(gentle upbeat music) >> Welcome back everyone, to "theCUBE"'s live stage performance here in Palo Alto, California at "theCUBE" Studios. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante, kicking off our first inaugural Supercloud event. It's an editorial event, we wanted to bring together the best in the business, the smartest, the biggest, the up-and-coming startups, venture capitalists, everybody, to weigh in on this new Supercloud trend, this structural change in the cloud computing business. We're about to run the Ecosystem Speaks, which is a bunch of pre-recorded companies that wanted to get their voices on the record, so stay tuned for the rest of the day. We'll be replaying all that content and they're going to be having some really good commentary and hear what they have to say. I had a chance to interview and so did Dave. Dave, this is our closing segment where we kind of unpack everything or kind of digest and report. So much to kind of digest from the conversations today, a wide range of commentary from Supercloud operating system to developers who are in charge to maybe it's an ops problem or maybe Oracle's a Supercloud. I mean, that was debated. So so much discussion, lot to unpack. What was your favorite moments? >> Well, before I get to that, I think, I go back to something that happened at re:Invent last year. Nick Sturiale came up, Steve Mullaney from Aviatrix; we're going to hear from him shortly in the Ecosystem Speaks. Nick Sturiale's VC said "it's happening"! And what he was talking about is this ecosystem is exploding. They're building infrastructure or capabilities on top of the CapEx infrastructure. So, I think it is happening. I think we confirmed today that Supercloud is a thing. It's a very immature thing. And I think the other thing, John is that, it seems to me that the further you go up the stack, the weaker the business case gets for doing Supercloud. We heard from Marianna Tessel, it's like, "Eh, you know, we can- it was easier to just do it all on one cloud." This is a point that, Adrian Cockcroft just made on the panel and so I think that when you break out the pieces of the stack, I think very clearly the infrastructure layer, what we heard from Confluent and HashiCorp, and certainly VMware, there's a real problem there. There's a real need at the infrastructure layer and then even at the data layer, I think Benoit Dageville did a great job of- You know, I was peppering him with all my questions, which I basically was going through, the Supercloud definition and they ticked the box on pretty much every one of 'em as did, by the way Ali Ghodsi you know, the big difference there is the philosophy of Republicans and Democrats- got open versus closed, not to apply that to either one side, but you know what I mean! >> And the similarities are probably greater than differences. >> Berkely, I would probably put them on the- >> Yeah, we'll put them on the Democrat side we'll make Snowflake the Republicans. But so- but as we say there's a lot of similarities as well in terms of what their objectives are. So, I mean, I thought it was a great program and a really good start to, you know, an industry- You brought up the point about the industry consortium, asked Kit Colbert- >> Yep. >> If he thought that was something that was viable and what'd they say? That hyperscale should lead it? >> Yeah, they said hyperscale should lead it and there also should be an industry consortium to get the voices out there. And I think VMware is very humble in how they're putting out their white paper because I think they know that they can't do it all and that they do not have a great track record relative to cloud. And I think, but they have a great track record of loyal installed base ops people using VMware vSphere all the time. >> Yeah. >> So I think they need a catapult moment where they can catapult to the cloud native which they've been working on for years under Raghu and the team. So the question on VMware is in the light of Broadcom, okay, acquisition of VMware, this is an opportunity or it might not be an opportunity or it might be a spin-out or something, I just think VMware's got way too much engineering culture to be ignored, Dave. And I think- well, I'm going to watch this very closely because they can pull off some sort of rallying moment. I think they could. And then you hear the upstarts like Platform9, Rafay Systems and others they're all like, "Yes, we need to unify behind something. There needs to be some sort of standard". You know, we heard the argument of you know, more standards bodies type thing. So, it's interesting, maybe "theCUBE" could be that but we're going to certainly keep the conversation going. >> I thought one of the most memorable statements was Vittorio who said we- for VMware, we want our cake, we want to eat it too and we want to lose weight. So they have a lot of that aspirations there! (John laughs) >> And then I thought, Adrian Cockcroft said you know, the devs, they want to get married. They were marrying everybody, and then the ops team, they have to deal with the divorce. >> Yeah. >> And I thought that was poignant. It's like, they want consistency, they want standards, they got to be able to scale And Lori MacVittie, I'm not sure you agree with this, I'd have to think about it, but she was basically saying, all we've talked about is devs devs devs for the last 10 years, going forward we're going to be talking about ops. >> Yeah, and I think one of the things I learned from this day and looking back, and some kind of- I've been sauteing through all the interviews. If you zoom out, for me it was the epiphany of developers are still in charge. And I've said, you know, the developers are doing great, it's an ops security thing. Not sure I see that the way I was seeing