April 29, 2014 at 8:23 am
Dalkeith (4/29/2014)
...Software only becomes valueless if it can't run.
...
...or be maintained.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
April 29, 2014 at 8:25 am
The cloud is probably OK for anything that is NOT demanding steady performance for long periods of time. It has costs advantages for running short jobs like daily web crawlers or when required storage is huge / needs to be distributed to many other locations. Almost by definition it is not an enterprise worthy platform.
You do not want to notice any interference from other cloud customers and their crappy queries. You want predictable response times and the control to tune it trough a high level of hardware control. You want to use SSDs if you are not working with massive amounts of data as it is cheap and gets you a massive speed boost.
Microsoft should acknowledge that times have changed and that server hardware is a lot cheaper now then it was not too long ago. Their product is costing relatively speaking more then ever and that is not a good position to be in. They need revenue from quantity instead of margins, have as many people and products work with their platform by making it as attractive as possible. That is how a business grows and survives big changes.
Charging more for certain features few need is fine, but excluding useful features for many from the volume products is downright "moronic". They should fire the guys at the marketing department, and I seriously mean this! They accomplished alienating existing customers and have nothing new to offer to potential new customers. Long term development will be that their product delivers less value as customers get less invested and use less of the features. Alternatives will have an increasingly easier time to take over customers simply by competing on price.
April 29, 2014 at 8:30 am
I guess the current threat on Net Neutrality plays into this discussion too.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
April 29, 2014 at 8:42 am
Open Source is becoming more attractive. The sunset of XP has driven a large number of people to Linux, especially given how easy it is to use Ubuntu and Mint. Open Source databases work pretty well.
For some reason I have an image of a large, old tree, with Microsoft emblazed along the trunk, falling down as Bill Gates and team chop it down at the base.
Dave
April 29, 2014 at 8:50 am
Gary Varga (4/29/2014)
I guess the current threat on Net Neutrality plays into this discussion too.
Net Neutrality is a double edged sword; sure your Netflix movies will stream more smoothly at home, if internet providers don't favor corporations willing to pay for priority bandwidth. But, on the downside, your connection to cloud data services at work has to compete with millions of schmucks who sit at home streaming NetFlix all day. Riding on Microsoft's political and financial coattail isn't such a bad thing.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
April 29, 2014 at 9:02 am
Eric M Russell (4/29/2014)
Gary Varga (4/29/2014)
I guess the current threat on Net Neutrality plays into this discussion too.Net Neutrality is a double edged sword; sure your Netflix movies will stream more smoothly at home, if internet providers don't favor corporations willing to pay for priority bandwidth. But, on the downside, your connection to cloud data services at work has to compete with millions of schmucks who sit at home streaming NetFlix all day. Riding on Microsoft's political and financial coattail isn't such a bad thing.
Wait a minute, Net Neutrality does NOT speed up access. It is exactly the opposite. It allows Comcast and others to BLOCK their competitors content unless the competitor is willing to pay a bribe! Your wording that "If providers don't favor" is a pipe dream. They already do.
The theory that Internet bandwidth is being eaten up by movies is a red herring. The real issue is corporate greed and politicians who have sold their ethics to the highest bidder! When my 6-year old asked why everything is "buffering" all the time, and I explained what the law allows, his comment was that politicians are stupid.
Every other developed country has far faster Internet, at far, far lower cost. As consolidation in the US has occurred, progress has slowed dramatically.
Dave
April 29, 2014 at 9:09 am
djackson 22568 (4/29/2014)
Eric M Russell (4/29/2014)
Gary Varga (4/29/2014)
I guess the current threat on Net Neutrality plays into this discussion too.Net Neutrality is a double edged sword; sure your Netflix movies will stream more smoothly at home, if internet providers don't favor corporations willing to pay for priority bandwidth. But, on the downside, your connection to cloud data services at work has to compete with millions of schmucks who sit at home streaming NetFlix all day. Riding on Microsoft's political and financial coattail isn't such a bad thing.
