Clouds Ain't Always Cheap

Cloud computing is supposed to save us all tons of dough. You do away with your servers, disks, interconnects and air conditioners, and run all your software over the wire from a cloud. You presumably save on hardware, energy and management.

But cloud services don't magically configure themselves or keep themselves up-to-date. Some, like BitCurrent analyst Alistair Croll (I imagine Alistair with a pipe, a smoking jacket and a shelf full of dusty old books), believe it can actually be more difficult and expensive to manage this remote software. Not only will admins have to administer this software, but their companies may add more and more applications to the mix -- increasing complexity and admin time.

Do you care about clouds? Have you found any good Web sites that cover cloud services or teach you how to build your own clouds? URLs welcome at [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 22, 20080 comments


Mailbag: Good Riddance, Seinfeld

Doug may be sad to see the Gates-Seinfeld commercials go, but James thinks the whole endeavor was a failure from the get-go:

I saw the first commercial and thought, "Wow, that has to be the lamest commercial I have ever seen! They should fire whichever agency sold 'em that load of crap." Then I saw the second commercial and I realized why Vista sucks so bad. It's because Microsoft has a bunch of morons working for it. If it can't see how lame those commercials were, they should all be fired and bring in some people with enough sense to say, "Hey, those commercials suck, let's go hire that company that made the Apple ads. At least they have a sense of humor."

Now I hear that Microsoft is scrapping the Seinfeld commercials because they "accomplished what they wanted," which I guess was proving that MS is out of touch with reality. OK, so tell me another one. More like Microsoft finally saw that people were only laughing at how ridiculous its commercials were, especially compared to the Apple commercials (I thought the latest one with PC in the pizza box was the best one so far). If MS doesn't pull their collective heads out of their behinds, they are going to end up digging such a deep hole, they will never be able to climb out of it.
-
James

Tell us what you think! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 22, 20080 comments


Was It Something I Said?

I admit I was pretty rough on the first Gate/Seinfeld video. In fact, I thought Bill was way funnier than Jerry. I hope the ad whizzes at Microsoft didn't take too much of that to heart and that critics like me aren't the reason there will be no more episodes of the Bill-and-Jerry show.

That's right: After three installments, Microsoft is shelving the Jerry commercials in favor of a new batch starring a guy that looks like the PC guy from the Apple commercials.

I'm actually pretty bummed. The second and third installments were darn good, and way different from your average TV fare (with four kids, I know a lot about average TV fare). Just as there have been petitions to bring XP, how about one to bring back Jerry?

Posted by Doug Barney on September 22, 20080 comments


Mailbag: VMware's Big Plans, Seinfeld Ad, More

One reader is optimistic about VMware's virtualization ambitions:

A Datacenter Operating System? I think that'd be wonderful if implemented correctly. From my experience, most datacenters have a tendency to have a server per application to ensure the reliability of that application and that multiple applications won't tread on each other's territory. It also makes it easier to plan upgrades, patches and new releases.

With everything running under a virtual environment, we open up a new possibility. If all you are going to run is a Web server, then why not have an OS that is designed from the ground-up to be a Web server? You could have the same for a file server or a print server. I know that Windows Server 2008 has headed in this direction by only installing the roles needed, but there is probably still a LOT of unnecessary code that allows this one OS to be everything to everyone. Without this extra code, the OS would run much faster and would be much easier to secure. I think the time is right for someone to develop operating systems that are designed from the ground-up to maximize the benefits of a virtual environment.
-T.W.

The second installment of the Gates-Seinfeld ads is out, but the response hasn't changed much (read: lukewarm):

The second ad had funny parts to it, like the grandmother and the setup, but there were many moments where the ad was too lame (like the bedtime story). The ads need work. They lack and need a certain je ne sais quoi. I'm disappointed in the ads because MS is spending so much money on them and they're not as entertaining as Apple's Mac and PC ads.
-Christian

The first commercial seemed really bad, but it did set the tone. The second one IS better. Obviously, it's like all the foreign car commercials, where you know absolutely nothing about the car when it is over, but in this case, everybody in the target audience knows what the product and message is, regardless of how bad the delivery may become. I think at this point, we just miss Bill, and are glad to watch him in mini sitcoms on TV.
-Mel

I have no idea why Bill Gates is in a commercial; as a business person, I don't get it. Why would I care if he became a normal person or an oddball? All I want is for Vista to work quickly, correctly and with zero maintenance! The average consumer has no idea what should work or should not on their PC; if they get a Blue Screen of Death, then they think this is normal.

The Mac commercials are very accurate and, sad to say, Microsoft really doesn't care; it's all about marketing. In fact, Microsoft reminds me of Ford and GM: They have made cars which fail after so many years and now they are paying the price for this inferior "marketing" quality.
-Mike

I guess I'm thinking that these Gates-Feld commercials are going to take folks somewhere and when we get there we'll all be converts to Microsoft. I know that we'll all end up in Vista-ville down the road, though I'm dragging my feet like everyone else. Often, the changes that end up being "for the better" are often the ones that are uncomfortable to wiggle into -- maybe like the "conquistadors." The ones that are comfortable in the store end up being loose and sloppy.

