From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
her business)
2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
This reminds me of quote from Moliere
Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
applied to...?
Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
Philosophy Master: Prose
Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
it.
(Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
We are now getting there
I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
course it's what we've been doing all along.
> From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
> that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
> cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
> expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
> cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
> 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
> will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
> her business)
> 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
> The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
> away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
> Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
> cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
> This reminds me of quote from Moliere
> Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
> applied to...?
> Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
> Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
> Philosophy Master: Prose
> Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
> These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
> it.
> (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
> We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
> We are now getting there
> I think what you are saying just points out the utter
> of a lot of cloud computing hyperbole.
Utter vacuousness? Not at all! I quoted Mr Jourdain from Moliere,
that we spoke prose all our life, and we didn't know about it.
In a typical Data Center, we have not a clue who is using what and who is paying what. An IT in a corporation is cost center, by tradition.
We tried for years to optimize the usage. So what is the result? The Tivoli's from IBM and similar products from Computer Associates are a nightmare to manage and train people on them.
So here come the cloud business model. It is clean. we have the technology to move resources according to demand.
We don't have to over-design and no need to have 10% usage most of the year because we have a few crazy peaks a year.
This is the reason why cloud computing is fascinating. The pioneers (Google, Yahoo, Amazon) made TONS of money, .. and everybody else was watching unable to imitate their
business model
The cloud is not a cost, but a profit center. This is huge change.
It does not qualify for the epithet of "vacuousness"
As about the technology definition, once we have a clear business definition, ... and profits, we have the money to pay all the interesting, leading edge technical ideas proliferated on this thread, and make them robust and productive.
----- Original Message ----
From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
To: Cloud Computing <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 12:52:27 PM
Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a Proto-Cloud. Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
Miha,
I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
course it's what we've been doing all along.
On Jan 25, 5:42 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <MyInnerVo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
> From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
> that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
> cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
> expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
> cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
> 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
> will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
> her business)
> 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
> The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
> away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
> Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
> cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
> This reminds me of quote from Moliere
> Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
> applied to...?
> Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
> Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
> Philosophy Master: Prose
> Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
> These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
> it.
> (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
> We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
> We are now getting there
> > I think what you are saying just points out the utter
> > of a lot of cloud computing hyperbole.
> Utter vacuousness? Not at all! I quoted Mr Jourdain from Moliere,
> that we spoke prose all our life, and we didn't know about it.
> In a typical Data Center, we have not a clue who is using what
> and who is paying what. An IT in a corporation is cost center, by tradition.
> We tried for years to optimize the usage. So what is the result?
> The Tivoli's from IBM and similar products from Computer Associates
> are a nightmare to manage and train people on them.
> So here come the cloud business model. It is clean. we have the
> technology to move resources according to demand.
> We don't have to over-design and no need to have 10% usage
> most of the year because we have a few crazy peaks a year.
> This is the reason why cloud computing is fascinating.
> The pioneers (Google, Yahoo, Amazon) made TONS of money,
> .. and everybody else was watching unable to imitate their
> business model
> The cloud is not a cost, but a profit center. This is huge change.
> It does not qualify for the epithet of "vacuousness"
> As about the technology definition, once we have a clear business definition,
> ... and profits, we have the money to pay all the interesting, leading edge
> technical ideas proliferated on this thread, and make them robust and productive.
> Have a nice weekend,
> miha
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
> To: Cloud Computing <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 12:52:27 PM
> Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a Proto-Cloud. Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
> Miha,
> I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
> lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
> generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
> course it's what we've been doing all along.
> On Jan 25, 5:42 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <MyInnerVo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > All,
> > From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
> > that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
> > cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
> > expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
> > cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
> > 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
> > will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
> > her business)
> > 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
> > The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
> > away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
> > Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
> > cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
> > This reminds me of quote from Moliere
> > Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
> > applied to...?
> > Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
> > Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
> > Philosophy Master: Prose
> > Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
> > These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
> > it.
> > (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
> > We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
> > We are now getting there
One might recall that somewhere, someone has to provide the compute
cycles to execute the request. This becomes the model of the electric
utility companies - they have to build for peak demand or suffer brown-
outs. The challenge is to build a cloud infrastructure that will
still be there when a Super Bowl add says to login now to mumble.com
and receive a free $20 bill. Everyone can gain from efficiency and
paying only for what is used - I seem to recall that's how the
electric meter on my house works. But someone, somewhere, has to
provide the slack.