before. I think what I learned was the refactoring pattern that's emerging, In Sik Rhee brought this up from Vertex Ventures with Marianna Tessel, it's a nuanced point but I think he's right on which is the pattern that's emerging is developers want ease-of-use tooling, they're driving the change and I think the developers in the devs ops ethos- it's never going to be separate. It's going to be DevOps. That means developers are driving operations and then security. So what I learned was it's not ops teams leveling up, it's devs redefining what ops is. >> Mm. And I think that to me is where Supercloud's going to be interesting- >> Forcing that. >> Yeah. >> Forcing the change because the structural change is open sources thriving, devs are still in charge and they still want more developers, Vittorio "we need more developers", right? So the developers are in charge and that's clear. Now, if that happens- if you believe that to be true the domino effect of that is going to be amazing because then everyone who gets on the wrong side of history, on the ops and security side, is going to be fighting a trend that may not be fight-able, you know, it might be inevitable. And so the winners are the ones that are refactoring their business like Snowflake. Snowflake is a data warehouse that had nothing to do with Amazon at first. It was the developers who said "I'm going to refactor data warehouse on AWS". That is a developer-driven refactorization and a business model. So I think that's the pattern I'm seeing is that this concept refactoring, patterns and the developer trajectory is critical. >> I thought there was another great comment. Maribel Lopez, her Lord of the Rings comment: "there will be no one ring to rule them all". Now at the same time, Kit Colbert, you know what we asked him straight out, "are you the- do you want to be the, the Supercloud OS?" and he basically said, "yeah, we do". Now, of course they're confined to their world, which is a pretty substantial world. I think, John, the reason why Maribel is so correct is security. I think security's a really hard problem to solve. You've got cloud as the first layer of defense and now you've got multiple clouds, multiple layers of defense, multiple shared responsibility models. You've got different tools for XDR, for identity, for governance, for privacy all within those different clouds. I mean, that really is a confusing picture. And I think the hardest- one of the hardest parts of Supercloud to solve. >> Yeah, and I thought the security founder Gee Rittenhouse, Piyush Sharrma from Accurics, which sold to Tenable, and Tony Kueh, former head of product at VMware. >> Right. >> Who's now an investor kind of looking for his next gig or what he is going to do next. He's obviously been extremely successful. They brought up the, the OS factor. Another point that they made I thought was interesting is that a lot of the things to do to solve the complexity is not doable. >> Yeah. >> It's too much work. So managed services might field the bit. So, and Chris Hoff mentioned on the Clouderati segment that the higher level services being a managed service and differentiating around the service could be the key competitive advantage for whoever does it. >> I think the other thing is Chris Hoff said "yeah, well, Web 3, metaverse, you know, DAO, Superclouds" you know, "Stupercloud" he called it and this bring up- It resonates because one of the criticisms that Charles Fitzgerald laid on us was, well, it doesn't help to throw out another term. I actually think it does help. And I think the reason it does help is because it's getting people to think. When you ask people about Supercloud, they automatically- it resonates with them. They play back what they think is the future of cloud. So Supercloud really talks to the future of cloud. There's a lot of aspects to it that need to be further defined, further thought out and we're getting to the point now where we- we can start- begin to say, okay that is Supercloud or that isn't Supercloud. >> I think that's really right on. I think Supercloud at the end of the day, for me from the simplest way to describe it is making sure that the developer experience is so good that the operations just happen. And Marianna Tessel said, she's investing in making their developer experience high velocity, very easy. So if you do that, you have to run on premise and on the cloud. So hybrid really is where Supercloud is going right now. It's not multi-cloud. Multi-cloud was- that was debunked on this session today. I thought that was clear. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I think- >> It's not about multi-cloud. It's about operationally seamless operations across environments, public cloud to on-premise, basically. >> I think we got consensus across the board that multi-cloud, you know, is a symptom Chuck Whitten's thing of multi-cloud by default versus multi- multi-cloud has not been a strategy, Kit Colbert said, up until the last couple of years. Yeah, because people said, "oh we got all these multiple clouds, what do we do with it?" and we got this mess that we have to solve. Whereas, I think Supercloud is something that is a strategy and then the other nuance that I keep bringing up is it's industries that are- as part of their digital transformation, are building clouds. Now, whether or not they become superclouds, I'm not convinced. I mean, what Goldman Sachs is doing, you know, with AWS, what Walmart's doing with Azure connecting their on-prem tools to those public clouds, you know, is that a supercloud? I mean, we're going to have to go back and really look at that definition. Or is it just kind of a SAS that spans on-prem and cloud. So, as I said, the further you go up the stack, the business case seems to wane a little bit but there's