Vista SP1 fixed some issues I had with one of my customers whose "dollar-store laptop" didn't want to participate in their Windows Domain. If Microsoft can continue to chip away at the nuisances and annoyances to provide a secure and stable platform, we'll move on.
-Dan

But unlike the ad, Doug's crack about the difference between a VMware CEO and a pitbull was unequivocally funny...to one guy:

I laughed at your joke.
-Anonymous

Thanks for the support, Anonymous. Everyone else, feel free to chime in! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 18, 20080 comments


Our Economy Ain't Dead Yet

All week, the financial news has been bleak. Lehman Brothers saying uncle, stocks falling faster than a base jumper, the doom-and-gloom analysts getting unlimited air time...

But I was living in a different world. At VMworld, there were some 10,000 customers looking to transform their shops, over 200 third parties creating a brand-new and vibrant market, and a company, VMware, looking to do revolutionary things -- doing it all with a fair bit a class and savvy.

Virtualization also offers us a way out of this economic and even energy mess. Through the massive centralization of servers, PCs, networks and storage that virtualization allows, we can save mega megawatts. The energy saves are stupendous, as are the hardware and management economics.

Posted by Doug Barney on September 18, 20080 comments


XenServer Take 5

Everyone, it seems, is trying to crash VMware's big VMworld party. Microsoft's shenanigans this week are well-documented, but Citrix (also a pioneer in thin client computing) made some noise, too -- right in VMware's back yard: Citrix unveiled server virtualization tool XenServer 5.

Some have questioned Citrix's commitment to XenServer given that the company is so close to Microsoft and such a fan of Hyper-V. Perhaps XenServer 5 will help answer that question. New features focus on monitoring, disaster recovery and more options for third-party programs.

Where do you see Xen going, and is Citrix truly committed? Send conjectures to [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 18, 20080 comments


Sun Adds VMware to Virtual Line

Sun is one of the pioneers, if not the pioneer, in thin client computing. While the "Network Computer" that Scott McNealy and Larry Ellison talked about for years never quite materialized, the Sun Ray line is a very effective thin solution.

But just as Sun made up with Microsoft, it apparently isn't religious about thin client and other virtual tools. This week, in fact, Sun agreed to sell and support VMware's Virtual Desktop Infrastructure and Virtual Desktop Manager.

This software can be used to drive Sun Ray devices, or customers can opt for a purer Sun solution. Sun has a pretty cool strategy of pushing its unique technology, such as SPARC and Solaris, as well as a full complement of industry standard (read: Wintel) tools.

What do you think of Sun these days? Opinions accepted at [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 18, 20080 comments


Just Say No to Other Hypervisors

In a Q&A session, Maritz was asked about support for non-VMware hypervisors. He said, "At this point in time, we don't support hypervisors other than our own," adding that VMware isn't religious about hypervisors and it would consider it if there was enough demand.

After private conversations, it's clear that the door is open for other hypervisors. The trouble is in doing things like VMotion with Hyper-V et al. that are so easily accomplished with ESX.

Posted by Doug Barney on September 17, 20080 comments


Mailbag: Firefox vs. IE...Again, Cloudy Computing, More

Readers talk browsers -- specifically, why Firefox trumps IE, and whether Netscape died a natural death:

I don't know what you don't like about Firefox. I find it fast, intuitive, extensible and easy to use. Granted, I've been in on this session since 1982; I've seen EVERY version of IE. I've seen everything that IE can possibly do and I am not happy with IE. I only use IE because of some Web sites, like the educational system's Web site. Otherwise, I do everything else in Firefox.

If I had to choose just one feature of Firefox that I rely on most, it's the infinite zoom feature.
-Ari

Netscape definetely died. Take a look at Firefox (well, it's free). It's still gaining momentum over IE, and now Chrome is doing its part. If Netscape would've offered a very compelling reason to stick with it, it would be alive. But I'm sure it would be as freeware.

I think Microsoft did a good job (even tough, unconsciously) in making the market for the Web browsers at no cost. I don't think paying for such a piece of software would've improved the security and quality.

-Armando

John isn't sure how, exactly, the movement toward cloud computing is going to help him save energy:

Let see if I am getting this right: If I use the cloud instead of my own datacenter, I can save energy? As I see it, the datacenter I use, either Microsoft's or my own, may or may not be energy-efficient. I do not see how the location has anything to do with how much energy it uses. Try this: If I use my home computer, which is bloated because it is running Vista, and buy a cloud service to handle my checkbook, correspondence and record keeping, according to your theory I would save energy. I don't understand how that can be true.

