMC or possibly even SAP.   Any of these vendors should be able to take their solutions and integrate them as part of a broader ESM/BSM solution.  SOA Software assets could help accelerate with that.  As far as product strategy, I think SOA Software will have to break away from just “SOA management” targeting enterprise customers into broader Cloud management also targeting Cloud service providers: self-service, asset/portfolio management, Cloud operational governance (quota, policies, SLA, billing, …) configuration, provisioning, automation…  They can do some of that on their own or go to market with new partners.

In summary, Oracle’s acquisition is definitely good for customers.  It also forces the other player to consider solutions and strategies.

IBM Cloud for Development & Test

IBM has a new service IBM Smart Business - Cloud for Development and Test that offers developers a set of pre-configured images for implementation and lifecycle management of IT solutions based on IBM stack.  It looks like it went beta September 30, 2009.

This service was mentioned in an IBM press release in June, but I don’t think it got picked up by any Cloud Computing forums/SIGs.  IBM itself didn’t promote it much either.  In this initial release, it is free and offers a limited set of images from IBM Rational and WebSphere portfolio.  It provides a nice self-provisioning control panel to manage servers:

Personally, I have been waiting for such a service from IBM for a long time, because it has been a pain uploading IBM software to build environments on other public clouds (especially those that require multiple server components). 

I think IBM could/should have done this 4 years ago (when I was at IBM, I talked to several executives about it).  Never-the-less, I think it will be a successful offering and IBM should see rapid adoption.  I also believe that it enables an infrastructure to support complex hybrid cloud usecases especially for those set of customers that have invested in IBM infrastructure and middleware technologies.   Finally, as the service matures (i.e. additional platform services and APIs), it shouldn’t be limited to just developers building apps.  Customers should be able to host enterprise apps or build new apps using their cloud services…

Linux Foundation Report

Following my post on VMWare’s acquisition of SpringSource, a friend of mine alerted me to the latest report from Linux Foundation. It contains various statistics on the Kernel development including contributors (both individuals & vendors). On page 11, it shows Red Hat as #1, followed by IBM, Novell, Intel…

With all this investment and involvement, Red Hat’s virtualization strategy, and not to forget Xen and vendors like Citrix, I think competitive pressure on VMWare will intensify much more in the next 12 – 18 months…

VMWare’s acquisition of SpringSource

Last week, VMWare announced that it had entered into an agreement to acquire SpringSource, an open-source enterprise Java vendor. This was a significant development, because SpringSource brings new assets and capabilities beyond virtualization to VMWare (i.e. CloudFoundry).

In VMWare’s press release, the motivation for the acquisition is described as follows: “Together, VMware and SpringSource plan to further innovate and develop integrated Platform as a Service (PaaS) solutions that can be hosted at customer datacenters or at cloud service providers.“

I think the acquisition was also influenced by Red Hat’s virtualization strategy, Linux-based virtualization (KVM), its open-source approach to virtualization management (libvirt, oVirt, Thincrust…) and how it’s rallying the open source community around Cloud Computing… Also, Red Hat offers a complete middleware stack (JBoss, MRG), Systems Management solutions (Red Hat Network Satellite, JBoss Operations Network). Acquisition of SpringSource enables VMWare to compete with Red Hat and offer customers an alternative.

Who is SpringSource?

SpringSource created and leads the open source Spring framework. They offer a set of tools + consulting & support to facilitate the enterprise adoption of Spring and related open-source technologies. They are very active in other open-source projects and industry groups (Tomcat, Groovy, Grails, OSGi…)

Here are a few highlights:

• Open source leadership – Many of the Spring & Tomcat committers work for SpringSource. By acquisition, SpringSource also leads Groovy & Grails.
• Spring has excellent traction in the enterprise. Some of SpringSource’s customers include JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, LinkedIn… And, they are continuing their impressive growth.
• They have assembled a strong management team including previous executives from JBoss & BEA
• They have developed key partnerships and alliances with Global Systems Integrators and solution providers
• CloudFoundry – This is a new offering from SpringSource. It is a Spring-based Cloud solution development & deployment framework optimized for AWS (it leverages CloudTools).

Why would VMWare buy SpringSource?

SpringSource brings proven & popular technologies to VMWare that don’t overlap with their existing portfolio. It fills its technology gaps above the infrastructure & OS layers. It enables VMWare to reach new customers.

VMWare is a leader in the infrastructure virtualization space. They engage infrastructure architects and sell to data center managers. They sell from bottom up or at the C-level (i.e. cost reduction, simplification).

VMWare doesn’t speak middleware & application frameworks. Similarly, most middleware architects don’t get virtualization. First, SpringSource should be able to raise awareness about virtualization with their existing customer base (middleware architects & developers). This should open up new opportunities for VMWare fairly quickly… Next, VMWare should be able to bring SpringSource in front of their customers. That will also create new opportunities for both companies.

With CloudFoundry, VMWare is able to offer a choice to customers (private or public). By entering the market early, and early engagements with customers on both VSphere & CloudFoundry, VMWare gets a head start understanding the market requirements which enables them to plan and design more competitive Cloud solutions. That is a big advantage.

What about Red Hat?

Red Hat’s approach is different from VMWare. Their strategy is to provide an open-source virtualization solution based on Linux, and provide a unified management framework to address not just virtual infrastructure, but virtual desktops as well.

