A new take on cloud taxonomies: Migration

I was on a panel in the Bay Area a couple of weeks ago at Cloudconnect. As always, the topic of cloud taxonomies came up. It’s hard to discuss clouds without having a framework about which to discuss them. But taxonomies abound (with good ones from James Urquhart, Peter Laird, David Chappell, John M. Willis, Christopher Hoff, and Sam Charrington) and there’s no clear winner.

I came up with a new way to look at them, which didn’t immediately embarrass me. So here it is, for you to tear apart.

The problem with clouds, you see, is that  criticism levelled at one kind of cloud is a strength of another. For example, infrastructure-centric clouds where IT operators still need to add machines to grow aren’t inherently scaleable; whereas service-oriented clouds that “just work” aren’t as open.

So this model — which I’ll call the “cloud migration taxonomy” for want of a better label, looks at the issue in a way that matters to enterprises: How do I migrate to the cloud?

Here’s how to read the diagram:

  • If you have an existing data center application (say a WordPress instance, or a JBoss server) you can migrate to an infrastructure-centric cloud such as EC2 by simply building a machine image in the cloud. There are companies like rPath that can help with this, and Amazon has a payment system that lets firms like Red Hat get a share of the proceeds from your cloud usage.
  • If you have app code you like, and want to simply “paste” it into a form, you can do so with a service-centric cloud. If you wrote something in Python, you can take that code, tweak it (to remove cloud-incompatible functions such as RDBMS joins) and paste it into App Engine. Microsoft is betting that legions of Windows developers will take the server code they’re familiar with and port it to Azure. This is also why Joyent bought Reasonablysmart, so it has a service-centric cloud offering.
  • The next level of cloud use is to rewrite the process. If you have an in-house process — say, trouble ticketing — that was written on a legacy system (Fortran on a mainframe) you can’t just move it to the cloud. Instead, you’re going to map the business process, and then use a tool to recreate that process in the cloud. This is where Platform-as-a-Service companies like Coghead, Quickbase, Longjump, and many others can play. The app won’t be sexy; but then, neither was your legacy one.
  • At the highest level is Software-as-a-Service. Here, you’re simply copying your content to the cloud app. You might be saving your directory full of Word documents to Zoho, or Google Apps, or Microsoft Office Live. The only thing you’re migrating is the content itself.

When you’re trying to figure out how to embrace the cloud, these are your four options. The lower down you go, the more control you have (and the more work and testing you need to do); the higher up you go, the more turnkey (but the less flexibility and customization you get.) It’s that simple.

There are vendors who blur these lines, of course. Salesforce has SaaS, PaaS, and (arguably) a Service-centric cloud. Google certainly offers Apps, App Engine, and a number of tools like Googlebase that sit in the middle.

Anyway, I’m kinda sick of taxonomies, but what I like about this perspective is that it’s oriented to the issue of enterprise cloud migration that we’re all going to deal with in 2009. It’s going to be front and center at the Enterprise Cloud Summit (ECS) in Vegas (where, amazingly enough, most of the people who’ve been driving the taxonomy debate will all be gathering.)

Will Azure win? They have Dave Cutler, for starters

Recent US politics aside, it’s unwise to pin your hopes on a single person. But I’m going to do so, because that person is Dave Cutler. Dave is a lead developer for Windows Azure. That means it won’t suck.

Dave is legend: For starters, he built VMS, then built a compartmentalized OS that could run both VMS and UNIX called Mica. This was years ahead of its time.

I had a great conversation about the birth of operating systems with Peter Christy recently, who explained that early on, Digital was very supportive of VMS, forcing engineers to use it instead of older machines. But then they lost their nerve, and weren’t willing to do the same thing for Mica.

So Dave headed to Microsoft.

Continue reading “Will Azure win? They have Dave Cutler, for starters”

Why I like my data near my logic

I use an email client on my iMac. When it can’t get to the server, it still works. But sometimes, on a slow day with an unreliable network like the one I’m on right now, I don’t realize that I have mail waiting for me. The disconnect between by client-side logic and the server-side data camouflages the fact that the network isn’t working.

By contrast, when I use GMail’s web interface to read my mail, I know when I have new messages. Because Google controls the processing (on its servers) and data (right next to them) the two are connected. No camouflage there: If the network sucks, I know it.
Continue reading “Why I like my data near my logic”

Is cloud computing stable in bad weather?

Abstract: Network effects are powerful and scary.

The clouds just keep rolling in. Microsoft has thrown their hat in the ring with Azure which deserves notice because Ray Ozzie is behind it. Amazon just released a CDN service. With recent coverage in The Economist and every major newspaper, even my local news tonight, cloud computing appears to be here to stay, judging by the marketing feeding frenzy.

There have been some recent well publicized outages that have generated some concerned opinion.  Something struck a related chord when I read an excellent interview by Stephen Strogatz about network effects in Seed magazine:

I have this general concern about entering this networked era, which we’re clearly already in. For example, the power grid used to not be a grid. It was just a lot of isolated power stations. When there was trouble people would just close down the power plants and repair whatever the problem was.

But now that there’s a grid, when something bad happens at one point in the grid, and you use the defense strategy of just shutting down that plant, it can have propagating effects. It can put too much load on other plants, which may cause them to shut down. And this is exactly what we saw here in the northeast when we had the 2003 blackout. Or think about what is happening right now in the market, where there are all kinds of propagating, cascading failures in our market and financial systems. So, I’m just thinking that you may be opening a Pandora’s Box

Continue reading “Is cloud computing stable in bad weather?”