A few weeks ago I completed a series of posts describing the ways that cloud computing will change the way we utilize virtual machines and operating systems. The very heart and soul of software systems design is being challenged by the decoupling of infrastructure architectures from the software architectures that run on them.
(Credit:
Flickr/Ross Berteig)
Over the last few weeks, I've been slowly trying to get a grip on what the state of the union is with respect to software "packaging" architectures in cloud computing environments. Specifically, I've been focusing on infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) and platform-as-a-service (PaaS) offerings, and the enabling infrastructure that will handle application deployment to these services in the future. How will they evolve to make deployment and operations as simple as possible?
My search started innocently enough. After writing the "big rethink" series, I formed a theory that there are really only two interface points that IaaS and PaaS services needed to standardize:
The management interfaces that enable a wide variety of tools to monitor and manipulate the resources and services being offered
The "unit of delivery" that includes the software to be hosted and any required supporting data, configuration, and policy required to allow that software to work.
The former interface is well covered, with a large number of interfaces attempting to either be the sole vehicle for cloud management, or to map heterogeneous options to a single interface.
The "unit of delivery" interface, however, is actually far behind its management brethren when it comes to concerted efforts to provide a standard. There is OVF, which the Distributed Management Task Force, a standards body, is developing in part as a server-centric packaging for IaaS applications. However, OVF still requires developers and administrators to build an image from the ground up (or to build on top of an image provided by others), including configuring the operating system, any management and security utilities, and the virtual machines themselves.
The more I explore this question, in light of the "big rethink," the more I think there is an opportunity to simplify cloud computing through changing the focus from infrastructure to applications. Specifically, I think there are some advantages to a uniform description of an application, its configuration, and its operational requirements, that can be used to describe any software deliverable to the cloud, whether meant for IaaS or PaaS.
The diagram below describes my vision in a nutshell:
(Credit:
James Urquhart)
The package could be an archive file of some kind, or it could be some other association of files (such as a source control file system). The four elements displayed above are:
Metadata describing the manifest of the package itself, and any other metadata required for processing the package such as the spec version, application classification, etc. The manifest should describe enough that the receiving cloud infrastructure could decide if it was an acceptable package or not.
The bits that make up the software and data being delivered. This can be in just about any applicable format, I think, including an OVF file, a VHD, a TAR file or whatever else works. Remember, the manifest would describe the format the bits are delivered in--e.g. "vApp" or "RoR app" or "AMI" or "OVF," or whatever--and the cloud environment could decide if it could handle that format or not.
An appropriate deployment and/or configuration description, or pointers to the appropriate descriptions. I've always thought of this as a Puppet configuration, a Chef recipe, or something similar, but it could simply be a pointer to a JEE deployment descriptor in a WAR file provided in the "bits" section.
The deployment/configuration section must contain the information required to successfully get the application up and running in the target cloud environment, beyond what is contained in the bits themselves. This could potentially include a lot of information, such as required server and storage configurations, required network connections to services the app depends on, and potentially things like acceptable pricing and/or billing terms.
The information could be proprietary to a single vendor, but in the interest of some level of portability, I would hope we would see some more generalized standards for each application classification.
Orchestration and service level policies required to handle the automated run-time operation of the application bits. Again, I would hope to see some standards appear in this space, but this section should allow for a variety of ways to declare the required information.
Examples of what I would expect to find in this section are spot pricing limits (if needed), service level metrics and limits, information or code describing how the system should respond to increases or decreases in load, etc.
I don't expect the specific contents of the package to be uniform, just the overall structure and the manifest itself. Because of this, it is important to point out that this application packaging is not about portability, but rather about packaging, inventory, and interpretation. You would use these files to consistently store all types of cloud deliverables in a format interpretable by a standardized inventory system, digitally "ship" the deliverables to any arbitrary cloud service that supports the packaging standard, and to allow the cloud vendor to decide if and how it can support the needs of the application.
All of which leads to a simple question: why would anyone want or need this form of application packaging? Here are my thoughts on that:
It lets customers build an inventory of all cloud (and, in reality, non-cloud) application components in a format that makes automated deployment to a wider variety of cloud vendors theoretically possible, and packages all deployment and runtime automation parameters with the application code for change management purposes.
It would allow cloud vendors to begin to accept applications from competing environments using the same core platform or infrastructure without giving up the ability to add differentiated services, configuration, or orchestration features. This would be extremely beneficial in the PaaS market, where common use of open-source platforms means that there is some level of code portability, and where the service offerings of each vendor is what differentiates the offering.
It would greatly aid the open-source community in creating a simple, consistent way to describe complex applications to folks looking for software alternatives. Without this approach, the open-source provider is required to either build a virtual appliance with their code, or to require the end user to do all of the "heavy lifting" of application installation into an IaaS environment.
Clearly this is an outline of a vision, not a standard that is under way or a "running code and loose consensus" demonstration of that vision. Why not keep this to myself and build a business around it? Because such a packaging format would have to be open and standard, and I'm hoping some of you will get inspired to explore the idea further.
What do you think? What works, doesn't work, or is missing for you?
A special thanks to Heroku's Oren Teich and the Clouderati on Twitter for their contributions and challenges to this idea.
Thought that the newest laptop technology is always priced at a premium? Think again. Due in the next few weeks from Hewlett-Packard, Gateway, Toshiba, and a host of other PC makers, some of the first laptops using Intel's new Core i3 processor will be priced as low as $700.
At the Consumer Electronics Show, which starts January 7, PC makers will debut laptops using Intel's freshly minted Core i3 processor, as was previously reported. Core i series processors are based on Intel's Nehalem microarchitecture. In 2010, the chipmaker will move most of its processor lines from the current Core 2 technology to the Core i design.
Core i3-based laptops are, in a word, cheap. Cheap in the context that these are systems using a brand new processor based on a new Intel microarchitecture--in the past, this kind of technology has commanded a steep premium. A system from HP now posted on online retailer eCost is priced at $865. And a Gateway laptop listed on Canadian retailer Future Shop is priced at $730 Canadian dollars or about $694 U.S. dollars.
And add a Toshiba system to the mix (priced at $799 Canadian dollars or about $763 U.S. dollars). The Toshiba Satellite (PSLS6C-00F005) packs the same Core i3 processor but uses a 16-inch screen, according to a posting on Future Shop.
HP Core i3-based Pavilion laptop (WA786UA#ABA) as listed by eCost:
- Processor: 2.13GHz Intel Core i3-330m
- Display: 15.6" LED
- Memory: 4096MB DDR3
- Hard disk drive: 320GB 7200rpm
- Optical drive: DVDRW
- Operating system: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
- Video card: Intel Integrated Graphics Media Accelerator HD
- Price listed by eCost: $864.99
The $694 Gateway system has the same screen size (listed with a 1600 x 900 native resolution) and memory configuration as the HP laptop ups the ante with a 500GB hard disk drive and, most interestingly, uses an as-yet-unannounced ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470 graphics chip instead of Intel's graphics silicon.
Gateway Core i3-based laptop is below $700
(Credit: Future Shop)Product specifications aside, one of the most anticipated laptop technologies at CES this year is Arrandale, the codename for Intel Core i series mobile processors targeted at the mainstream laptop market. The Arrandale-based Core i3 is the first mainstream Intel laptop processor to combine two processor cores and a graphics function together in one chip package (previously, the graphics chip was in a separate chipset), resulting in better overall power efficiency.
And the new built-in graphics technology will offer better graphics performance than current technology, according to Intel. The chipmaker will try in earnest to prove this at CES with plenty of demos showing off Arrandale's graphics prowess. (Though not all PC makers are convinced that Intel's new graphics technology is the way to go, as evidenced by Gateway's decision to use a discrete ATI graphics processor from Advanced Micro Devices).
One thing worth noting is that the Core i3 won't ... Read more
A U.S. trade court has agreed to look into Samsung's claims that Japanese rival Sharp had infringed its patents relating to LCD (liquid crystal display) technology.
The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) said in a statement on its Web site this week that it has "voted to institute an investigation" into Samsung's complaint of patent infringement by Sharp, filed Dec. 1.
The Korean company's allegations, according to the statement, are made against Sharp Corp. of Japan and two of its American subsidiaries.
Read more of "Report: US court steps into Samsung-Sharp spat" at ZDNet Asia.
Bibble Labs has released the long-awaited version 5 of its software for editing and managing the raw photos higher-end cameras can take.
Bibble 5 adds a number of new features for editing, cataloging, and performance. The company had hoped to release Bibble 5 in 2008 but ran into delays.
Also new is the price. The Pro version of Bibble 5 costs $199.95, up from $129.95 for Bibble 4 Pro; those who bought Bibble 4 Pro after September 1, 2006, however, get a free upgrade. Bibble 5 Lite hasn't been released yet, but the company said Bibble 4 Lite customers may use Bibble 5 Pro until it is.
One feature of Bibble 5 is selective editing, which lets photographers change only a portion of an image. The editing is nondestructive, which means the changes don't alter the underlying raw file. Another is cataloging features to more easily manage files and sift through libraries.
Performance is a major issue for raw processing, a computationally demanding chore, and Bibble appears particularly pleased with its performance improvements. The software is able to take advantage of all the processing cores on a 32-core system, according to the company. Although the incremental benefits of more cores diminish, Bibble boasts that its software can scale even as unnamed competitors' performance doesn't get any better beyond eight cores.
Bibble's main competitors include Adobe Systems' Photoshop Lightroom, Apple's Aperture, Phase One's Capture One, DxO Labs' DxO Optics Pro, several smaller rivals, and utilities that often ship with SLRs and other cameras that can shoot raw. Raw photographs offer more flexibility and quality but take time and effort to process.
Update 2:12 p.m. PST: Bibble 5 Pro was released via the company's forums Tuesday, but the formal announcement of the software will come Monday, the company said in a statement.
How will Apple redesign the ultraslim, seminal MacBook Air that launched dozens of me-too ultraportable laptops? Only Apple knows. But here are some gratuitous musings anyway.
Dell Latitude Z: a 16-inch laptop that's less than 0.8-inches thick and under five pounds.
(Credit: Dell)In a previous post, I said I wouldn't hazard any guesses on what Apple may do with the MacBook Air. And I won't. That doesn't stop me from looking at the most recent ultrathin laptop competition to see where Apple might be able to improve the design that turns two years old in January.
Enclosure: This will be a tough act to follow. The original design was good enough that Apple didn't change it for gen 2--aka Rev. B--of the Air. And the aluminum enclosure was a trendsetter, which all MacBook Pros (and other PC makers) eventually copied.
But that doesn't mean the Air is perfect. The razor-thin slab of aluminum provides little room for ports and connectors. (Apple's implementation is a flip-out set of USB, Mini DisplayPort, audio ports that retract back into the body.)
A design modification that the Dell Adamo uses (some say retrogressed to) was putting the ports on the back (behind the screen). This allows Dell to offer a fuller array of connectors.
Could Apple come out with a tablet version of the Air?
(Credit: OLPC)Hewlett-Packard, for its part, went another route: it just made its Envy 13 slightly thicker (at 0.8 inches) than the Air, allowing a couple more connectors (a second USB port and an SD card slot). HP also molded the base of the Envy in magnesium, which makes it lighter, according to HP.
Then there's just-announced Dell Adamo XPS. This is even thinner than the MacBook Air and puts the CPU-complex-plus-circuit-board (aka motherboard) behind the screen, not underneath the keyboard--standard design practice for all laptops.
Sony Vaio X is a good example of how small and thin a premium laptop can be: it has an 11.1-inch screen.
(Credit: Sony)Of course, there's the recurring rumor that Apple is looking at different materials to make it even lighter while maintaining its famous sturdiness. This could potentially be a combination of aluminum and something like carbon fiber. (Though, as stated above, HP claims that magnesium is the way to go.)
Other possibilities: make one model bigger (wider), a la the Dell Latitude Z, which offers a 16-inch 1600x900 WLED Display and at its thickest point is only 0.79 inches.
Or make it smaller. The Sony Vaio X is a great example of how light (1.6 pounds) and thin (0.55 inches) a premium laptop (technically it's a Netbook) can be.
Tablet? There is the remote possibility that a version of the Air becomes a tablet. And that would mean potentially a new enclosure and new silicon.
Graphics:. The second feature I'll touch on is graphics. A good graphics chip is tough to squeeze into ultrathin designs and this a major feature that set the Air apart from other slim designs, ... Read more
(Credit:
Hewlett-Packard)
Hewlett-Packard hasn't announced the Mini 210 Netbook yet--but a reseller has.
The follow-on to the popular Mini 1000 and 110 Netbook series, the 210 packs Intel's newest Atom N450 silicon, which features an updated graphics chip built directly onto the central processing unit, or CPU. Netbooks are tiny laptops designed for undemanding Web-based tasks and typically sell for about $350.
Reseller eCost lists the Mini 210 at $389 and shows a few models as "in stock." A call to a sales representative confirmed this.
And even HP has jumped the gun. A full menu of items about the unannounced Netbook on HP's support Web page includes information about "software and driver downloads" and a user guide.
Here are the Mini 210 specs as listed by eCost:
- Operating System: Win7 Starter
- Processor:1.66GHz Intel Atom N450
- Display: 10.1" Flush Glass
- Memory: 1GB
- Hard disk drive: 250GB 7200RPM
- Video Card: Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 3150
- Battery: 6 cell
- Wireless Connectivity: 802.11 b/g/n
- Other Device: Integrated Webcam & Mic
- Price: $398.99
The legal back-and-forth between Nokia and Apple over patents, and who might be abusing them, continued Tuesday as Nokia lodged a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission.
In its complaint to the USITC, the Finnish company alleges that Apple infringes seven Nokia patents "in virtually all of its mobile phones, portable music players, and computers."
The alleged patent infringement is connected to key features in Apple products including user interface, camera, antenna, and power management technologies. Their value to Nokia, the company says, comes in allowing better user experience, lower manufacturing costs, smaller size, and longer battery life for Nokia products.
In October, Nokia filed a lawsuit against Apple in U.S. District Court in Delaware regarding 10 patents related to wireless handsets, which Nokia says Apple has refused to license. Every iPhone model since the original, introduced in 2007, infringes on those patents, Nokia has charged.
Apple filed a countersuit earlier this month, charging Nokia with infringing 13 Apple patents related to the iPhone.
"While our litigation in Delaware is about Apple's attempt to free-ride on the back of Nokia investment in wireless standards, the ITC case filed today is about Apple's practice of building its business on Nokia's proprietary innovation," Paul Melin, general manager of patent licensing at Nokia, said in a statement.
"Nokia has been the leading developer of many key technologies in small electronic devices," Melin said. "This action [Tuesday's complaint to the USITC] is about protecting the results of such pioneering development."
Apple was not immediately available to comment on Nokia's filing with the U.S. International Trade Commission. The USITC is an independent federal agency that looks at issues including unfair trade practices involving patent, trademark, and copyright infringement.
Nokia says that over the past two decades it has spent some 40 billion euros ($57.5 billion) on R&D and has amassed "one of the wireless industry's strongest and broadest IPR portfolios, with over 11,000 patent families."
In November, research firm Strategy Analytics reported that Apple had surpassed Nokia in quarterly mobile phone profits, bringing in $1.6 billion from the iPhone, compared with Nokia's $1.1 billion in cell phone profits.
Verizon is looking closely at "slate" computers as it plans to expand its portfolio of offerings in 2010.
OLPC's XO-3 tablet concept: Verizon expects many 'slate' devices to emerge in 2010
(Credit: OLPC)In an interview, Brian Ullem, who heads emerging devices for Verizon Wireless, discussed slate computers (aka tablets) and Netbooks and what these mean--and could mean--to Verizon's future.
"I do think that slates are going to be emerging in rapid succession in 2010," Ullem told me. "What remains to be seen is how people use them. And the operating systems that manufacturers and carriers will select."
Verizon is looking at the slate computer as an emerging device that it would possibly market, Ullem said.
And what may be inside some of these devices? Verizon is looking at Nvidia's Tegra processor, among many possibilities. The graphics chipmaker's new processor is expected to be used in tablet or slate computers that will come to market in 2010.
What does he think about Apple's influence? "Apple has been very good at defining new categories where there previously has been limited interest," he said. The Apple tablet, if it debuts as expected early next year, has the potential to be a disruptive product, Ullem said.
And the operating system for these emerging devices? Ullem mentioned Jolicloud, Intel's Moblin, and Google's Chrome OS as possibilities, with the caveat that Internet connectivity with a pleasant interface isn't enough. "Look at Ubuntu [Linux]. Just getting (consumers) on the Web is not good enough," he said. "There has to be enough elements of what they're used to in order for it to be adopted." Ubuntu has not been as successful as expected in mobile devices.
Verizon continues to see steady Netbook sales at stores.
(Credit: Verizon)Ullem categorizes products that the Verizon stores handle or will potentially handle in order of ascending size as: smart devices (smartphones), mobile Internet devices (MIDs), and Netbooks. "Anything up to a 7-inch device is a MID...anything over that is a Netbook-class device or PC-computing device," he said.
To consumers, MIDs will look like oversize smartphones or small tablets. Larger-size tablets (with a 10-inch diagonal screen size) will be more like a full-blown personal computing device, Ullem said.
Other devices that may appear in Verizon stores? "Picture frames, video cameras, digital cameras, gaming equipment...we will look at everything that will be bring an additional subscriber to the network. Basically, Verizon looks to put more devices that are wirelessly enabled into customers hands."
And Verizon stores continue to see steady Netbook sales. "After an initial burst when they first hit the stores around Thanksgiving, sales have slowed a bit, though they are still steady," said Bob Elek Manager, a Verizon spokesman. "Customers appear to like the versatility that the Netbook offers, as well as the smaller size."
Google, the company that made "don't be evil" its corporate motto, is shunning use of an open-source license variation that precludes use of software for evil purposes.
The matter illustrates the tensions between the sometimes free-wheeling ways of open-source programming world and the buttoned-down corporate realms where open-source software is no longer unusual. This particular issue bubbled up at Google Code, a site that hosts open-source projects from Google and others.
