Classically CC has been marketed as a great way to handle unusual/emergency situations - if your main server system fails, you have a CC backup - sure it costs more than the main system per hour, but only when you use it. CC is also marketd as a solution when your system gets overwhelmed with "flash mob" traffic. Much like Akamai for bandwidth, CC solutions can be "at the ready" for CPU. Both of these make sense, and have a solid business case.
But I don't see any way for CC to systemically get the costs of general every day, typical-load IT services down lower than running servers in-house. I say "systemically" because we can always come up with thought experiments where CC will be less expensive than in-house servers, but in general, technological advancements that are available to make CC services cheaper will also be available to IT organizations as products. Economies of scale are valuable and important, but they are not infinite.
Having said that, I think at some price point, IT may simply put everything on the cloud because the cost is so small it doesn't matter either way compared to the cost of other budget items.
Personally I think the interesting opportunities with Cloud Computing have not necessarily been invented yet. Massive, but short-term projects are one area where CC makes a lot of sense, and where there is no current solution available (to my knowledge). (Real world parallel: Conventions). Because there is no meaningful solution, the projects do not exist. Massively geographically distributed, but low-demand solutions also make sense as something that CC might do very well, compared to any corporate-constructed solution (Real world parallel: Iridium).
Another, similar CC application would be something that jumped across the globe from server to server, never staying in one place for long, collecting and sending out data in a way that would be incredibly difficult to detect, retrace or predict. (Real world parallel: espionage).
Even more exciting are all the applications that we haven't even thought of yet. But it is certain that they will not be a direct fit for the standard, metrics and concepts we're discussing today.
No you're missing the point. How long does it take you to spin up a 1000 server system in a colo? What are the costs of doing that activity? In my colo you can get your 1000 servers installed, cabled, powered, secured and configured in less than one hour. If you see no value in that then I think we're talking about different things entirely...
From: "Pietrasanta, Mark" <Mark.Pietrasanta@aquilent.com>
To: "cloud-computing@googlegroups.com" <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 6:32:11 AM
Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Gartner: Will Cloud Displace Internal IT Services For Data Centers?
But again, it seems like people are missing the point:
1) Cloud Computing, at least in any of its current and pending forms, does almost nothing to reduce my internal IT staffing needs. It's no better than Co-Lo in terms of IT staffing requirements;
2) CC is more expensive than *any* of the alternatives, except in fringe cases (e.g. those with extremely volatile volume changes, and academic/research/"super computing" needs)
CC can't possibly replace internal IT services until CC *offers* some form of IT services. And the costs have to come way way down before it becomes a realistic alternative to Co-Lo (or for the small business, setting up a machine under their desk and hiring a college kid to manage it).
From: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com [mailto:cloud-computing@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Krishna Kurapati
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 9:18 AM
To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Gartner: Will Cloud Displace Internal IT Services For Data Centers?
My View:
It also depends on size of organization. For SMBs, Core applications as well as non-core applications (if any) will shift to Cloud/SaaS model.
And with recent financial turmoil, many large companies became medium and medium became small :)
Any organization adopting cloud would be security/compliance, availability/accessibility.
and portability/migratability.
These requirements overweigh cost advantages depending on the vertical they play into.
Krishna Kurapati
Cloud Ventures
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 3:37 AM, nagarajansankar@gmail.com <nagarajansankar@gmail.com> wrote:
Here is an interesting article that appeared yesterday.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/12/gartner_will_cl.html?catid=cloud-computing
My take is that possibly Non-mission critical or Non- revenue
generating applications (the so called departmental applications) in
enterprises that may form about 20 to 25% of the total IT
infrastructure and services may find their way to the clouds..
Do share your thoughts...
- Sankar
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nsk007
--
678 467 3504
Agile Development Blog: IndefiniteArticles.com
Stone Magic: Stonemagic.Picobusiness.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Cloud Computing" group.
To post to this group, send email to cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cloud-computing-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To post job listing, send email to jobs@cloudjobs.net (position title, employer and location in subject, description in message body) or visit http://www.cloudjobs.net
To submit your resume for cloud computing job bank, send it to resume@cloudjobs.net.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.ca/group/cloud-computing?hl=en?hl=en
Posting guidelines:
http://groups.google.ca/group/cloud-computing/web/frequently-asked-qu...
This group posts are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/
Group Members Meet up Calendar - http://groups.google.ca/group/cloud-computing/web/meet-up-calendar
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment