OK, you can call me a geek, but I really like CLI’s. It could be that they so seldom have serious UI issues the way GUI’s do. Or it could simply be nostalgia for the days when screen savers actually had a purpose. Either way, I had to smile when I first came across goosh, a shell like interface for google.

Now if google would just put the database on a floppy . . .

Just found this one via slashdot. Enjoy!

Twenty Experts Define Cloud Computing (with source links)

http://cloudcomputing.sys-con.com/read/612375_p.htm

Poll: should we add our own?

—

Update, 7:30pm: Bert adds his view on why we shouldn’t try to make our own definition

One of the truisms of promoting new technologies is that the market never forms as fast as you expect. Spending sixteen hours a day, seven days a week working on steeped in the nuances of your technology, it can be frustrating trying to breakthrough the FUD accumulated in consumers minds by years working with the status quo. So, when you start to see that people get it, the moment is really gratifying.

One such moment was finding an article on ZDnet about Accenture Technology Labs’ assesment that utility computing is a green technology:

“Industrial-scale computing facilities can be located so as to optimize across land costs, power costs, bandwidth costs and power reliability . . . This can result in significant savings and is not an option most enterprises have available to them. “

The use of virtualization to enable utility computing has become pretty well accepted over the past year. So much so, that it’s almost comical to think of some of the responses we got three years ago when we started 3tera and were touring VCs and potential partners with our Powerpoint slides.

Unfortunately, some folks take the idea too literally and believe that virtualization and a SAN is all that’s required. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. AppLogic has been in production for 18 months and EC2 for twelve, so we now have data about what services are required for utility computing.

Peter and I just finished an article for fishtrain that discusses how virtualization fits into utility computing and what additional services are required. Hopefully it’ll stir a little bit of discussion.

I’ve been asked more than once during interviews whether utility computing will ultimately cost IT jobs. With fewer physical assets to manage and with the ability to automate a great deal of the mundane labor intensive operations, the logic is there should be need for fewer system administrators. However, this is a rather poorly though out analysis.

Utility computing eliminates labor by substituting technology. At 3tera, we routinely find system administrators who run hundreds of systems. Even a thousand isn’t out of the question. Compare that with 20 to 30 in typical IT environments and the ROI become pretty obvious. So, what about the jobs?

Economics, and the history of technology, suggests that when we encounter a step function in cost overall usage increases by a greater multiple than the cost reduction. Of course, this assumes demand is elastic and I haven’t seen any indication that demand for computing overall has been satisfied. This is why minis, PCs and the Internet didn’t reduce the number of IT jobs. With each of these new innovations IT related projects got done quicker and more cost effectively. After a period of ajustment each caused a rapid increase in IT jobs associated with the new technology that dwarfed any losses of older job functions.

Accordingly, I find it odd to suggest that utility computing will eliminate IT jobs. Quite the contrary, I expect to see a rapid expansion of IT jobs as more users learn the advantages of utility computing.

Layered Tech has taken the covers off their new DynaVol storage service.

In addition to offering a reliable and secure way to store data, DynaVol can also be used to serve static content, taking a lot of load off your infrastructure. Plus, with packages starting at just $15 month, the system is exceptionally affordable.

I’m looking forward to using DynaVol for near-line storage of application backups.

Canadian domain registrar and hoster Sibername.com announced on their forum today that they’re beginning implementation of AppLogic. We’ve been working with them since HostingCon in Chicago as they put AppLogic through a barrage of tests. They have a good team and we’re pleased to have them on board.

Rich Miller has a post about the Open Virtual machine Format (OVF) that a consortium of vendors submitted to the DMTF last week.

I’ve blogged about standards for utility computing a few times before, and I continue to believe it’s too early for a standard.

Standards are a double edged sword - a trade-off to gain interoperability in exchange for stifling innovation. Once sufficient experimentation in an area of technology has been conducted that agreement can be negotiated between competitors on market requirements, a standard can be drafted that delivers interoperability and allows innovation at the next layer. IMHO it’s way too early to make that trade-off. We haven’t adequately explored the possibilities in utility computing.

For instance, the OVF is intended to provide interchange of applications between services. To my knowledge, no vendor other than 3tera has ever demonstrated this ability. Our customers do it frequently. Therefore, we can document precisely what the requirements of an interchange format are and what services are required on both ends. OVF, unfortunately, is simply insufficient.

Even if 3tera published our interchange specification tomorrow and all parties signed on to it, that wouldn’t be the end game, because transfering an application between data centers isn’t the end requirement. It’s merely one important step. 3tera’s roadmap includes several major leaps in capabilities that will require significant extension of our current interchange format. And, as I mentioned, that’s where the negative aspect of standards comes into play. To adequately explain the need for those extensions in a standard body, 3tera would be required to site use cases where they could be needed - in essence to divulge our product roadmap to our competitors.

That said, if the authors of the OVF draft want input and are willing to embrace capabilities they can’t yet provide, capabilities that will set the stage for years of innovation, then we’ll be happy to participate.