goraka epa | information technology security





Don’t forget the Bare Metal Cloud

By Jonathan Wisler, head EMEA, SoftLayer

I just came from the Cloud World Forum in London. virtual technology

 There was some excellent new technology, and having talked to literally many people about IaaS, I'm still amazed by the perception that it's only a virtual server offering affair. So let me say it as clear as possible: it's NOT. you'll now have a very hybrid cloud infrastructure that includes public clouds (virtual), bare metal clouds (dedicated servers), and personal clouds (your own private VM farm).

A little history about SoftLayer. We were started within the kitchen of 1 of the founders with the goal to revolutionize the hosting industry by removing the pain points for patrons and operations. Our founders didn't limit themselves to selling only servers with hypervisors, they wanted to urge the purchasers the compute power and network performance once they needed it and with minimal effort. They developed what we now call “infrastructure as a service” before anyone was calling it the cloud. it had been not about selling virtualization technology. it had been about quick deployment times, consumption-based billing, automation, control, and accessibility through a standard API.

So why is that this important? If I could sum it up in one word: performance. While virtual servers are valuable surely applications like web applications and gaming front ends, given they're a shared tenant environment, you'll trade off performance and reliability for quick deployment.

This is where the bare metal cloud comes in. you'll still deploy them quickly, in 1-4 hours, instead of 5-15 minutes for virtual servers. But since this is often one tenant environment, you'll get more compute power and network throughput. only for an indoor benchmark, we did some performance testing on our Riak database engineered servers, and that we got huge performance differences. we've heard from some customers that performance improvement of bare metal is 10-20 times over virtual only. I even have also worked on customer migrations from a purely virtual environment to a hybrid of bare metal plus virtual servers. on average we will cut their monthly billings in half while improving reliability and performance.

I am not getting to start a debate on virtual vs. bare metal because they're both valuable. the purpose is you'll have both…

I am not getting to start a debate on virtual vs. bare metal because they're both valuable. It really depends on your application’s performance and elasticity requirements. the purpose is you'll have both, sitting on an equivalent specification, accessible through any pane of glass, with a pay-as-you model and complete with an API. Also referred to as “the cloud.” The question is what tools are going to be the simplest to optimize the performance of your architecture. Cloud computing infrastructure now has the choices you would like to form sure your customers, whether or not they are external or internal, get the experience they have and expect.

Could all servers become the dimensions of an Apple TV? (They will if Cloud maturity rises)

By Theo Priestley, Consultant at ITredux

According to both Gartner and IDC worldwide server market revenue has fallen by up to five, with major server manufacturers taking success. The figure doesn’t appear big but the impact and shift to Cloud are beginning to make their mark. But the most important shifts are going to be happening further within the future as organizations move to downsize their infrastructure and run their business on smaller IT footprints.

…Will the MicroServer become a reality?

The server market figures might actually be a blip for the subsequent reasons;

Firms move towards server farms hosted by a 3rd party, reducing spend internally on larger IT assets but large farms still require these assets so spend will level out

Hardline negotiations are happening where once server OEMs had a business by the short and curlies, orgs now have a variety of choices at their disposal

But the most important trend shift will happen not within the size of the revenue but the physical size of kit required by businesses internally. I posted an unusual article recently which suggested that each one you’d got to run a business was a box the dimensions of an Apple TV.

What if a box as small because the Apple TV was all you needed to run your business?

The mainframe is becoming extinct…

Software is becoming leaner, faster…

Cloud is digitally pervasive…

In-Memory data and multiprocessing across an online of Things are going to be a reality…

Startup businesses are getting leaner, more agile…

And all you’d got to run it all may be a 3x3x1 inch block!

As companies embrace Cloud, whether fully or hybrid, the likelihood of massive IT spend on server hardware becomes more in question and actually OEMs got to move with this. The logical way is to start out downsizing the physical requirements of server technology to almost a slave unit because the majority of work for a corporation is completed by the Cloud provider.

