Archive

Archive for the ‘Apple’ Category

IBM’s hardware sneak attack

April 13, 2010 5 comments

Yesterday I read an interesting blog commenting on why Oracle seems so interested in Sun’s hardware.

I quote from a comment by Brian Aker, former head of architecture for MySQL on the O’Reily Radar blog site.  He comments on his view on why Oracle bought Sun,

Brian Aker: I have my opinions, and they’re based on what I see happening in the market. IBM has been moving their P Series systems into datacenter after datacenter, replacing Sun-based hardware. I believe that Oracle saw this and asked themselves “What is the next thing that IBM is going to do?” That’s easy. IBM is going to start pushing DB2 and the rest of their software stack into those environments. Now whether or not they’ll be successful, I don’t know. I suspect once Oracle reflected on their own need for hardware to scale up on, they saw a need to dive into the hardware business. I’m betting that they looked at Apple’s margins on hardware, and saw potential in doing the same with Sun’s hardware business. I’m sure everything else Sun owned looked nice and scrumptious, but Oracle bought Sun for the hardware.

I think that Brian has a good point. In fact, in a post I wrote a few months ago, I commented on the fact that hardware is back.  It is somewhat ironic. For a long time, the assumption has been that a software platform is the right leverage point to control markets.  Clearly, the tide is shifting.  IBM, for example, has taken full advantage of customer concerns about the future of the Sun platform. But IBM is not stopping there. I predict a hardware sneak attack that encompasses IBM’s platform software strength (i.e., middleware, automation, analytics, and service management) combined with its hardware platforms.

IBM will use its strength in systems and middleware software to expand its footprint into Oracle’s backyard surrounding its software with an integrated platform designed to work as a system of systems.  It is clear that over the past five or six years IBM’s focus has been on software and services.  Software has long provided good profitability for IBM. Services has made enormous strides over the past decade as IBM has learned to codify knowledge and best practices into what I have called Service as Software. The other most important movement has been IBM’s focused effort over the past decade to revamp the underlying structure of its software into modular services that are used across its software portfolio. Combine this approach with industry focused business frameworks and you have a pretty good idea of where IBM is headed with its software and services portfolios.

The hardware strategy has begun to evolve in 2005 when IBM software bought a little hardware XML accelerator hardware appliance company called DataPower. Many market watchers were confused. What would IBM software do with a hardware platform?  Over time, IBM expanded the footprint of this platform and began to repurpose it as a means to pre-packaging software components. First there was a SOA-based appliance; then IBM added a virtual machine appliance called the CloudBurst appliance.  On the Lotus side of the business, IBM bought another appliance company that evolved into the Lotus Foundations platform.  Appliances became a great opportunity to package and preconfigure systems that could be remotely upgraded and managed.  This packaging of software with systems demonstrated the potential not only for simplicity for customers but a new way of adding value and revenue.

Now, IBM is taking the idea of packaging hardware with software to new levels.  It is starting to leverage the software and networking capability focused on hardware-driven systems. For example, within the systems environment, IBM is leveraging its knowledge of optimizing systems software so that it applications-based workloads can take advantage of capabilities such as threading, caching, and systems level networking.

In its recent announcement, IBM has developed its new hardware platforms based on the five most common workloads: transaction processing, analytics, business applications, records management and archiving, and collaboration.  What does this mean to customers? If a customer has a transaction oriented system, the most important capability is to ensure that the environment uses as many threads as possible to optimize speed of throughput. In addition, caching repetitive workloads will also ensure that transactions move through the system as quickly as possible. While this has been doable in the past, the difference is that these capabilities are packaged as an end-to-end system. Thus, implementation could be faster and more precise. The same can be said for analytics workloads. These workloads demand a high level of efficiency to enable customers to look for patterns in the data that help predict outcomes.     Analytics workloads require the caching and fast processing of   algorithms and data across multiple sources.

The bottom line is that IBM is looking at its hardware as an extension of the type of workloads they are required to support.  Rather than considering hardware as as set of separate platforms, IBM is following a systems of systems approach that is consistent with cloud computing.  With this type of approach, IBM will continue on the path of viewing a system as a combination of the hardware platform, the systems software, and systems-based networking.  These elements of computing are therefore configured based on the type of application and the nature of the current workload.