no question in my mind that from an infrastructure standpoint, to your point about operations, there's a real requirement for super- what we call Supercloud. >> Well, we're going to keep the conversation going, Dave. I want to put a shout out to our founding supporters of this initiative. Again, we put this together really fast kind of like a pilot series, an inaugural event. We want to have a face-to-face event as an industry event. Want to thank the founding supporters. These are the people who donated their time, their resource to contribute content, ideas and some cash, not everyone has committed some financial contribution but we want to recognize the names here. VMware, Intuit, Red Hat, Snowflake, Aisera, Alteryx, Confluent, Couchbase, Nutanix, Rafay Systems, Skyhigh Security, Aviatrix, Zscaler, Platform9, HashiCorp, F5 and all the media partners. Without their support, this wouldn't have happened. And there are more people that wanted to weigh in. There was more demand than we could pull off. We'll certainly continue the Supercloud conversation series here on "theCUBE" and we'll add more people in. And now, after this session, the Ecosystem Speaks session, we're going to run all the videos of the big name companies. We have the Nutanix CEOs weighing in, Aviatrix to name a few. >> Yeah. Let me, let me chime in, I mean you got Couchbase talking about Edge, Platform 9's going to be on, you know, everybody, you know Insig was poopoo-ing Oracle, but you know, Oracle and Azure, what they did, two technical guys, developers are coming on, we dig into what they did. Howie Xu from Zscaler, Paula Hansen is going to talk about going to market in the multi-cloud world. You mentioned Rajiv, the CEO of Nutanix, Ramesh is going to talk about multi-cloud infrastructure. So that's going to run now for, you know, quite some time here and some of the pre-record so super excited about that and I just want to thank the crew. I hope guys, I hope you have a list of credits there's too many of you to mention, but you know, awesome jobs really appreciate the work that you did in a very short amount of time. >> Well, I'm excited. I learned a lot and my takeaway was that Supercloud's a thing, there's a kind of sense that people want to talk about it and have real conversations, not BS or FUD. They want to have real substantive conversations and we're going to enable that on "theCUBE". Dave, final thoughts for you. >> Well, I mean, as I say, we put this together very quickly. It was really a phenomenal, you know, enlightening experience. I think it confirmed a lot of the concepts and the premises that we've put forth, that David Floyer helped evolve, that a lot of these analysts have helped evolve, that even Charles Fitzgerald with his antagonism helped to really sharpen our knives. So, you know, thank you Charles. And- >> I like his blog, by the I'm a reader- >> Yeah, absolutely. And it was great to be back in Palo Alto. It was my first time back since pre-COVID, so, you know, great job. >> All right. I want to thank all the crew and everyone. Thanks for watching this first, inaugural Supercloud event. We are definitely going to be doing more of these. So stay tuned, maybe face-to-face in person. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante now for the Ecosystem chiming in, and they're going to speak and share their thoughts here with "theCUBE" our first live stage performance event in our studio. Thanks for watching. (gentle upbeat music)

(light hearted music) >> Okay, welcome back to Supercloud '22. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. We got Ali Ghodsi here, co-founder and CEO of Databricks. Ali, Great to see you. Thanks for spending your valuable time to come on and talk about Supercloud and the future of all the structural change that's happening in cloud computing. >> My pleasure, thanks for having me. >> Well, first of all, congratulations. We've been talking for many, many years, and I still go back to the video that we have in archive, you talking about cloud. And really, at the beginning of the big reboot, I called the post Hadoop, a revitalization of data. Congratulations, you've been cloud-first, now on multiple clouds. Congratulations to you and your team for achieving what looks like a billion dollars in annualized revenue as reported by the Wall Street Journal, so first, congratulations. >> Thank you so much, appreciate it. >> So I was talking to some young developers and I asked a random poll, what do you think about Databricks? Oh, we love those guys, they're AI and ML-native, and that's their advantage over the competition. So I pressed why. I don't think they knew why, but that's an interesting perspective. This idea of cloud native, AI/ML-native, ML Ops, this has been a big trend and it's continuing. This is a big part of how this change and this structural change is happening. How do you react to that? And how do you see Databricks evolving into this new Supercloud-like multi-cloud environment? >> Yeah, look, I think it's a continuum. It starts with having data, but they want to clean it, you know, and they want to get insights out of it. But then, eventually, you'd like to start asking questions, doing reports, maybe ask questions about what was my revenue yesterday, last week, but soon you want to start using the crystal ball, predictive technology. Okay, but what will my revenue be next week? Next quarter? Who's going to churn? And if you can finally automate that completely so that you can act on the predictions, right? So this credit card that got swiped, the AI thinks it's fraud, we're going to deny it. That's when you get real value. So we're trying to help all these organizations move through this data AI maturity curve, all the way to that, the prescriptive, automated AI machine learning. That's