The worldwide server market isn’t dying on its feed due to Cloud, it’s just getting to undergo a radical change in configuration. which suggests both hardware and software has got to change with it. Developers wont to squeeze everything into 5kb once, there’s no reason it can’t happen again,

And the tiny box sitting under your TV might just be pointing to the longer term of infrastructure during a few year's time.

Cloudy with Integration

By Theo Priestley, Consultant at ITredux

I was recent with a client who is trying to find a replacement enterprise software solution and that they have a really positive outlook towards Cloud. technology degrees

 They like it, such a lot in order that they weren’t curious about on-premise solutions. This represents a true shift in attitude, and therefore the company is not any slouch or tadpole in size either.

And this is often where iPaaS (Integration Platform as a Service) is basically coming into the fore and has got to rule as a first-thought strategy when entering the cumulonimbus worlds of Cloud and SaaS. within the last month, both SoftwareAG (Integration LIVE) and TIBCO (Cloud Bus) have thrown down the gauntlet into the ring with IBM, Mulesoft, and Informatica to call a scarce few who are already there.

But why has it taken everyone so long?

iPaaS, without the seller nonsense, clouding the understanding (pun) may be a solution provider’s service that permits cloud-cloud and cloud-premise integration for applications. It’s a step faraway from Cloud Brokerage which is actually the event and maintenance of SaaS applications and their integration within the entirety. If iPaaS was a scarce offering Brokerage is even thinner on the bottom (however take a glance at Accenture’s play during this area recently announced in April).

But back to the client at the beginning of the post. Despite their pro-cloud stance tucked away in their enterprise architecture diagrams was that horrendous long box labeled ‘ESB’ (Enterprise Service Bus) and it just looked so out of place during a forward-thinking strategy. And this is often where iPaaS doesn’t go far enough on my behalf. iPaaS is restricted because it’s built primarily for Cloud-based services.

A Cloud-based ESB strategy would be a welcome minimum requirement to any iPaaS solution just because the Service Bus is one among the foremost overworked and overly relied on pieces of kit in an enterprise stack.

Removing that entire headache of routing messages between disparate systems into a Cloud solution makes more sense where a hybrid environment exists instead of retaining that piece on-premise. It’s also a solid initiative for companies in moving far away from counting on IT to manage the most important piece of the architecture puzzle. Most of those services will have already undergone SSAE 16, ISO27001, PCI compliance so they’ll be robust and secure and that I see no reason to not ask an answer vendor whether or not they can provide a cloud ESB in its truest sense as a part of their iPaas offering.

I see no reason to not ask an answer vendor whether or not they can provide a cloud ESB in its truest sense as a part of their iPaas offering.

Cloud is basically at a tipping point now. we've SaaS applications and corporations willing to take a position but in an unstructured and legacy heavy manner. we've vendors offering to integrate a multi-SaaS strategy with their own solution but still retain that on-premise bus. we've Brokers who will handle it fully from end to finish. But the key to real Cloud adoption is in how that ESB is treated. It’s the most important prize to be had and therefore the largest thorn to get rid of.

The iPaaS rush is on and each cloud features a golden lining, but without clearly including a Cloud-based ESB therein strategy you would possibly just be panning for iron pyrites. Partnerships, Alliances within the Cloud, And What Makes Them Effective

By Marcus Cauchi of Sandler Training

The recent traffic jam of Oracle and Salesforce.com (see here for article) got me to thinking. On the surface, this is often about docking their technologies but underpinning this is something else that hasn’t been factored into the combination, which is that both these company's sales forces are trained in and use the Sandler selling system. Now I'm really curious to ascertain how having a shared sales methodology and philosophy behind their sales goes to affect their growth and therefore the rate of customer acquisition, assuming they will make the technologies play nicely together.

I’m curious to find out about other partnerships like Oracle and Salesforce.com within the Cloud space, and the way their salespeople, managers, and engineers play nicely together. Certainly, the history of its suffering from partnerships and tie-ups did not deliver on the expected results. and that I am interested in the implications for vendors who sell via the channel, and therefore the impact not having a cohesive sales methodology affects them and their clients?

