information technology is expected to play an important part in the global economic recovery, according to a new survey released Wednesday.
Some 72 percent of business and information technology executives say their "organizations place greater value on the IT function today than they did before the economic crisis" and that they "view IT as an important part of their economic recovery efforts," according to Accenture's Global Survey on IT Investments.
This is not an unfamiliar sentiment and is one we've heard from United States CIO Vivek Kundra as he's attempted to use IT to kick start a variety of programs on the federal level that will set the pace for innovative new uses of technology across the globe.
The results of the Accenture survey are similar to last week's Goldman Sachs cautiously optimistic survey results that suggested IT spending would trend upward in 2010 and normalize to pre-recession levels with the majority of countries represented planning to increase investment selectively next year.
... Read more
With infrastructure services like Amazon EC2, Rackspace, and VMware making it easy to take advantage of the flexibility, portability, and reduced costs of cloud computing, it seems obvious to jump on the cloud bandwagon for new IT projects.
But, developers are generally left on their own to deal with the pain of deploying their apps to the cloud: configuring application servers, libraries, disk partitions, networking, clustering, service connections, and virtual private networks. After they get their app installed they also need to install management agents that run on top of the application layer.
If you really want to take advantage of the cloud and optimize return on investment, you'll want the on-boarding process to be easy and fast and you won't install that agent. Agent-based solutions are inherently inflexible. Deploying agent-based solutions in a cloud-based environment, which is, by definition, highly flexible, is often like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. In agent-based solutions, hard-coded agents are installed on every machine to monitor the application. If a change to the application configuration occurs--such as the IT department adds a node or upgrades a component--the agents must be updated as well.
Each agent and management server must be configured separately with management and monitoring solutions generally not portable. When every change to an environment requires installation of multiple agents on each server and configuration of multiple management servers, it becomes a tall order to move an application from a traditional infrastructure to the cloud, or from one cloud infrastructure to another: private to public, public to hybrid, or hybrid to private.
How do you get around this so you can actually capitalize on the benefits of cloud computing? Go virtual. Move application management, including easy on-boarding, from above the application stack into the underlying virtual layer, along with the rest of the cloud infrastructure.
I was recently briefed by webappVM CEO Isaac Roth on how the company is pioneering this new approach. He said the virtual path allows you to actually realize all of the flexibility, portability, and reduced costs that come with the promise of cloud computing.
... Read more
The cost benefits of virtualization are well-documented, allowing enterprises to significantly reduce the space and electrical power required to run data centers and streamline the management of an ever-growing number of servers.
Virtualization also provides means for expedient scalability. Given today's economic climate and cost-cutting mandates, it is not surprising that analyst firm Gartner recently predicted that 50 percent of workloads will run inside virtual machines by 2012.
What many organizations fail to understand, according to Amir Ben-Efraim, CEO of virtualization security provider Altor Networks, is that collapsing multiple servers into a single one with several virtual machines inside eliminates all firewall, intrusion detection, and other protections in existence. Physical security measures literally become "blind" to traffic between VMs, since they are no longer in the data path.
This echoes comments made by Gartner analyst Neil MacDonald, who wrote in a recent presentation titled "Securing the Next-Generation Virtual Data Center" (subscription required), that "most virtual machines you deploy will be less secure than the physical systems they replace," and that "virtualization will radically change how you secure and manage computing environments."
VMware recently launched a partner program to help ISVs develop solutions certified as "VMsafe." VMsafe provides API sharing through a secure container, enabling partner companies to access virtual environments. This virtual security technology provides fine-grained visibility over virtual-machine resources, including monitoring every aspect of the system with the ability to address previously undetectable viruses, rootkits, and malware before they can infect a system.
I spoke to Ben-Efraim to better understand the issues around VM security and for what users should be on the lookout. According to him, there are two common approaches that use existing methods to secure virtual-network traffic: using VLANs to separate and control communication between VMs; and taking software-based firewalls and running them as agents on each VM. Unfortunately, both of these approaches fall short.
