The statistics he laid out were incredible:<\/p>\n
- \n
- 102% YoY revenue growth for the S3 service comparing Q4 2014 to Q4 2013<\/li>\n
- 93% YoY revenue growth for the EC2 service comparing Q4 2014 to Q4 2013<\/li>\n
- 1,000,000 active customers. \u00a0(Active customers do not include internal Amazon customers)<\/li>\n
- 40% YoY Revenue growth in total<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Andy went on to say that AWS is the fastest growing multi-billion dollar enterprise IT company. \u00a0He backed this up by showing what I would guess internally they may be calling the “dinosaur slide”. \u00a0A slide that showed the lagging growth of other companies like Cisco (7%), IBM, HP, etc. \u00a0(never mind that he was comparing to the total Cisco business and not just the datacenter business that AWS competes with)<\/p>\n
This presentation with its great guest speakers and the announcement of the new EFS service really set the Internet on fire. \u00a0There were posts such as this one: “How in the hell will any cloud ever catch AWS<\/a>” and many more.<\/p>\n
I love AWS. \u00a0After being stuck using VMware for a few years AWS just feels so right. \u00a0I love how easy it is to use and develop applications and I especially love the APIs. \u00a0But I have to take exception with the simple Dark Lord Sith logic of there is “the right way = AWS” and the “wrong way = whatever else you’re doing”. \u00a0This is what I call the Sith Lord slide that he showed:<\/p>\n
![\"A4E8582C-22F7-49DF-BADA-CE624A9CA0E0\"](\"http:\/\/benincosa.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/05\/A4E8582C-22F7-49DF-BADA-CE624A9CA0E0.png\")
<\/a>The Sith Lord Slide from AWS Summit San Francisco April 2015<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n <\/p>\n
The slide and the pitch suggest rather explicitly, that if you build your own frozen datacenter and don’t use AWS you will get left behind. \u00a0Really, AWS says there is no need for your own data centers. \u00a0AWS releases new services nearly every day, 512 in 2014 (I’m not sure what all 512 are, nor what they consider a service, but this seems like marketing hyperbole). \u00a0And there is no way you or any other datacenter can catch up.<\/p>\n
Also this last weekend there was an article that’s title looked like it was written by Bilbo Baggins called: “There and Back Again: Zynga’s Tale with Amazon’s cloud<\/a>“. \u00a0The article talks about how Zynga, so hot, tried to ween itself from AWS and then after several years, decided it would ditch its own data centers and go back to AWS. \u00a0All in, according to their CEO on earnings call last week.<\/p>\n
But that’s just like your opinion, man<\/h3>\n
So based on all that, it seems that building your own data center is a fools errand. \u00a0So in light of all this, I have to quote the Big Lebowski and say: Yeah? Well, you know, that’s just like, your opinion man.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/i.qkme.me\/3s3k1d.jpg\")
That’s just like, your opinion, man.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n A differing opinion, man<\/h3>\n
Let’s just talk in general now and then talk specifically about what we know from the Zynga article.<\/p>\n
- \n
- The Enterprise: The final frontier<\/li>\n
- Taxi cabs or rent a car?<\/li>\n
- Feature complete or good enough?<\/li>\n
- What can we build together on open source?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
The Enterprise: The final frontier<\/h4>\n
AWS’s reach has largely been for startups. \u00a0My two instances in AWS count towards that 1,000,000 customer count. \u00a0Now the focus is to the enterprise where they are starting to see great success. \u00a0But the enterprise may not be as good of a fit to go ‘all in’ and there’s one good reason:<\/p>\n
Large static workloads<\/strong>. \u00a0Startups have workload that comes and goes based on the customers an seasonality. \u00a0So too does the enterprise, but there is still a large amount of static workload that doesn’t change size. \u00a0Take the HR programs of these companies that are off the shelf and just live in their own data centers. \u00a0It makes good sense for a line of business organization to move a lot of its customer facing, variable driven, applications to the cloud. \u00a0But for that static work load?<\/p>\n
Look, static workloads are as unsexy as a corner drugstore. \u00a0They are the old applications. \u00a0They are about as sexy as the applications that run on a mainframe (which who’s business continues to grow for IBM). \u00a0But for the enterprise, we still need them. \u00a0Perhaps these old workloads are the new mainframe workloads.<\/p>\n
In the future these workloads will probably offered as SaaS based applications and then the enterprise can abandon them, but for now most of them aren’t. \u00a0In addition there are applications that are home grown, like a facilities application in certain universities that hasn’t been rewritten to be cloud aware (probably a lot of money in this by the way).<\/p>\n
But its not just off the shelf software packs from Oracle. \u00a0It could be the companies own product: \u00a0A SaaS delivered to its customers. \u00a0If that is largely static, and we already have the data centers, why not just use them? \u00a0It doesn’t require extra capital outlay as we’ve already got them. \u00a0The only thing enterprises may be lacking is the cloud operations experience, but that is something they can buy from something like Metacloud, now Cisco OpenStack Private cloud.<\/p>\n
Uber or rent a car?<\/h4>\n
Scott Sanchez<\/a> talks about how workload infrastructure is similar to transportation options<\/a>. \u00a0The cloud is like renting a taxi cab. \u00a0When you only need it now and then, it makes a lot more sense. \u00a0When I fly into Seattle, I grab a cab because its so much easier. \u00a0I don’t have to take the bus all the way to the rental car facility. \u00a0I hop into the cab and he takes the carpool lanes all the way to the city. \u00a0I pay and I’m done. \u00a0This is like the cloud. \u00a0Its super effective and faster.<\/p>\n