It is, in fact, workload optimization that is at the forefront of what is changing in hardware in the coming decade. This is true both in the data center and in the cloud. Cloud computing — and the hybrid environments that make up the future of computing are all predicated on predictable, scalable, and elastic workload management.  It is the way we will start thinking about computing as a continuum of all of the component parts combined — hardware, software, services, networking, storage, collaboration, and applications.  This reflects the dramatic changes that are just at the horizon.

Is Infrastructure moving to the clouds?

November 3, 2007 3 comments

Now that I am back from my trek to Redmond, I have time to come back to earth and think about what I heard. I think that several issues surfaced in my mind. Here are the three key issues that I think are worth more time:

1. We are at a turning point in enterprise computing. I predict that we are moving into the cloud as the focal point for enterprise infrastructure.

2. How much complexity do customers need to be exposed to? Distributed computing is hard and requires a new level of complexity that we haven’t seen before outside of small implementations and experiments.

3. What does it mean for the balance of power in the software industry? Whenever there are monumental changes in technology and customer strategy the shape of the industry changes.

Here’s my quick take on these issues. I’ll keep writing about this. In the meantime, I would love to start a dialog with you on these issues. So, if you agree, disagree or just think this is irrelevant, I would like to hear from you.

What about that cloud? What is an infrastructure cloud? Without getting into too much detail..it is a complex computing infrastucture that is hosted by an infrastructure provider that provides access to services ranging from access to storage, electronic mail, applications, etc. In some cases, this infrastructure can be well designed and scalable; in other situations the provider can cobble together a mess that is hidden from customers.

I don’t think that anyone owns this model yet but some company will. It will be the company that provides a scalable, well-designed, distributed infrastucture. This is what Amazon.com is trying to do with its Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2). It is what Google will pursue with all of its applications. However, Google’s first “official” cloud computing announcement is a joint educational venture with IBM. It is also at the heart of Microsoft’s Oslo initiative via its “Internet Service Bus”. I also expect that IBM, Oracle, and HP will get into the mix. Is there room for Apple with a Google partnership? How about Salesforce.com?

I am not ready to pick a winner(s). That is what makes this transition so interesting. A vendor doesn’t necessarily need a massive set of packaged applications or a huge sales force to gain traction. Does it avoid questions about operating systems? Does it matter if the software in the cloud is proprietary or open source? How much will the customer care? Maybe a lot right now. But who knows what we will think five years from now.

The one thing that I will predict is that the software industry is about to be turned upside down. Now, isn’t that fun?

Apple’s momentum: it’s all about innovation, isn’t it?

October 25, 2007 1 comment

Apple has always been a company that prided itself on innovation. In reality, Apple has been really good at taking a technology and creating products that are usable and accessible. Take the example of the Macintosh. Apple took the innovation of a graphical user interface pioneered by Xerox and turned it into a hugely successful product offerings. I think that Apple really stumbled in the late 1980s when it decided that it would sue Microsoft for patent infringement by violating its intellectual property rights by using the Macintosh “look and feel”. Eventually the lawsuit was settled out of court. Microsoft actually invested in Apple as a consequence.

This is when I started worrying about Apple’s future. If a company holds on to its past success in defining its future, trouble will follow. And for many years, this adage seemed to follow. Apple struggled as it watched its fortunes diminish as the Windows platform became dominant.

But things started to turn around for Apple with the iPod because Apple started innovating again. Again, like with the Macintosh, it wasn’t the first company to try to sell an MP3 player. However, it was the first one to innovate on ease of use that made this device easy to figure out. The second innovation was around business model with itunes. The same can be said about the iphone. Integrating ease of use and the web together into a phone was well conceived. Now that Apple is opening the iphone to third party developers, there is a potential to evolve into a platform beyond the obvious cell phone/web platform. I liked John Simonds’ blog that covered this topic this week.

What do you think? Does turning important ideas into workable implementations the same as innovation? Is innovation only about bringing something never conceived of before to the market? For what it’s worth, I think that building on great ideas and making them sing is what innovation is all about.

Categories: Apple