On Jan 30, 4:46 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <mij...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > I think what you are saying just points out the utter
> > of a lot of cloud computing hyperbole.
> Utter vacuousness? Not at all! I quoted Mr Jourdain from Moliere,
> that we spoke prose all our life, and we didn't know about it.
> In a typical Data Center, we have not a clue who is using what
> and who is paying what. An IT in a corporation is cost center, by tradition.
> We tried for years to optimize the usage. So what is the result?
> The Tivoli's from IBM and similar products from Computer Associates
> are a nightmare to manage and train people on them.
> So here come the cloud business model. It is clean. we have the
> technology to move resources according to demand.
> We don't have to over-design and no need to have 10% usage
> most of the year because we have a few crazy peaks a year.
> This is the reason why cloud computing is fascinating.
> The pioneers (Google, Yahoo, Amazon) made TONS of money,
> .. and everybody else was watching unable to imitate their
> business model
> The cloud is not a cost, but a profit center. This is huge change.
> It does not qualify for the epithet of "vacuousness"
> As about the technology definition, once we have a clear business definition,
> ... and profits, we have the money to pay all the interesting, leading edge
> technical ideas proliferated on this thread, and make them robust and productive.
> Have a nice weekend,
> miha
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
> To: Cloud Computing <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 12:52:27 PM
> Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a Proto-Cloud. Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
> Miha,
> I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
> lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
> generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
> course it's what we've been doing all along.
> On Jan 25, 5:42 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <MyInnerVo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > All,
> > From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
> > that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
> > cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
> > expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
> > cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
> > 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
> > will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
> > her business)
> > 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
> > The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
> > away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
> > Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
> > cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
> > This reminds me of quote from Moliere
> > Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
> > applied to...?
> > Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
> > Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
> > Philosophy Master: Prose
> > Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
> > These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
> > it.
> > (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
> > We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
> > We are now getting there
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:18:07 To: Cloud Computing<cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a Proto-Cloud.
Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
Miha, I thought I was agreeing with you.
At least in one sense: That people who claim this is all new stuff are
spouting nonsense. That's the vacuous hyperbole I was referring to.
On Jan 30, 4:46 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <mij...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > I think what you are saying just points out the utter
> > of a lot of cloud computing hyperbole.
> Utter vacuousness? Not at all! I quoted Mr Jourdain from Moliere,
> that we spoke prose all our life, and we didn't know about it.
> In a typical Data Center, we have not a clue who is using what
> and who is paying what. An IT in a corporation is cost center, by tradition.
> We tried for years to optimize the usage. So what is the result?
> The Tivoli's from IBM and similar products from Computer Associates
> are a nightmare to manage and train people on them.
> So here come the cloud business model. It is clean. we have the
> technology to move resources according to demand.
> We don't have to over-design and no need to have 10% usage
> most of the year because we have a few crazy peaks a year.
> This is the reason why cloud computing is fascinating.
> The pioneers (Google, Yahoo, Amazon) made TONS of money,
> .. and everybody else was watching unable to imitate their
> business model
> The cloud is not a cost, but a profit center. This is huge change.
> It does not qualify for the epithet of "vacuousness"
> As about the technology definition, once we have a clear business definition,
> ... and profits, we have the money to pay all the interesting, leading edge
> technical ideas proliferated on this thread, and make them robust and productive.
> Have a nice weekend,
> miha
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
> To: Cloud Computing <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 12:52:27 PM
> Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a Proto-Cloud. Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
> Miha,
> I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
> lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
> generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
> course it's what we've been doing all along.
> On Jan 25, 5:42 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <MyInnerVo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > All,
> > From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
> > that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
> > cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
> > expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
> > cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
> > 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
> > will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
> > her business)
> > 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
> > The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
> > away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
> > Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
> > cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
> > This reminds me of quote from Moliere
> > Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
> > applied to...?
> > Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
> > Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
> > Philosophy Master: Prose
> > Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
> > These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
> > it.
> > (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
> > We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
> > We are now getting there
Many presume cloud computing is a computing model supplied by providers,
Hosting or SaaS providers as we would call them today, but a cloud might as
well be an on premise solution for enterprises. On-Demand, Massively
Scalable, Internet Supplied and Consumpion Priced are the magic words,
enabling any datacenter to become or host clouds as long as it meets the
charactaristics as named above.
