SALabs October Silicon Valley Cloud Club Report [Part 1]
Wednesday, October 7, 2009 at 8:22AM
Rich Miller in Cloud Club, Cloud Infrastructure, Cloud Platform, Cloud Standards, Clouderati, JeOS

On Monday, October 3, the San Francisco Cloud Computing Club and Silicon Valley Cloud Computing Club hosted a joint session that was notable for any number of reasons. Someone described it as being involved in a Twitter / Clouderati twitterstorm, but face-to-face. Whatever it felt like, it was a great source of good thought and numerous, mutually respected points of view.

James Watters, of Silcon Angle acted as the MC and moderator for the session, and took it upon himself to capture the spirit of the session. He kindly invited me to add in my take on the meetup and we found ourselves with a jointly authored recollection of the conversation.

Here's a snippet. For the full version, take a look at Silicon Angle's site:


Q: What is the impact of internal private clouds on both enterprises and external cloud service providers? (Question submitted by Randy Bias)

James Watters: I got the "scrunch face" from Randy Bias, and James Urquhart when I suggested that private clouds need to adhere to public cloud standards to be really useful. I believe this is important because it keeps both the economics and usability innovations of the public cloud proximal to how users evaluate their internal private clouds, or as /Hoff said once, allows public cloud to be the forcing function for change.

If Private or internal clouds get really exotic, with proprietary in-house created management, deployment and consumption functions they won‚  play as easily with the coming wealth of interesting solutions created on top of public cloud standards.

The other point is simple: this is what really smart companies already have today. If you sit down with the top investment banking firms in the country many of them have highly sophisticated JeOS optimized application deployment, scaling, patching, and management functions for autonomic computing, but its expensive to create this kind of in-house IP.

Amazon sources tell me that over 40% of their revenues are driven by third party applications built directly atop their API. If you build an internal cloud not compliant to public standards you may be left without access to this increasingly important ecosystem of innovation.

Rich Miller: For better or worse, the adoption of cloud-oriented computing by the Enterprise and Small-Medium Business (SMB) will start as a transition from "the way things are done now," to in-house, on-premise clouds. IT organizations will get religion, in part through the widespread adoption of server virtualization, and start operating their in-house IT organizations like utilities: lots of self-service, pay-as-you-go, multi-tenancy. (Remember: cloud is an operating model, not just a technology model.)

But, in order to get there in an orderly fashion, the path will be evolutionary. And, in order to get there, some of the internal clouds will be mixed-bags of infrastructure-cloud offerings (especially in-house data clouds), platform-cloud offerings and application-cloud offerings.

To your point, James, one way in which coordination and compatibility with public cloud offerings may come about is if the management systems that the enterprise uses for their in-house operations are built to recognized 'standards‚' - those offered by the most powerful service providers (e.g. Amazon AWS) or technology providers (e.g. VMware). Over a reasonable period of time, the management of an in-house, on-premise cloud will morph easily into managing hybrids (both on- and off-prem). ...

Article originally appeared on telematica (
See website for complete article licensing information.