VLAN segmentation extends the notion of LAN resource segmentation to include VMs. The approach essentially requires that VMs, which can naturally be grouped (i.e. by function or user base), be isolated from other VMs by use of virtual switches and routing (i.e. the human resources VLAN contains HR-serving VMs). However, VLAN segmentation is not a permanent solution to securing environments because of networking complexities, performance degradation, and security limitations of the approach, Ben-Efraim said.
... Read moreI attended the Virtual Goods Summit on Friday and walked away struggling to figure what topics might be interesting to write about. My net takeaway is that not much has changed in the year that I've been writing about social gaming and virtual goods, with the exception of two facts:
1. Virtual good providers are being lauded as the next big thing to replace advertising
2. There's something weird going on with the ads and offers that have taken over the more traditional banner advertising role
There is no question that virtual goods have become an integral part of social network revenue streams. And the mainstream media has finally started to catch on.
But, I didn't realize the oddities of the way users are being monetized until I attended the event and saw the heavy emphasis not just on monetizing users but on doing so in a way that was transparent and non-intrusive. Theoretically, it's a good idea, but in practice, many of the "offer" providers are purposely or inadvertently running Ponzi schemes.
TechCrunch's Michael Arrington arrived at my second point above and took the theory much further with data that shows many social gaming offers and advertising practices amount to little more than a complicated scam that gets people in the door for free only to take advantage of their lack of understanding of what they've technically agreed to in the various offers.
In short, these games try to get people to pay cash for in game currency so they can level up faster and have a better overall experience. Which is fine. But for users who won't pay cash, a wide variety of "offers" are available where they can get in-game currency in exchange for lead gen-type offers. Most of these offers are bad for consumers because it confusingly gets them to pay far more for in-game currency than if they just paid cash (there are notable exceptions, but the scammy stuff tends to crowd out the legitimate offers). And it's also bad for legitimate advertisers.... Read more
Gamers are not just making purchases to enhance their gaming experience but also selling virtual assets to other players, according to new research from video game market research firm VGMarket.
Sales of virtual goods are expected to reach $1 billion this year and already generate near $4 billion annually in China. But there are some challenges, primarily the fact that once you convert your real money to virtual cash you can't readily get the dough back out.
The research revealed that in-game currency is the most frequently sold digital good from player to player and that two out of three sellers sold in-game currency in the last 12 months, earning a median of $22. PlaySpan, a provider of monetization and payment solutions for games and virtual worlds and sponsor of the research, considers that to be good news as its platform enables game developers to provide player to player marketplaces for their players. In addition, the PlaySpan Marketplace currently provides a secondary market for IMVU players to buy and sell goods as well.
One out of two sellers made a sale in a social network game over the last 12 months and earned a median of $50, while one out of four sellers made a sale in a free-to-play game over the last 12 months, with their median earning being $98, or nearly double that on social networks.
Eric Hartness, chief marketing officer at PlaySpan, told me that the secondary market is a boon for games, adding value, real and perceived, to all players by associating a real world dollar value on their playing time, game accounts, and digital items.
... Read more
New research from video game market research firm VGMarket sponsored by Playspan reveals that gamers are actively making purchases to enhance their gaming experience, with free-to-play games leading the way to monetization. Playspan is a provider of monetization and payment solutions for games and virtual worlds.
Three out of four virtual goods buyers purchased in-game currency in the last 12 months and spent approximately $50 each. This statistic is interesting to me as I am always surprised when users buy in to currency that only works on one site. But, I suppose if it's the only option then you will eventually give in.
Of further interest in the report is the fact that free-to-play games may actually be monetizing better than MMOs (massive multiplayer online games) and social networks.
- 58 percent made purchases in free-to-play (F2P) games over the last 12 months.
- 34 percent made purchases in MMOs.
- 23 percent made purchases in social network games.
- The average respondent is currently playing three online games and 80 percent report buying digital goods for their own use while 20 percent said they purchase for gifts.
