Peter Christy

Why Clouds Exist

At times it can be hard to understand what part of the Cloud discussion has substance and what is just marketing fluff. What I want to do here is argue that over the last ten years there as been a "perfect storm" of events that collectively led to today's Cloud world. Clouds are not just yesterday's time sharing or ASP offerings with fresh marketing lipstick. Here's the story.

Consider all that has happened over the period time since the Dot Com bust:

• The Intel architecture "won."  If you were planning a Dot Com venture your funders would probably tell you to use an Oracle database on Sun Solaris. In 2000, many businesses had strategic investments in the IBM Power Architecture (or HP's proprietary architectures). Today there is widespread agreement that Intel's X86 is good enough. Intel won the microprocessor battle. Without that architecture convergence there would be no Cloud.
• The network got a lot better. Broadband access wasn't common ten years ago. It is now. Without modern connectivity and bandwidth there would be no Cloud.
• Wireless networks expanded. Wireless build-out during the period was remarkable on a global basis bringing developing areas immediately into the networked world, bypassing entirely the wired phase.
• Mobile devices became powerful and smart. With Apple's iPhone deal with AT&T, mobile applications escaped the control of the mobile carriers. The evolution in wireless and mobile devices (and the rapid rise of consumerism -- employee chosen devices) has really changed the enterprise application and design model. This transition is an ideal time to also transition the front-end parts of the application to a Cloud implementation.
• We consolidated server applications into data centers. During the Dot Com boom, businesses spent profligately for IT, fearing that otherwise they would be "Amazoned." When the bust came there was broad retrenchment in IT spending (it's a cost center, remember). One of the easiest ways to reduce IT cost is to consolidate diverse applications into data centers where the administration and support can be local and shared. This cost-driven consolidation was an important precursor to today's Cloud world.
• Google demonstrated the promise of very large scale commodity computing. Ten years ago if you suggested building "mission critical" applications on anything other than "enterprise class" servers and storage you would be laughed out of the room. Google changed the game entirely. They showed that the most powerful systems in the world could be built from high-volume, commodity parts, and operated with high availability at remarkably low cost. In part the drive to the Cloud is motivated by the radically improved cost structure clearly visible downstream.
• Intel adopted multicore microprocessor design.  For years Intel converted semiconductor design and process improvements (the train under "Moore's Law") into faster CPU's by making the CPU's more and more complex.  In the end complexity yields diminishing returns. Early in the decade progress looked threatened: new processors got the same task done more quickly, but required more energy in the process. Finally Intel followed AMD and adopted a multicore strategy in which technology improvements are used to put more independent processors on the chip (more "cores") rather than to build more complex processors. It was a risky decision. It wasn't clear how many cores a desktop PC could use productively and the same problem existed in the data center where Windows servers were commonly built to each run on an separate server. The adoption of multicore designs enables a rapid increase the power of a data center of a given size and with a given power budget.
• VMware created commercial quality X86 virtualization and server consolidation occurred. Virtualization abstracts a workload from the specific details of the hardware on which it runs and enabled the shared use of a virtualized server by many X86 workloads with no requirement that they all ran the same "stack."

Virtualization is the magic lubrication that brings it all together: we consolidated applications into data centers; the victory of the X86 architecture and virtualization enabled running many disparate workloads on a shared server; multicore enabled an uptick in performance and power efficency improvements; Google proved that large scale data centers could be built from commodity technology and operated with amazing economics. The rapid evolution on mobile access and devices are transforming the requirements for enterprise applications providing a high-value motivation to change application front end architecture, just at the right time to leverage Cloud implementations.

There is hype and fluff in the Cloud discussion but underneath that there is a remarkable confluence of independent technology waves. In this case the substance is far greater than the hype.

Why You Should Really Pay Attention to the iCloud .......

In the recent newsletter, John talked a little about the recent Apple introductions at WWDC. I think that the implications go far beyond the surface and deserve attention. Here's why.

• Last year Mary Meeker pointed out that in 2012 more smart phones would be shipped than PC's. We're clearly at an important inflection point. Inflection points are confusing because they are about rate of change, not volume: the installed base of PC's is far greater than the installed base of smart phones and it will be for some time. But the world is changing and we're seeing that right now, unambiguously.
• If Jobs were to just watch, as a key particpant in the new platforms his position would get stronger over time, but he's accelerating the process in a very clever way.
• iOS 5 was introduced at WWDC and will be available later this year. With iOS 5 it will no longer be necessary to have a PC or MAC order to maintain your iPhone or iPad; they become "untethered". They will come from the factory with enough software built into do those functions by themselves as long as they have Internet connectivity.
• That still leaves the PC or Mac in the equation as the place you store al your content and keep your various devices up to date with each other. As Jobs pointed out, the coordination process is tedius requiring serial synchronication of each device, possibly more than once to get all the exchanges and updates done.
• iCloud fills in that gap (a shared content repository) and by implementing Groove-like synchronization greatly simplifes the device coordination as well and by doing so makes having a PC or Mac for those functions unnecessary.

It's likely that these new features will "canabalize" Mac sales. The rush for the iPad is pretty obvious; how many of these new Apple users also bought a Mac as well?  But Jobs clearly understands that accelerating the move to unteathed, mobile, wireless (and non-Windows) devices is all in his favor.

This isn't only about individuals and personal devices I think. We need to reimagine how IT will be done in the interconnected, mobile device, Cloud world that is rapidly upon us. To stimulate your thinking, imagine a small business running on iPad's, sharing and replicating data locally, and linking to shared applications that run in the (i)Cloud with no local "servers" whatsoever. What's wrong with that picture other than the implications for Microsoft?

"A Hard Day's Night"

In honor of Apple's recent agreement to sell Beatles tunes online we've decided to dedicate our headlines to Beatles' songs (maybe Apple will send us an iPAD?).