But does hiring a cab make sense if I need a car all week with multiple meetings in different cities? \u00a0Hiring a cab gets really expensive and really may not be the best fit. \u00a0It costs a lot more to keep him sitting there unused while I’m in my meetings with the meter running. \u00a0In this case, I may be better off just renting a car. \u00a0Especially if its multiple days and different cities and in places where parking is free.<\/p>\n
A best option for large enterprises would be to have a place where they can run static workloads more cost effectively and if things get dynamic, burst those workloads to the cloud. \u00a0Some apps go here, some go there.<\/p>\n
Feature complete or good enough?<\/h4>\n
Can anybody catch AWS? \u00a0Oh yeah. \u00a0Let’s look at VMware as a case study. \u00a0Nothing even came close to offering its complete, feature rich, easy to use vSphere products. \u00a0But what happened? \u00a0In that space a new technology like AWS started to erode it and then Microsoft got ‘good enough’. \u00a0This will continue to happen, even though VMware is currently meeting earnings<\/a> expectations I’m already predicting its demise. \u00a0Let’s check back in 5 years and see how 2020 earnings are. \u00a0Maybe I’m wrong?<\/p>\n
Microsoft continues to get good enough and its new offerings are very compelling to the enterprise because they include a strategy on how to leverage their existing data center. \u00a0Their azure stack<\/a>\u00a0offers the link for hybrid cloud that AWS doesn’t have. \u00a0Its not perfect, but its on the track to do what enterprises need: \u00a0Connect the static with the variable.<\/p>\n
What about feature complete? \u00a0No service is really feature complete, but for the average programmers and IT organizations, how many of those AWS services are people really using? \u00a0 For the beginning organizations just give me EC2, ELB, S3, cloud formation, and cloud watch for autoscale and I’m pretty good.<\/p>\n
Guess what? \u00a0OpenStack already has at minimum 2nd or 3rd generation projects that already do that. \u00a0Consider the rise of Digital Ocean with its cheaper services, limited features, and hyper growth.<\/p>\n
The other issue is newer clouds don’t need the baggage of the old guard. \u00a0If we had a cloud service that was container based (docker, rkt) then we could use that. \u00a0AWS has ECS but this current version leaves a lot to be desired. \u00a0A container based cloud I’m convinced is the future and the only real cloud we’ll need. \u00a0(I’ve been wrong before… a lot), but as a full stack guy, I’m going all in on containers. \u00a0I don’t know if Docker will survive, but containers will.<\/p>\n
What can we build together<\/h4>\n
This brings me to my last point and this is how I think everybody else can win: \u00a0If we standardize our private clouds based on an open architecture and then at some point connect those together then we can really do something incredible. \u00a0If we did that we could:<\/p>\n
1. \u00a0Offer cheaper cloud services than even AWS to our customers. \u00a0Private cloud wins every time on cost, but it isn’t about cost why people use AWS: \u00a0Its about speed and features. \u00a0If we can’t get that with a private cloud there’s no reason to have it. \u00a0But if we can deliver both we win.<\/p>\n
2. \u00a0Offer capacity up. \u00a0Think of it like a house with solar panels. \u00a0You make extra electricity and the electricity company has to pay you for what you use. \u00a0If we can create secure connections and secure data at rest then data centers can attach to this cloud-grid and consume and use services all over the place. \u00a0You will have more data centers than even AWS has to chose from.<\/p>\n
Positioning your private data cloud around proprietary offerings limits you from the ability to engage with the larger community. \u00a0No doubt these private offerings have their place and will have their day in the sun, but I fail to see how they help build a community large enough to be sustainable; That is, unless they achieve critical mass, but then we’ve got the same problem with one player setting the rules.<\/p>\n
An open platform offers a way for everybody to win.<\/p>\n
Zynga<\/h4>\n
Let’s turn back to Zynga. \u00a0I used to tell everybody how Zynga got so big they had to make their own cloud because their AWS bill was too big. \u00a0Zynga gave great reasons, including over-provisioning as a reason they built their own cloud<\/a>. \u00a0If they’ve gone back to AWS ‘all-in’ what does it say about them and what can we infer? \u00a0Does it mean AWS killed the private cloud? \u00a0Here’s what I infer:<\/p>\n
1. \u00a0Revenue isn’t coming in. \u00a0Trimming its workforce by 18% and jettisoning data centers are cost cutting measures so they can free capital to invest in new games. \u00a0Gaming\u00a0is a tough business and it seems there is no fixed workload.<\/p>\n
2. \u00a0Variability. \u00a0Zynga’s games may be more variable than previously thought. \u00a0This probably relates to point 1. \u00a0Did the variability in Zynga’s games make it so that they had over built capacity?<\/p>\n
3. \u00a0Is private Cloud best served as a product or a service? \u00a0We know a\u00a0little\u00a0about the Zcloud<\/a>. \u00a0It was at one point based on Cloudstack with RightScale to provision workloads. \u00a0Citrix sells products. \u00a0Its not an operations company. \u00a0Zynga used CloudStack before it was open source. \u00a0While all reports generally show that CloudStack is getting better, perhaps its features are not enough for Zynga and maintenance and upgrades wasn’t so easy. \u00a0CloudStack is still a distant second as best from market adoption as OpenStack is<\/a>. \u00a0But OpenSource\u00a0alone isn’t going to save people. \u00a0A service like Metacloud, now Cisco OpenStack Private Cloud may have saved this.<\/p>\n
4. \u00a0Were developers happy using the internal cloud? \u00a0If they weren’t and couldn’t move as fast then perhaps they didn’t want the Zcloud. \u00a0Perhaps the Zcloud was a cause of contention the whole time it was around.<\/p>\n
Lastly, this interesting tweet from Adrian Cockcroft:<\/p>\n
![\"Screen](\"http:\/\/benincosa.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/05\/Screen-Shot-2015-05-11-at-10.14.41-AM.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n