According to the study, "12% of the overall population surveyed reported that they had bought virtual goods in the last 12 months. However, a closer look at the digital entertainment habits of virtual goods buyers reveals that virtual world visitors are the heaviest virtual goods buyers, with 46% of these consumers buying virtual goods (from virtual worlds, games or social networks) and nearly one third of iPhone owners buying from the same platforms."
Virtual world users, social gamers, and iPhone owners all made more purchases than hardcore gamers, which suggests that casual players are likely more comfortable spending money on goods as the games they play are generally free.
Key points from the survey results:
- 12 percent of Americans spent an average of $30 last year on virtual goods purchases, with 15 percent of those who made purchases saying they spent at least $100 or more.
- Females ages 25-34 represent the largest demographic of those who made purchases (17 percent).
- Of those surveyed, Asian Americans represent the largest ethnic segment (16 percent), followed by Latinos (14 percent), Caucasians (12 percent), and African Americans (10 percent)
- 46 percent of those who've made purchases are virtual world users, with nearly 30 percent coming from iPhone users.
Sustainable revenue from virtual goods is not a foregone conclusion, but the options for monetizing goods are growing and providing new possibilities.
Follow me on Twitter @daveofdoom.
Funding for virtual worlds has grown dramatically over the last year and companies need to find sustainable revenue models. Transactions of virtual goods allow for new cash flow into both subscription and nonsubscription sites.
But some users don't like the idea that you can simply buy something to affect the game in your favor. Accordingly, games need to be very clear about the purchased goods unfold into the game.
The team at Champions Online have outlined how microtransactions will surface in the game in their State of the Game blog post.
... Read more
China has unveiled the first official rule on the use of virtual currency in the trade of real goods and services to limit possible impact on the real financial system. The Chinese government also spelled out the definition of "virtual currency" for the first time, which includes prepaid cards of cybergames, according to a joint announcement from the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Commerce Friday. It said:
The virtual currency, which is converted into real money at a certain exchange rate, will only be allowed to trade in virtual goods and services provided by its issuer, not real goods and services.
The ban is primarily aimed at "gold farming," an Internet-age phenomenon in which players in less developed countries collect and sell virtual gold (common to games like World of Warcraft) to wealthier gamers in the developed world. This enables gamers who have the means to buy virtual gold to get ahead in the games without actually having to accomplish the grunt work.
The trading of virtual currency for real cash generates between $200 million and $1 billion annually, according to a 2008 survey conducted by Richard Heeks at the University of Manchester.
... Read moreOracle has decided to kill the Virtual Iron business and keep only the technology, according to a report in The Register.
Apparently, one month plus one week was enough for the database giant to float its latest acquisition into the dead pool.
While not surprising, this is an unfortunate situation for Virtual Iron customers and also feeds into BigCo sales tactics that tell customers to avoid buying from small companies. Oracle has long used the "bigger is better" sales tactic and this will falsely emphasize the perception that buying from start-ups and small companies is risky.
According to The Register:
In a letter to Virtual Iron's sales partners, Oracle says it "will suspend development of existing Virtual Iron products and will suspend delivery of orders to new customers." And in a second letter to a partner speaking with The Reg, the company says it will not allow partners to sell new licenses to anyone - including existing customers - after the end of this month (i.e. in 11 days). Before then, partners can only sell licenses to existing customers under certain conditions.
"Until June 30, 2009, Oracle may approve granting add-on licenses to existing Virtual Iron end customers, or licensing end customers who had demo'd or otherwise evaluated the former Virtual Iron products and do not require further delivery," the second letter reads.
Virtual Iron was certainly not a big dog like VMware or XenSource, but the company did hold a great deal of promise. In the acquisition announcement, Oracle described Virtual Iron as a "leading provider of server virtualization management software." Fellow CNET blogger Gordon Haff wrote that, in this instance, "leading" should be read as "on the roster but something like fourth-string backup quarterback."
As enterprise sales get harder to come by, there will be more of these types of deals. It remains to be seen if Oracle will do right by the customer and partner base, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Follow me on Twitter @daveofdoom
