Is it time to stop trying to define the Cloud?


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

“Either you stand for something or you don’t”

Jack Ryan from the Tom Clancy novel Clear and Present Danger

clrpresentdanger

Cloud Computing is real and seems to be growing rapidly. Cloud providers need the most energy-efficient servers they can get without compromising the features and reliability of traditional rack servers. That aspect of Cloud Computing seems to be, well, the least cloudy. It’s why AMD added the 40-watt ACP Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ EE processors to our server lineup earlier this year and plans to soon offer 40-watt ACP Six-Core AMD Opteron™ EE processors.

Since we launched our EE processors, I’ve tried to gain a better understanding of what Cloud Computing really is. Now, I’m not sure why, but that over-simplistic Jack Ryan quote kept running through my head as I recently read the latest f5 networks survey results on Cloud Computing. It asked 250 IT professionals what they thought of SIX possible Cloud Computing definitions. Before reading the results, I said to myself: Either you know what the Cloud is or you don’t. It should just be that simple.

Not so fast. There appears to be a thought leadership race among analysts, service providers and numerous other industry pundits to be the one who arrives first at the accepted Cloud Computing definition.

This “define the cloud” fascination seems to be reaching new levels. This week alone, I found more than 100 articles that discussed the topic of defining Cloud Computing on Google News. Does this mean we are near the “tipping point” on coming to a consensus, or are we further away than ever?

India’s CXO Today  just posted an Cloud Computing interview with an SAP senior executive, Simon Dale. Dale said “For now it is still a marketing definition with nobody having come out with a proper and complete description of cloud computing.” Great observation and it would be nice if the industry could actually land on even a single “marketing” definition of Cloud Computing.

The good news is that even without a widely-accepted definition, interest and investments in Cloud computing are undeterred, looking at f5’s survey results. M

AMD-V™AMD-P

 Phil Hughes is a senior public relations manager at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.

  1. #1 by crystald - August 28th, 2009 at 17:04

    This reminds me of Dan Farber’s video from last year’s Web 2.0 Expo (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-9938949-80.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5). Dan asks tech pundits and execs the question: What is cloud computing?, and eventually comes to the conclusion, “Ask a dozen people what “cloud computing” means and you’ll get a dozen different answers.”

  2. #2 by Datsun - August 30th, 2009 at 20:14

    Why AMD still not trade marked the terms of “Real World Effects Engine?” AMD Real World Effects Engine (AMD RWEE) is a combination of ATI Radeon GPU, AMD multicore MPU and AMD Multienvironment Software libraries that enabled real world effects will be came in visual computing applications within AMD Platforms. Real World Effects engines redefined how we interact in a virtual environment like games with life like experiences. These applications will comprise of :
    1. Real Time Physics engine that simulates real physics like a melted candle and a burning tree.
    2. Real World Ray Tracing that combines sun rays and sky.
    3. Live sound effects with True Surrond using HD sounds.
    4. Visual Characteristics of Chemistry and Materials like gas, liquid or solid.
    5. Intelligence Behaviour with smarter Artificial Intelligence.

  3. #3 by rwb - September 6th, 2009 at 02:29

    There is a business model, really a possible feature of cloud computing that I find so interesting as to be definitive.

    Subscription based general content exchanges. They don’t attach IP. They don’t allow ads or sponsorship. The tools are free. Posting is as easy as browsing and payment is made on the basis of how much attention is paid to a piece of content.

    The pricing for the end user is generic and the pricing minus overhead is generic outlays on posted content. The exchanges are dumb pipe/platforms, neutral but possibly bundling in ISP fees. The are redundant and expansive to the point that in practice they would always pit actual content against any attempt to advertise.

    Its not utopian its just that between user generated search new “efficient search” there doesn’t seem to be any room for demand creation or ads in general. Net seems to displace publishing and media as well because people are active to the point of wanting dialog vice canned consensus.

    Also game streaming seems like it will be the killer application for these content exchanges and cloud in general, it will be what kicks it off.

*
* (it won't be published)
Your Comment:*
* denotes a required field
We moderate the comments submitted to our blogs. Please do not submit your comment twice -- it will appear shortly.
  1. No trackbacks yet.