Realisticly Cloud Providers will either host VM's, with or without OS
instance, or host standardised SaaS applications. Enterprises will utilise
the recources or functionality as extention to their existing
infrastructure, while at the same time undertaking the effort to optimise on
premise datacenters in exactly the same fasion to create dynamism and
agility.
Especially larger enterprises will always keep their own resources. As long
as there is a reasonable proportion of required capacity and cost of
ownership a self-owned cloud is simply more cost-effective without the
middle-man. Resources can be shifted between existing application workloads
to increase datacenter density and resource utilisation.
When reaching a point where peakloads exceed normal datacenter capacity
external clouds are ideal for cloud bursting or - in case large parts of in
premise datacenters are down for whatever reason - for disaster recovery
purposes. Yet this is, for the large enterprise, a rather small part of the
total required capacity.
I see far more opportunity in the SaaS area rather then raw capacity (VM's)
for the large enterprise. Considering the SOA model business process owners
will require service owners to deliver specific busines functionality.
Service owners will consider how to deliver, either as part of existing on
premise apps, by implementing new applications or by extracting the required
functionality as a cloud service. Especially if the functionality is not
available in existing apps, the cloud service will be increasingly
preferable above the implementation of new apps. ROI, TCO, delivery time,
knowledge requirements, scalability, lifecycle and such are a few arguments
why.
For smaller enterprises however, and SMB in particular, a reasonable scale
to enable sufficient density for cost-effective on premise datacenters will
be much more difficult to achieve. For this market segment cloud computing
as external hosting service for scalable VM's is extremely attractive. SaaS
is probably as attractive for larger enterprise as it is for SBM, although
there might be a diffirence to the offering of total solutions or specific
on-demand functionality.
It's all about the average cost of application workload capacity, a phisical
server, vm or container. This is extremely dependant on the total amount and
the fluctuation of the total amount, the larger the scale and the smaller
the fluctuation, the more attractive an on-premise cloud is and vice versa.
I would appreciate anyone in this group who can delivery data on these
variables, so it will become possible to create calculators, break-even
analysis and such to determine when to keep it insise and when to go
external.
> Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:18:07
> To: Cloud Computing<cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a
> Proto-Cloud.
> Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
> Miha, I thought I was agreeing with you.
> At least in one sense: That people who claim this is all new stuff are
> spouting nonsense. That's the vacuous hyperbole I was referring to.
> On Jan 30, 4:46 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <mij...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > > I think what you are saying just points out the utter
> > > of a lot of cloud computing hyperbole.
> > Utter vacuousness? Not at all! I quoted Mr Jourdain from Moliere,
> > that we spoke prose all our life, and we didn't know about it.
> > In a typical Data Center, we have not a clue who is using what
> > and who is paying what. An IT in a corporation is cost center, by
> tradition.
> > We tried for years to optimize the usage. So what is the result?
> > The Tivoli's from IBM and similar products from Computer Associates
> > are a nightmare to manage and train people on them.
> > So here come the cloud business model. It is clean. we have the
> > technology to move resources according to demand.
> > We don't have to over-design and no need to have 10% usage
> > most of the year because we have a few crazy peaks a year.
> > This is the reason why cloud computing is fascinating.
> > The pioneers (Google, Yahoo, Amazon) made TONS of money,
> > .. and everybody else was watching unable to imitate their
> > business model
> > The cloud is not a cost, but a profit center. This is huge change.
> > It does not qualify for the epithet of "vacuousness"
> > As about the technology definition, once we have a clear business
> definition,
> > ... and profits, we have the money to pay all the interesting, leading
> edge
> > technical ideas proliferated on this thread, and make them robust and
> productive.
> > Have a nice weekend,
> > miha
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
> > To: Cloud Computing <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 12:52:27 PM
> > Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a
> Proto-Cloud. Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
> > Miha,
> > I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
> > lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
> > generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
> > course it's what we've been doing all along.
> > On Jan 25, 5:42 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <MyInnerVo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > All,
> > > From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
> > > that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
> > > cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
> > > expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
> > > cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
> > > 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
> > > will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
> > > her business)
> > > 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
> > > The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
> > > away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
> > > Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
> > > cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
> > > This reminds me of quote from Moliere
> > > Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
> > > applied to...?
> > > Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
> > > Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
> > > Philosophy Master: Prose
> > > Monsieur Jourdain: It's prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
> > > These forty years now, I've been speaking in prose without knowing
> > > it.