.the history of its suffering from partnerships and tie-ups which did not deliver on the expected results.

From CIOs, I’d wish to understand how having partnered with differing selling methodologies affect your ability to urge an honest understanding of what the partnering organizations are offering and therefore the way well or badly they convey what they provide to you and your teams? Do they specialize in the technology and the IT team or have they spread their influence across your organization, and particularly are they engaging with the proper executives, influencers, and users in your business?

I am curious whether you see these quite partnerships becoming more prevalent – and what you think about to be the defining factors which will ensure within the EXECUTION they're successful? On paper and at the strategic thinking stages many ideas regarding tie-ups look good but when it involves execution they fall far in need of expectations.

…teams where the leadership fails to talk with one, clear voice, tend to become very political very quickly.

In my experience, teams where the leadership fails to talk with one, clear voice, tend to become very political very quickly. A crack at the highest of an organization turns into the Grand Canyon by the time it reaches the battlefront troops and it becomes full blown political warfare. If they aren’t cohesive and that they don’t communicate what's expected clearly you'll make certain there'll be as many versions as those that heard or read the policy or decision. and that they will take their perception to their teams then on. during this traffic jam like any, the leadership are often united and be clear, but it's essential to stay reinforcing that clarity (common purpose, common language, shared cultures, aligned compensation schemes, aligned management, shared targets and key must-win accounts, sharing of intelligence and contacts, etc) so customers, staff, suppliers, and commentators don’t become confused or feel there are mixed messages or intent coming from either or both parties.


And the final element that my experience tells me is important is that both management teams repeatedly reinforce and practice what they're getting to achieve with their team's reception and together before they are going in to meet the prospects. what's interesting here is we teach a rule that “When on a joint sales call, just one person talks”. meaning the opposite doesn’t! 2 on 1 is intimidating, so this must be managed very carefully and therefore the battle of egos doesn’t happen ahead of the prospect, and to make sure they avoid the embarrassment of feeling such as you need to interject because the opposite salesperson is just too weak to try to their job right.

2 on 1 is intimidating, so this must be managed very carefully and therefore the battle of egos doesn’t happen ahead of the prospect,

If you're a CEO, manager, or owner and you're considering a traffic jam or partnership, I’d be very curious to find out what pitfalls you've got experienced within the past and what you'll do to stop them in order that such alliances work from the outset? How will you avoid making equivalent mistakes with the subsequent partnership? And what are you doing to organize your sales department in order that they are going out and deliver the added value the partnership is in a position to supply customers, rather than getting into the way of the sale.

I have a few clients independent of 1 another whom I introduced from IBM and Imtech; they work well together precisely because they are doing the preparation and confirm they speak an equivalent language. They don’t go over each other or let their egos get within the way and that they both smash target routinely wherever they're working. and that they have common sales philosophies and systems. In working with a few of the Salesforce.com and Oracle partners, I even have noticed a serious shift in their performance. In one case, they were ready to go from startup to £3m annual run rate in 12 months and after 18 months they sold for $8-figures by partnering and one major think about their success and exit for cash was sharing their sales methodology.

Where does one see the simplest opportunities for tie-ups within the market supported compatible and related technologies over the subsequent 12 months [and] why?

Where does one see the simplest opportunities for tie-ups within the market supported compatible and related technologies over the subsequent 12 months? Why? Are their selling methods compatible or effective? And what about marriages made in Hell, those that won’t work out? which of them does one predict will crash and burn or worse, taper off and die a slow painful death?

Has this sparked the other thoughts on why and the way Cloud vendors can extend their reach and market share by collaborating?

Marcus Cauchi runs Sandler Training in London. information technology security

 He lacks the milk of human kindness you’d accompany nice trainers because nobody hires him to be their friend. They hire him to approach sales and eliminate ineffective and bad selling and sales management habits. Working with him is never a pleasing experience, it’s tough and it’s expensive. Call him and you’ll know why. 0203 427 5133 or 07515 937221.