Millions More (if Not Billion) Will Be On The Cloud Very Soon...

Q: At this point, Jesus himself could not define what a cloud is. Its a mission loaded with agenda and propelled by sophism - a mission you seem to have chosen to accept. If you think you have something concrete and actually valuable to add to the endless debate of what is cloud computing, then I think you should start a new thread or forum to engage in that fascinating exploration. I just don't see the need to continually interrupt threads with these deep thoughts.

A: I agree, I was being dogmatic. I think any business decision involving the transition of sensitive customer or business data into a third party is going to take a whole lot of convincing / magic / voodoo to get your average CIO to agree with this. Perhaps indeed the managed hosting providers will have a better shot at this, but thinking from the PoV of the customers I have worked with now and in the past, I can see a whole lot of hurdles for the public cloud. Much easier to sell them on a platform to build, manage, maintain a private cloud. If I need a server with far less power than a standard Amazon EC2 on-demand instance how would I get it? In other words, I want a virtual server that is a "deamon" and needs only 0.001 of a standard core. How would you implement this in the current amazon scheme? What if I need 10% of a standard core? Depends how you calculate the price. If you don't consider the cost external to a server in the in-house scenario, power, cooling, infrastructure, cost of money, extra labor to pull cable, install racks etc, then your correct. Otherwise it's a much more even comparison. Since you have only one application, you might want to look for SaaS solution comparable with 'micro-instances'. Perhaps slicing small EC2 instance introduces management overhead or affects SLAs, so they decided to go with this configuration as cutoff point.

Discuss It!

Most Popular Articles

More