This reminds me of the fellow who is going to save energy by charging his cell phone from the car. No, that isn't free energy; the car's engine has to run a tiny bit harder to charge the phone. It isn't much, but it is the same amount as you would draw from the wall outlet at home. Charging where you get it is a trade, and not necessarily an improvement. It depends on all the factors involved. Maybe if I buy one of China's $99 laptops instead of my home desktop with 2GB et al., that might save me some energy. But it is not because the laptop is battery-powered -- it is because it might, just might, use less power to do its work.
-John

Speaking of cheap laptops, Marc thinks that no matter how inexpensive they get, Linux laptops won't catch on in the States:

In the U.S., low-cost PCs are extremely attractive to cost-conscious segments. But in the end, American consumers are needed to drive costs down. In the end, no matter how much you drive down costs with low-power, Linux-based systems, user demand is the key and consumers (at least in the USA) ask for Windows. Why? Well, lots of Web sites are dependent upon IE (Firefox just won't cut it). Commercial products, be they for personal productivity, multimedia or gaming, overwhelmingly are available for Windows and, sometimes, Macintosh. Not much commercial software is available for Linux. The fact that most Linux software is free just doesn't help when the consumer cannot shop of those Linux choices at their favorite retailer.

This new Chinese laptop might do well in European and Asian markets, but without the ability to run Widows applications or view IE-centric Web sites, don't expect it to take hold in the USA.
-Marc

And Chris, who was in Las Vegas during 9/11, shares his memories of the aftermath:

A day or so after the tragedy, all gaming stopped for one minute at noon to remember the victims. All major attractions were closed (such as the Stratosphere rides and headliner acts), since they were considered potential targets. The oversized electronic hotel signs had patriotic messages such as "God bless America" instead of the usual advertising. The Fitzgerald casino downtown changed its marquee to read, "Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this week's tragedies." It is probably the only time they've ever had a prayer on their marquee. Every sports book was shut down; instead, their mammoth screens displayed the news channels.

Friday, Sept. 14, the hotels minimized all exterior lighting, including turning off marquees and decorative lighting, to memorialize Tuesday's events. In addition, for 10 minutes, they turned off ALL exterior lighting. We were in a cab, and it was as if the entire strip simply disappeared. It was an unbelievable sight, or rather a lack thereof!
-Chris

Tell us what you think! Leave comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 17, 20080 comments


VMware Wants To Virtualize Everything

While Microsoft has a series of discrete tools for servers, PCs, applications and management, VMware is now talking about what it calls a Datacenter Operating System. If that wasn't bold enough, this OS (well, it's not really an OS) handles computers, networks and storage (not sure how Cisco and NetApp feel about all that).

Essentially, VMware wants you to build your own clouds. The cloud isn't just Google et al., but the datacenter right down the hall. Under this plan, computing becomes a utility -- carefully managed by VMware.

This works for fine Google, which invests billions in built-from-scratch server farms to which it adds built-from-scratch applications. But how do you do that when you don't have billions to invest in built-from-scratch server farms to which you can add built-from-scratch applications? You have to deal with all things legacy.

To me, going forward this is a fine IT goal, but while the end result sounds simple, getting there is immensely complex. If VMware succeeds with these plans, it will not only become the new Microsoft, but the new Cisco and EMC, as well (oh, yeah, they already are EMC).

Is this pie in the sky or money in the bank? Answers readily accepted at [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 17, 20080 comments


VMware CEO's Big Splash

New VMware CEO Paul Maritz stood in front of a crowd of (I'd have to guess) thousands and, like Sarah Palin, gave the speech of his life. What's the difference between a former VMware CEO and a pitbull? Lipstick. And if you put lipstick on Hyper-V, it's still Hyper-V.

No, Maritz really didn't say any of those things. In fact, that's probably the lamest joke I've ever penned (send barbs my way at [email protected]).

The Maritz talk wasn't quite as well-received as Palin's convention speech. Virtualization Review Editor Keith Ward wasn't impressed, whereas I thought Martitz came across as thoughtful, highly technical and one not afraid of pushing the envelope.

Posted by Doug Barney on September 17, 20080 comments


Mailbag: Seinfeld's Second Shot, More

Based on the aforementioned Michael's reaction, the second Seinfeld-Gates commercial is already more successful than the first:

In case you haven't seen it yet, here is the next installment. It's on YouTube. I was crying about 30 seconds in. That grandmother is hilarious.
-Michael

But that might not make a difference for Darren from the U.K., who has just one question:

Sorry, who is Seinfeld?
-Darren

And Raymond shares his thoughts on the naysayers who think the Large Hadron Collider will only spell disaster:

I do not understand why the fear mongers want to stop the LHC. I may not be a particle physics major, but I would love to see what we will learn from their experiments and, like the article stated, we have higher energy collisions that are being caused by cosmic rays all around us and they have not destroyed the earth.

There are always doom-and-gloom people out there and we never seem to learn to ignore them. When they tested the first atomic bomb, there were people that were worried that the chain reaction would not stop and the earth would be destroyed. I can remember when all the planets aligned on the same side of our sun and it was not torn apart like some apocalypse doomsayers said it would. By the way, if I recall, we were supposed to go back to the Stone Age when the year 2000 hit because of the Y2K computer bug...so I guess I am not really writing this message to you after all.
-Raymond

Tell us what you think! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].

Posted by Doug Barney on September 16, 20080 comments