> > > (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
> > > We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
> > > We are now getting there
And everyone i.e. the customers pay for the slack; its not the utility companies.
Efficiency comes from efficiency, except that if we can aggregate demand over many users, we can build for the true high water marks of total demand. This will be less than sum of high water marks + estimation error, if only because some of the high water marks are at times that others aren't busy.
Building a silo-ed platform means that any over capacity can't be shared. Its only
Frank wrote:
> One might recall that somewhere, someone has to provide the compute
> cycles to execute the request. This becomes the model of the electric
> utility companies - they have to build for peak demand or suffer brown-
> outs. The challenge is to build a cloud infrastructure that will
> still be there when a Super Bowl add says to login now to mumble.com
> and receive a free $20 bill. Everyone can gain from efficiency and
> paying only for what is used - I seem to recall that's how the
> electric meter on my house works. But someone, somewhere, has to
> provide the slack.
and customers have to pay for it, they want to know they have more than they use at anyone time and will have to pay for their potential demand as well as their actual demand. This is an option price.
> On Jan 30, 4:46 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <mij...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> I think what you are saying just points out the utter
>>> of a lot of cloud computing hyperbole.
>> Utter vacuousness? Not at all! I quoted Mr Jourdain from Moliere,
>> that we spoke prose all our life, and we didn't know about it.
>> In a typical Data Center, we have not a clue who is using what
>> and who is paying what. An IT in a corporation is cost center, by tradition.
>> We tried for years to optimize the usage. So what is the result?
>> The Tivoli's from IBM and similar products from Computer Associates
>> are a nightmare to manage and train people on them.
>> So here come the cloud business model. It is clean. we have the
>> technology to move resources according to demand.
>> We don't have to over-design and no need to have 10% usage
>> most of the year because we have a few crazy peaks a year.
>> This is the reason why cloud computing is fascinating.
>> The pioneers (Google, Yahoo, Amazon) made TONS of money,
>> .. and everybody else was watching unable to imitate their
>> business model
>> The cloud is not a cost, but a profit center. This is huge change.
>> It does not qualify for the epithet of "vacuousness"
>> As about the technology definition, once we have a clear business definition,
>> ... and profits, we have the money to pay all the interesting, leading edge
>> technical ideas proliferated on this thread, and make them robust and productive.
>> Have a nice weekend,
>> miha
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Greg Pfister <greg.pfis...@gmail.com>
>> To: Cloud Computing <cloud-computing@googlegroups.com>
>> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 12:52:27 PM
>> Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Existing IT is nothing but a Proto-Cloud. Cloud is not a buzz word anymore
>> Miha,
>> I think what you are saying just points out the utter vacuousness of a
>> lot of cloud computing hyperbole. When you reach the degree of
>> generality that incorporates everybody's project into cloud, then of
>> course it's what we've been doing all along.
>> On Jan 25, 5:42 pm, Miha Ahronovitz <MyInnerVo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> All,
>>> From all the lively debates on this group, this is the one definition
>>> that makes sense. Almost everything we have today in IT, is a proto-
>>> cloud, and can be transformed into a cloud if we meet the end users
>>> expectations. As Nati Shalom pointed out, a person attracted to the
>>> cloud after reading all the buzz, has two key expectations:
>>> 1. The ability to get a quality service any time (how the provider
>>> will get in minutes the resources to provide this quality is not his/
>>> her business)
>>> 2. The ability to pay only for what s/he uses when s/he needs it.
>>> The rest is an implementation details. Users want to be totally free
>>> away from any technical complexity other than the service itself.
>>> Every current grid, data center, individual lab network, can become a
>>> cloud if it meets the above two simple requirements.
>>> This reminds me of quote from Moliere
>>> Monsieur Jourdain: And this, the way I speak. What name would be
>>> applied to...?
>>> Philosophy Master: The way you speak?
>>> Monsieur Jourdain: Yes.
>>> Philosophy Master: Prose
>>> Monsieur Jourdain: It’s prose. Well, what do you know about that! …
>>> These forty years now, I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing
>>> it.
>>> (Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman)
>>> We did try to make clouds all our lives, and we didn't know about it.
>>> We are now getting there
>>> 2 cents,
>>> Miha- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
--
Dave
*David Levy *
*Chief Technologist*
Sun Microsystems Europe
Global Sales & Services
55, King William St.,
London EC4R 9ND
United Kingdom
Sun Proprietary & Confidential . This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and priviliged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
|