One of the advantages for Red Hat is that Linux is the most widely deployed OS in the enterprise. This is powered by their big alliance and partnership programs with mega vendors like IBM & HP. This is in balance with VMWare’s partnership program & distribution model (i.e. embedded hypervisor). However, Red Hat’s challenge remains to generalize its efforts and solutions for all Linux distributions.

Final thoughts

I think this is a market defining acquisition. It gives other Cloud Computing vendors some direction to follow. As we move forward, I think the following trends will get stronger:

• More lightweight middleware solutions in the Cloud from open source & mega vendors (i.e. IBM, Oracle)
• More systems management tools in the Cloud from both open source & commercial
• More middleware & systems management appliances

A recurring question for me is what AWS’s strategy is (or should be) with regards to growth? Should they remain an infrastructure provider and incrementally build out more services (organic growth)? Should they continue to rely on partners for value-add services and distribution channel? Is it time for AWS to consider acquisition for growth? What would you do, if you were running AWS?

IBM's Cloud Computing annoucement

Disclosure: I previously worked for IBM.

Back in October, IBM made an announcement about its Cloud Computing initiatives that was particularly interesting, because it illustrated efforts across different IBM divisions, and plans to respond to opportunities in the marketplace.

So far, the primary adopters of Cloud Computing have been Web 2.0 startups and some SMBs, but it seems larger enterprises are slowly moving to a more blended model of computing:

• Customers are looking for more capabilities beyond server consolidation and virtualization. They are looking to transform their data centers across different sites to “private clouds” with autonomic capabilities to leverage internal resources and capabilities more efficiently.

• Customers are starting to show demand for solutions to help bridge these “private clouds” with “public clouds” to consume services securely and reliably.

As part of its Blue Cloud, IBM has been investing a lot on new global delivery centers and technologies. In addition, IBM research cooperates on a number of projects with universities and vendors on open-source, and standards around portability and interoperability (i.e. Reservoir, OpenNebula, and Eucalyptus).

I have been a big believer in internet-based Web services since Amazon introduced S3 & Elastic Compute Cloud in 2005 (I also worked for Amazon). They deserve a lot of respect and credit for leading the industry and continued innovation. But, I think big vendors like IBM and Microsoft are needed to change the mindset of executives and influencers at the enterprise level.

So, could this be the beginning of the end of the initial euphoria - typical of early stage technologies – and maturity of Cloud Computing towards an accepted approach?

Transitive acquisition -- Great, but maybe misunderstood

Autonomic/on-demand/elastic computing continues to be a very hot topic. Virtualization is a key technology and enabler. As usual, vendors are quick to position solutions in the infrastructure virtualization space...

Earlier this week, IBM announced it had acquired Transitive Corporation. Transitive was labeled as a cross-platform virtualization solution. This isn't accurate.

Transitive's key value is that it provides an alternative to porting applications from one system architecture to another. It has been the technology behind PowerVM Lx86 (formerly System p Applicaiton Virtual Environment) and sits below the actual virtualization layer.

Transitive allows re-platforming applications from one system to another without porting and recompilation. It does that through dynamic analysis and translation of processor instructions (i.e. x86 -> System p). This is huge value. From a server virtualization engine (i.e. hypervisor), it is the PowerVM that creates the logical partitions not Transitive. I think it is important to make the distinction.

So, what is this acquisition about and why now?

(1) Virtualization is topping the list of the CIO agenda. Transitive has been a core technology and shipped as part of IBM's PowerVM. It also has OEM agreements with HP. Could this be a defensive play against HP?

(2) SUN is in trouble and there are doubts about its future. Transitive provides several paths from SPARC -> x86. Transitive positions IBM as a viable alternative with a migration path to displace SUN.

On the more immediate side, Transitive gives IBM enhanced offerings to help customers with cost reduction measures such as server consolidation and application decommissioning.

I was an IBM VM systems programmer in previous life and am a strong believer in the value virtualization technologies. IBM has a long history with virtualization. I think Transitive's acquisition is a smart move and has many potential for MSPs, VARs, and ISVs...

SOA Governance, Registry, Repository ... 3 years later

A lot has happened since my post on SOA Registry & Repository 3 years ago.

In 2006, there were major acqusitions such as Mercury/Systinet and later Mercury itself by HP. BEA bought Flashline and that became AquaLogic Repositroy. Now, BEA is part of Oracle.

webMethods bought Infravio and in 2007, webMethods itself was acquired by Software AG.

Progress bought Actional. SOA Software bought Blue Titan.

IBM acquired Datapower, but decided to build its own Registry & Repository and bundled Rational Asset Manager for metadata management. Now, they are delivering a new product for Web Services security policy management.

Finally, AmberPoint's go-to-market strategey seems centered on the partner channel/OEM.

Vendors continue to enahnce products with new features and integration with other products (i.e. CCMDB for automated operations & management)...

In most cases, they fall short of delivering a solution. Even after a year, customers have difficulty to opertionalize the solution!

Fundamentally, most of the conversations with customers are product centric. Implementations are tool-driven with little or no understanding of the big picture at the client's side and requirements. There is little or no guidance/enablement around governance process design, transition/roadmap, and integration with customers' software development methodology, operational model, and existing tools...

Vendors should be very proactive on this issue to maintain that "trusted relationship" with customers.

A lot of value can be delivered and demonstrated through these solutions especially by capturing SOA governance metrics (i.e. ratio of service reuse) and operational metrics such as SLA... As customers try to figure out how to cut costs (i.e. consolidation), they can rely on these tools to provide some of the key metrics to help make the right decisions.