VDI 2010

This part of the VMware strategy seems to have changed a lot in the last 12 months although the VMware spokespeople didn't like it when I said that. One of Paul Maritz's earliest acts was to amp up the VDI investment a lot, believing it would seem that desktop management was ripe for the same kind of revolution that had driven the first wave of data center consolidation, and that VDI could be an important kicker to VMW revenues. I've always been personally skeptical, believing there to be good markets for server-based PC virtualization, but relatively small ones (we even have a two year old report to that effect J ). Citrix's view has been different, benefiting from their longstanding leadership in a broad "application delivery" market, and from that context viewing virtualization as an important new tool to work with but not the second coming. In Mark Templeton's Synergy 2010 keynote he painted a vision based on getting to your "stuff" (my term, not Mark's) from any device anywhere in the world in a fashion that optimized performance while preserving security. The Maritz view is very much in-line now, emphasizing user device support more than the wonders of server virtualization. To be fair to VMware, no one reasonably anticipated the impact of the iPhone and iPad on corporate IT. Templeton and Citrix have promoted the concept of "consumerism" for quite a long while, but Apple moved that from a strategic alternative (something a company might choose to do) to a tactical imperative (in the last quarterly call, Mark made special mention of how the iPad is starting to really disrupt corporate IT). VMware seems to agree that application delivery (your stuff from anywhere on any device) is the right focus (not their words). If that's the mission then Citrix's strengths in the battle are more self-evident now. It's going to be a good (and productive) war that the consumer will ultimately benefit from!

The iPhone Creates a Wi-Fi Ruckus

We recently had a chance to catch up with Selina Lo and her Ruckus Wireless team (many of whom, like Selina, old friends from way back). Ruckus has developed a nice business focusing on what can be done with especially intelligent WiFi antennas and systems. They report that the iPhone is a really nice driver for their industry. For example, hotel users only need to provide WiFi access for a relatively few locations as long as people had to unfold and power their laptops to take advantage. But now hotel guests reasonably want WiFi access everywhere including the restaurants and even the pool. A similar impact is being felt on college campuses for the same reasons. Oh, and AT&T is cooperating nicely eliminating the unlimited data plan giving the iPhone user all the more motivation to seek WiFi connection. There seems no doubt that the iPhone (and iPad) will prove to be a really important change in IT in many dimensions. pchristy@irg-intl.com

Processors Still Matter

As an old microprocessor geek I have to admit that I'm looking forward to the Intel Analyst Summit this week. It's hard to exaggerate the impact that today's virtualized, multi-core CPU's are having on how we do computing and even how we think about it. It was also fascinating to note that the Apple iPad incorporates an Apple processor from Apple's purchase of Palo Alto semiconductor. PA Semi is the creation of Dan Dobberpuhl. I met Dan back in my DEC semiconductor days and hold him in the highest regard as a true semiconductor wizard. After my DEC semi days, Dan and Rich Witek did a series of innovative chips including a very low power ARM processor that Intel acquired when it bought most of DEC's semiconductor assets. The rumor was that PA Semi was formed (back in 2003) to build very low power versions of IBM's Power architecture aiming precisely at Apple and the Mac, but then Apple embraced the X86 putting all that into question. I would have to assume that Apple is using PA Semi to create extraordinarily power efficient CPU's which when combined with software with very careful power management can translate directly into products with battery weight and higher battery life, something we're all interested in. Apple has already shown an ability to exploit advances in Intel CPU's quickly so the question is how much they can kick that up with their own CPU's. Engineering and releasing your own CPU is too expensive for most device companies, but then Apple ain't like most. — pchristy@irg-intl.com

The Year of the iPhone

Having worked at Apple during the period when Michael Spindler tried to create an OEM Mac ecology and failed, when the iPod came out I foolishly predicted that Apple would once again grasp defeat from the jaws of victory and screw things up when it came to high-volume, low cost devices. Boy was I wrong. Now, possibly equally foolishly, I'm going to step out on the other side and suggest that the iPhone will take over the world (at least at first approximation). The question I ask is how many categories of portable and mobile devices don't really make sense any more if you can just create iPhone apps instead. Car Navs for example: most are pretty clunky compared to the iPhone versions, and a phone has built in cellular connectivity to boot (not to mention Wi-Fi in many cases going forward). If you own the phone already, and the navigation apps don't cost very much, why would you want a new and different device rather than just buying a car mount? John and I were breakfasting in Palo Alto recently and I encountered a parking "meter-man" and chatted him up. He was using a bright-yellow handheld and entering in license plate ID's manually. I asked him why he didn't just snap a photo and his answer was "damned good question" more or less. The device was a Trimble Nomad, a Mobile 6 device with cellular and camera options, and of course GPS, since it's made by Trimble. But those units seem to sell for $2,500 and compared to an iPhone are harder to program, harder to use and a lot more expensive (that sounds like the Trifecta). Besides, wouldn't it make sense to do the license plate reading "in the cloud" or at least check the ID done locally and refine the algorithm dynamically? The iPhone certainly raised the bar on usability as did the iPod, but more importantly Apple created a whole solution ecology - iTunes on steroids. The biggest breakout of the iPhone was the destruction of the application walled garden by the mobile operator, and the construction of an open market to sell apps that didn't need permission to run. From time to time Steve Jobs' totally unique skills come together for huge home runs, and the iPhone is certainly one of them (Nobel prize in business innovation were such offered). Now that we have usable and programmable phones with GPS and cameras built in high volume and I suspect it won't take a long time for us to collectively realize that there are a whole lot of portable devices that don't make much sense any more. Of course I've been wrong before, and full disclosure requires that I admit to using a Blackberry and having a Garmin GMS in my car (go figure).