Wait a minute, Net Neutrality does NOT speed up access. It is exactly the opposite. It allows Comcast and others to BLOCK their competitors content unless the competitor is willing to pay a bribe! Your wording that "If providers don't favor" is a pipe dream. They already do.
The theory that Internet bandwidth is being eaten up by movies is a red herring. The real issue is corporate greed and politicians who have sold their ethics to the highest bidder! When my 6-year old asked why everything is "buffering" all the time, and I explained what the law allows, his comment was that politicians are stupid.
Every other developed country has far faster Internet, at far, far lower cost. As consolidation in the US has occurred, progress has slowed dramatically.
Here in the UK we look with envy at the likes of South Korea too 🙁
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
April 29, 2014 at 9:13 am
Gary Varga (4/29/2014)
djackson 22568 (4/29/2014)
Eric M Russell (4/29/2014)
Gary Varga (4/29/2014)
I guess the current threat on Net Neutrality plays into this discussion too.Net Neutrality is a double edged sword; sure your Netflix movies will stream more smoothly at home, if internet providers don't favor corporations willing to pay for priority bandwidth. But, on the downside, your connection to cloud data services at work has to compete with millions of schmucks who sit at home streaming NetFlix all day. Riding on Microsoft's political and financial coattail isn't such a bad thing.
Wait a minute, Net Neutrality does NOT speed up access. It is exactly the opposite. It allows Comcast and others to BLOCK their competitors content unless the competitor is willing to pay a bribe! Your wording that "If providers don't favor" is a pipe dream. They already do.
The theory that Internet bandwidth is being eaten up by movies is a red herring. The real issue is corporate greed and politicians who have sold their ethics to the highest bidder! When my 6-year old asked why everything is "buffering" all the time, and I explained what the law allows, his comment was that politicians are stupid.
Every other developed country has far faster Internet, at far, far lower cost. As consolidation in the US has occurred, progress has slowed dramatically.
Here in the UK we look with envy at the likes of South Korea too 🙁
I cant wait until Google Fiber comes to my area. I would gladly trade the current monopoly for the next one.
Dave
April 29, 2014 at 9:21 am
Alex Gay wrote:
There is no way that we in the NHS could use cloud computing in general, or Azure in particular, especially for databases that contain patient data. The risks of unauthorized access is too high to begin with ...
See the panel from 19 November 2009.
In fairness, though, I'm not sure what your ears look like.
April 29, 2014 at 9:25 am
My biggest worry about using the cloud is 5 - 10 years down the road, when 75% of SQL Servers are in Azure, MS can start jacking up the price. Switching from SQL Server to another RDBMS right now would be a headache, but worth it if the cost savings are there. Going from the SQL Server on the cloud to another RDBMS AND having to buy new hardware for it could be a huge cost.
April 29, 2014 at 9:25 am
djackson 22568 (4/29/2014)
Eric M Russell (4/29/2014)
Gary Varga (4/29/2014)
I guess the current threat on Net Neutrality plays into this discussion too.Net Neutrality is a double edged sword; sure your Netflix movies will stream more smoothly at home, if internet providers don't favor corporations willing to pay for priority bandwidth. But, on the downside, your connection to cloud data services at work has to compete with millions of schmucks who sit at home streaming NetFlix all day. Riding on Microsoft's political and financial coattail isn't such a bad thing.
Wait a minute, Net Neutrality does NOT speed up access. It is exactly the opposite. It allows Comcast and others to BLOCK their competitors content unless the competitor is willing to pay a bribe! Your wording that "If providers don't favor" is a pipe dream. They already do.
The theory that Internet bandwidth is being eaten up by movies is a red herring. The real issue is corporate greed and politicians who have sold their ethics to the highest bidder! When my 6-year old asked why everything is "buffering" all the time, and I explained what the law allows, his comment was that politicians are stupid.
