Comments on: Will computing flow like electricity?
Industry executives respond to Nicholas G. Carr's contention that utility computing will evolve in much the same way electricity did a century ago.
Industry executives respond to Nicholas G. Carr's contention that utility computing will evolve in much the same way electricity did a century ago.
December 7, 2009 12:40 PM PST
December 7, 2009 12:38 PM PST
December 7, 2009 12:21 PM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
If your idea of computing is two clerk punching data into an Exel spreadsheet, then utility computing will probably work well for you.
I suspect that covers about 20% of the buisness world. The rest are using IT much more strategically. It not only doesn't make sense to move to online utility computing for the other 80%, they would be giving away market edge by doing so!
If your idea of computing is two clerk punching data into an Exel spreadsheet, then utility computing will probably work well for you.
I suspect that covers about 20% of the buisness world. The rest are using IT much more strategically. It not only doesn't make sense to move to online utility computing for the other 80%, they would be giving away market edge by doing so!
You cannot customize electricity as much as you can computing.
Your particular usage patterns in the way you use electricity do not give away as much proprietary information as do your particular usage patterns of computing resources.
When you use electricity, you do not have to share highly sensitive data with an outside party.
Electricity does not change on a frequent basis in a way that changes the possibilities in which it may be used.
You cannot customize electricity as much as you can computing.
Your particular usage patterns in the way you use electricity do not give away as much proprietary information as do your particular usage patterns of computing resources.
When you use electricity, you do not have to share highly sensitive data with an outside party.
Electricity does not change on a frequent basis in a way that changes the possibilities in which it may be used.
1. Everybody wants their own custom application. There are many reasons for this but it boils down to nobody likes to make do with a "general" application because the people in charge of making the decision and those in charge of actually using the applications don't understand them. I've worked in several major IT departments and in each case there was much duplication between systems due to lack of knowledge of the existing infrastructure, internal politics and general resistance to making changes to procedures to accomadate a general solution.
2. Inertia - Corporate data centers are large organizations within a larger organization. They will be resistant to change because it would mean their jobs. Plus, there is the cost of changeover to utility computing. That means data conversion, QA, end-user retraining and then there is the entire physical apparatus of the data center. What happens to that? Nobody is going to be quick to jump on this bandwagon.
3. Security - I think this has been covered in other comments quite well. Businesses do not want to risk their data and are willing to pay more to store it themselves.
4. Outsourcing - Another name for utility computing is outsourcing. Basically instead of maintaining your own data infrastructure you'd be outsourcing your IT department. Then instead of X number of companies with varying sized IT departments we'd have X Number of companies soliciting Y number of IT providers.
One comment stated something about fungibility and that hardware was pretty much hardware. Having worked in IT departments and for a software vendor I'd have to disagree. Sure, you can get hardware to generally be identical but hardware is a collection of paperweights without software, be it system or application software. The hardware/software combo is complex enough that each installation is pretty much a unique entity. Very much hard work goes on in IT departments to standardize hardware and software throughout an enterprise environment and there are always those machines that are an exception. Same hardware, same software, same settings but somehow two different machines will peform differently.
1. Everybody wants their own custom application. There are many reasons for this but it boils down to nobody likes to make do with a "general" application because the people in charge of making the decision and those in charge of actually using the applications don't understand them. I've worked in several major IT departments and in each case there was much duplication between systems due to lack of knowledge of the existing infrastructure, internal politics and general resistance to making changes to procedures to accomadate a general solution.
2. Inertia - Corporate data centers are large organizations within a larger organization. They will be resistant to change because it would mean their jobs. Plus, there is the cost of changeover to utility computing. That means data conversion, QA, end-user retraining and then there is the entire physical apparatus of the data center. What happens to that? Nobody is going to be quick to jump on this bandwagon.
3. Security - I think this has been covered in other comments quite well. Businesses do not want to risk their data and are willing to pay more to store it themselves.
4. Outsourcing - Another name for utility computing is outsourcing. Basically instead of maintaining your own data infrastructure you'd be outsourcing your IT department. Then instead of X number of companies with varying sized IT departments we'd have X Number of companies soliciting Y number of IT providers.
One comment stated something about fungibility and that hardware was pretty much hardware. Having worked in IT departments and for a software vendor I'd have to disagree. Sure, you can get hardware to generally be identical but hardware is a collection of paperweights without software, be it system or application software. The hardware/software combo is complex enough that each installation is pretty much a unique entity. Very much hard work goes on in IT departments to standardize hardware and software throughout an enterprise environment and there are always those machines that are an exception. Same hardware, same software, same settings but somehow two different machines will peform differently.
Security. The need for security will manifest itself in two ways:
1. A delay in transitioning over to Utility computing: Until
customers are convinced that their information will not be
compromised they will be reluctant to transfer critical/high
volume processing. One aspect of this could be the need for
closed networks. Electricity companies typically own their
distribution networks.
2. A different breed of players: Security companies could get a
foot in the door ( a small foot though) by offering security
solutions for utility computing over the internet.
Security. The need for security will manifest itself in two ways:
1. A delay in transitioning over to Utility computing: Until
customers are convinced that their information will not be
compromised they will be reluctant to transfer critical/high
volume processing. One aspect of this could be the need for
closed networks. Electricity companies typically own their
distribution networks.
2. A different breed of players: Security companies could get a
foot in the door ( a small foot though) by offering security
solutions for utility computing over the internet.
Corporate data is complex, somewhat arbitrary (in that the corporation defines it) and needs to be consistent across the enterprise.
Utility computing can only be of use where the data managed by the utility does not need to be integrated into, and consistent with, Corporate Data. How often does this happen? Not often.
In most medium to large corporations, it is the data and business processes embodied in the applications that matter, not the technology. That's why Carr is correct when he says that "IT Doesn't Matter" but incorrect when he claims that utility computing is the answer.
It may sometimes be the answer but not enough to empty the corporate IT department.
I don't think that utility computing is ready for prime time, and I doubt it ever will be. You are still using the same amount of computing resources, so what was saved? Nothing really, except higher costs from markup and slower access and processing time.
Corporate data is complex, somewhat arbitrary (in that the corporation defines it) and needs to be consistent across the enterprise.
Utility computing can only be of use where the data managed by the utility does not need to be integrated into, and consistent with, Corporate Data. How often does this happen? Not often.
In most medium to large corporations, it is the data and business processes embodied in the applications that matter, not the technology. That's why Carr is correct when he says that "IT Doesn't Matter" but incorrect when he claims that utility computing is the answer.
It may sometimes be the answer but not enough to empty the corporate IT department.
I don't think that utility computing is ready for prime time, and I doubt it ever will be. You are still using the same amount of computing resources, so what was saved? Nothing really, except higher costs from markup and slower access and processing time.
is absolutely identical at each site with no customization at all.
Utility computing is just another name for webhosting, app
hosting and other centralized computing attempts. Just like
those, there are many promises but it always boils down to one
thing, the costs only are cheaper if all use the same app or
service with little to no customization. If the thought is "if it isn't
MS office you don't need it" then utility computing has a chance
to be big. Other than that it will become a respectible
component of the IT future. It will not be the only "IT".
is absolutely identical at each site with no customization at all.
Utility computing is just another name for webhosting, app
hosting and other centralized computing attempts. Just like
those, there are many promises but it always boils down to one
thing, the costs only are cheaper if all use the same app or
service with little to no customization. If the thought is "if it isn't
MS office you don't need it" then utility computing has a chance
to be big. Other than that it will become a respectible
component of the IT future. It will not be the only "IT".
- Clearly the way forward
- by iqula June 20, 2005 12:42 AM PDT
- Companies large and small are going to move across to this model so they can forget about the IT and can concentrate on the core business, I think in the future companies will run on thin clients connecting to trusted online desktop services like http://www.cosmopod.com for all their computing needs.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(32 Comments)