When he wrote JSMin, Douglas Crockford added this line to the open-source MIT License.
(Credit: Douglas Crockford)Google only permits software governed by a limited list of widely used open-source licenses to be hosted at Google Code; one that's permitted is the MIT License. Douglas Crockford picked a variation of the MIT license for his JSMin program to shrink JavaScript programs so that Web browsers can download them faster, and Ryan Grove carried that license over for his variation called JSMin-PHP rewritten in the PHP language.
JSMin-PHP had been hosted at Google Code until earlier in December, when it came to the attention of Chris DiBona, Google's open-source honcho, that the software's license had an extra requirement added to the regular MIT License:
"The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil."
"As Google (and some others) interpret it, this additional requirement constitutes a vague use restriction and thus makes the license non-free. Chris [DiBona] explained that if I were to remove that line from the license and 'return to a proper open source license that we support,' then jsmin-php could stay on Google Code. Otherwise, he said, 'we can't host you,'" Grove said on his blog. "Of course, I can't change the license, because it's not my license. It's Douglas's license...All derivative works and copies of jsmin.c either include this license or are in violation of it."
Consequently, Grove moved JSMin-PHP to the GitHub collaborative programming site. "If you currently have a project on Google Code that is derived from or includes jsmin.c, you might want to consider migrating to a new host with less restrictive policies," Grove added.
How did this all come about? According to a July speech by Crockford, who works for Yahoo and describes himself as a heretic, the license was an artifact of the George Bush administration's war on "evildoers." He uses the licenses for all the projects he's created, he said.
"This was late in 2002, we'd just started the war on terror, and we were going after the evildoers with the president and the vice president, and I felt like I need to do my part," he joked. "So I added one more line to my license, which was that 'the software shall be used for good, not evil.'"
"About once a year I'll get a letter from a crank who says, 'I should have a right to use it for evil! I'm not going to use it until you change your license.' Or they'll write to me and say: 'How do I know if it's evil or not? I don't think it's evil, but someone else might think it's evil, so I'm not going to use it,'" Crockford said. His conclusion: "My license works, I'm stopping the evildoers."
He's willing to grant an exception, though, he said.
"Also about once a year, I get a letter from a lawyer, every year a different lawyer, at a company--I don't want to embarrass the company by saying their name, so I'll just say their initials: IBM--saying that they want to use something I wrote," he said. "They want to use something that I wrote in something that they wrote, and they were pretty sure they weren't going to use it for evil, but they couldn't say for sure about their customers. So could I give them a special license for that? Of course. So I wrote back... 'I give permission for IBM, its customers, partners, and minions, to use JSLint for evil.'"
These days, though, lawyers are a real force in the programming world, and I can see how the line, however jokingly it might have been added, might cause corporate indigestion. Perhaps Crockford has no intention of enforcing the license, but perhaps some contributor to a project farther down the path of derivative works might have a more humorless interpretation.
After all, there have been efforts to add political elements into open-source and free-software licensing--for example, one variation of the GNU General Public License that prohibited military use of the software. And deeply held philosophical and ethical beliefs are certainly no stranger to the open-source and free-software realm.
Even if a company, project, or individual does conclude the license isn't onerous, that extra line adds a lot of busywork to the collective and never-ending task of evaluating software. I'm all for humor, principled positions, and honest debate, but I prefer it to take place where it won't hobble some other software project's prospects.
I know I sound stuffy (or perhaps "risk-averse" and "disconnected from the community," as Aaron Boodman would have it), but I hate to see good work fall by the wayside for what seems to me a reason that's secondary at best.
Updated 1:38 p.m. PST to clarify the nature of JSMin-PHP.
Mozilla won't make a 2009 deadline for releasing Firefox 3.6 and is giving itself more time to complete a major update, version 4.0.
The organization behind the open-source Web browser had predicted a final release of Firefox 3.6 in December 2009, but the Mozilla Web site now includes "ship Firefox 3.6" as a goal for the first quarter of 2010.
In addition, Firefox 4.0, which had been due in 2010, now is "aimed at late 2010 or early 2011," with a beta due in the summer of 2010, according to Mozilla.
Schedule delays are common in the software world, but browser development is furious these days with the arrival of Google's Chrome into the market, Apple helping to expand the frontiers of what the browser can do, Opera trying to dramatically speed up JavaScript execution and display performance, and Microsoft getting more ambitious again with Internet Explorer. "We've always been more quality-driven than time-driven, but we understand timing in the market matters to our users and our competitiveness," said Mike Shaver, Mozilla's vice president of engineering, in an October interview.
... Read more