Every other developed country has far faster Internet, at far, far lower cost. As consolidation in the US has occurred, progress has slowed dramatically.
Net Neutrality is also about bandwidth throttling. So long as all internet traffic in the U.S. gets squeezed through a handful of public pipes, the online inventory system for Joe's Auto Parts will have to compete with a million simultaneous downloads "Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3". The root of the problem is the monopoly; our options are limited.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
April 29, 2014 at 9:30 am
Subtle push? More like an overt attempt to sell an ostensibly benefit for even more access and control over private data by not-always-visible entities (read what security experts are saying about these trends, e.g., Bruce Schneier, and what has been leaked to the public, e.g., Julian Assange, etc.). Sure, today's concerns will be addressed, and as virtualization technologies continue to improve, maybe someday, the internet actually will be a distributed compute/storage entity instead of just a series-of-tubes:rolleyes:
I society we are being forced to exchange privacy for security, as if they were some sort of parity between them that needs to stay in constant balance. The same is happening with the traditional data center and Cloud resources. Personally, I think one day soon businesses are going to be told that their legal liabilities will be ameliorated by the "advanced security, availability, reliability, serviceability, etc." of the Cloud and they will be forced to transition. Getting laws like this passed is what lobbyist do for large organizations and corporations; Cloud services are quickly joining the ranks of these large entities and will no doubt act in kind...
April 29, 2014 at 9:37 am
Peter E. Kierstead wrote:
Subtle push? More like an overt attempt to sell an ostensibly benefit for even more access and control over private data by not-always-visible entities ...
MySQL, PostgreSQL and other open-source RDBMSs would seem to offer an alternative. Granted, commercial software may not always support them, but in-house development could do so.
April 29, 2014 at 10:22 am
Peter E. Kierstead (4/29/2014)
Subtle push? More like an overt attempt to sell an ostensibly benefit for even more access and control over private data by not-always-visible entities (read what security experts are saying about these trends, e.g., Bruce Schneier, and what has been leaked to the public, e.g., Julian Assange, etc.). Sure, today's concerns will be addressed, and as virtualization technologies continue to improve, maybe someday, the internet actually will be a distributed compute/storage entity instead of just a series-of-tubes:rolleyes:I society we are being forced to exchange privacy for security, as if they were some sort of parity between them that needs to stay in constant balance. The same is happening with the traditional data center and Cloud resources. Personally, I think one day soon businesses are going to be told that their legal liabilities will be ameliorated by the "advanced security, availability, reliability, serviceability, etc." of the Cloud and they will be forced to transition. Getting laws like this passed is what lobbyist do for large organizations and corporations; Cloud services are quickly joining the ranks of these large entities and will no doubt act in kind...
Public discontent creates careers for the next generation of politicians. Meanwhile, migrating databases from one platform to another and back again creates careers for those of us in information technology. In the bigger scheme of things, we can't always stop bad ideas, but we can make a living managing them or selling an alternative.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
April 29, 2014 at 11:32 am
It's pretty straightforward to move data into the cloud when it's your own data---but for the many companies (such as where I work) out there that offer SASS solutions, the option to "go to the cloud" is not possible.
To "put the cloud into the cloud" potentially takes away the level of control and trust that allows a web-based provider to be able to sell and maintain their software.
For example, if your product has an uptime requirement of 99.95, then Azure is immediately out-of-the-question as it promises only 99.9%. An additional piece of math would be to consider this: Let's say your uptime requirement is 99.9%. If you moved to Azure, then you would now need to guarantee that your uptime is 100% on your end to account for the potential for 0.1% downtime on the Azure size. In other words, total uptime becomes a function of every cloud service that you enlist and all of their SLAs. 3 services with 99.9% uptime would not guarantee 99.9% uptime for your solution, but potentially as low as 99.7% if all risks were sequentially realized.
The market will exist for both hosted and on-premises solutions for a long time as this use-case exists, or other security-related concerns persist.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 41 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply