Displaying articles for: 07-22-2012 - 07-28-2012
I am traveling this week and so it has been tight coming up with a post (you can look at my tweets on @cebess to find out more about where I’ve been). I did see that HP will be hosting some commercials throughout the next few weeks on the “make it matter” theme.
There have been some other videos in this theme too:
While I was at a conference this week, we were talking about how it takes about a GB to store a person’s genome but only 20MB when stored with a high-quality reference genome. Based on my estimates for technology trends for 2017 that means that it would cost about $18M to store the genome for every human on the planet at that time (assuming there are no disruptive technologies that totally change the trend). With compression and a good reference genome that coudl be shared, that storage price could be taken down to $400K. Of course, gathering that data is another problem.
The point is that we could do some very interesting things with this information. $4M is large, but not out of reach for even a relatively small organization. Sometimes thinking about things differently can create things that really matter. We need to ask better questions and not dismiss the possibilities using our “common sense”.
The average person (in the developed world) has about 27,000 days on this earth – make it matter.
In Texas, the role of a engineer is actually licensed – by law. The testing is now extending to software engineering as well. This means the legal use of terms like “engineer” and “engineered” are protected.
The new NCEES Software Engineering PE exam is ready and will be offered for the first time in April 2013. Everyone practicing software engineering in Texas is encouraged to register for the exam.
There has always been some concern about the cavalier way the term engineer is used – especially in the area of software. In many parts of the world, the boarders for these terms are more clear cut than in others. Having clear definitions should have a wide impact, especially in this world of XaaS and high job turnover.
I didn’t realize until yesterday but you can join the OpenStack Foundation as an Individual Member . The cost is free and everyone is invited. Taking advantage of this will allow you to keep up on the state of this cloud standards effort.
OpenStack has gained a lot of momentum in recent months, and many are interested in following the progress of the project and/or contributing to it in a variety of ways. With the creation of the new OpenStack Foundation, you can express your needs… They state their mission as:
“The OpenStack Foundation is an independent body providing shared resources to help achieve the OpenStack Mission by Protecting, Empowering, and Promoting OpenStack software and the community around it, including users, developers and the entire ecosystem.”
They even have an OpenStack blog to keep up with what is going on.
Standards in the cloud space have been a long time coming and is one of the game changers for future adoption. The hope is that they will help reduce the risk of vendor and product lock-in, improve interoperability and allow innovation to be focused on service differentiators instead of commodity features. Reaching a consensus on the definition of cloud computing took almost a decade, so the fact that there is not a single standard shouldn’t be a surprise.
Organizations like the Open Group and Open Cloud Consortium are defining standardize for some areas of cloud computing (mostly on the lowest layers of cloud). OpenStack and CloudStack, are currently examples of de facto standards. Although OpenStack has over 150 supporters, including HP, it is not a shoe in as “the” cloud-computing standard, but it does seem to dominate.
For cloud providers, the presence of multiple standards means they will need to select which standards to support or implement more than one standard. This adds to costs, so hopefully a standards consolidation effort is in the industry’s future.
From a customer perspective, using standards as part of a selection process is important, since the business could run the risk of tying their computing to a solution that cannot be supported elsewhere or relying on automation and monitoring tools that cannot be replaced effectively.
Even if a cloud provider meets all an organization’s needs today, migration to another vendor will likely happen at some point in the future. This can easily be more expensive and time consuming than an initial roll out. As I have said to numerous people in the paste the megabytes of data on the cloud today can quickly turn into petabytes in the future. This can be a pivot point for the private vs. public cloud decision for a larger enterprise.
The movement to cloud for most organizations for some percentage of their work is inevitable. The long-term lifecycle perspective is not always thought about when reaching an agreement today, but it needs to be. Standards play a role.