when you get real competitive advantage. And you know, we saw that with the fans, right? I mean, Google wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for AI. You know, we'd be using AltaVista or something. We want to help all organizations to be able to leverage data and AI that way that the fans did. >> One of the things we're looking at with supercloud and why we call it supercloud versus other things like multi-cloud is that today a lot of the successful companies have started in the cloud have been successful, but have realized and even enterprises who have gotten by accident, and maybe have done nothing with cloud have just some cloud projects on multiple clouds. So, people have multiple cloud operational things going on but it hasn't necessarily been a strategy per se. It's been more of kind of a default reaction to things but the ones that are innovating have been successful in one native cloud because the use cases that drove that got scale got value, and then they're making that super by bringing it on premise, putting in a modern data stack, for the modern application development, and kind of dealing with the things that you guys are in the middle of with data bricks is that, that is where the action is, and they don't want to go, lose the trajectory in all the economies of scale. So we're seeing another structural change where the evolutionary nature of the cloud has solved a bunch of use cases, but now other use cases are emerging that's on premises and edge that have been driven by applications because of the developer boom, that's happening. You guys are in the middle of it. What is happening with this structural change? Are people looking for the modern data stack? Are they looking for more AI? What's the, what's your perspective on this supercloud kind of position? >> Look, it started with not AR on multiple clouds, right? So multi-cloud has been a thing. It became a thing 70, 80% of our customers when you ask them, they're more than one cloud. But then soon to start realizing that, hey, you know, if I'm on multiple clouds, this data stuff is hard enough as it is. Do I want to redo it again and again with different proprietary technologies, on each of the clouds. And that's when I started thinking about let's standardize this, let's figure out a way which just works across them. That's where I think open source comes in, becomes really important. Hey, can we leverage open standards because then we can make it work in these different environments, as we said so that we can actually go super, as you said, that's one. The second thing is, can we simplify it? You know, and I think today, the data landscape is complicated. Conceptually it's simple. You have data which is essentially customer data that you have, maybe employee data. And you want to get some kind of insights from that. But how you do that is very complicated. You have to buy data warehouse, hire data analysts. You have to buy, store stuff in the Delta Lake you know, get your data engineers. If you want streaming real time thing that's another complete different set of technologies you have to buy. And then you have to stitch all these together, and you have to do again and again on every cloud. So they just want simplification. So that's why we're big believers in this Delta Lakehouse concept. Which is an open standard to simplifying this data stack and help people to just get value out of their data in any environment. So they can do that in this sort of supercloud as you call it. >> You know, we've been talking about that in previous interviews, do the heavy lifting let them get the value. I have to ask you about how you see that going forward, Because if I'm a customer, I have a lot of operational challenges. Cause the developers are are kicking butt right now. We see that clearly. Open sources growing at, and continue to be great. But ops and security teams they really care about this stuff. And most companies don't want to spin up multiple ops teams to deal with different stacks. This is one big problem that I think that's leading into the multi-cloud viability. How do you guys deal with that? How do you talk to customers when they say, I want to have less complications on operations? >> Yeah, you're absolutely right. You know, it's easy for a developer to adopt all these technologies and new things are coming out all the time. The ops teams are the ones that have to make sure this works. Doing that in multiple different environments is super hard. especially when there's a proprietary stack in each environment that's different. So they just want standardization. They want open source, that's super important. We hear that all the time from them. They want open the source technologies. They believe in the communities around it. You know, they know that source code is open. So you can also see if there's issues with it. If there's security breaches, those kind of things that they can have a community around it. So they can actually leverage that. So they're the ones that are really pushing this, and we're seeing it across the board. You know, it starts first with the digital natives you know, the companies that are, but slowly it's also now percolating to the other organizations, we're hearing across the board. >> Where are we, Ali on the innovation strategies for customers? Where are they on the trajectory around how they're building out their teams? How are they looking at the open source? How are they extending the value proposition of Databricks, and data at scale, as they start to build out their teams and operations, because some are like kind of starting, crawl, walk, run, kind of vibe. Some are big companies, they're dealing with data all the time. Where are they in their journey? What's the core issues that they're solving? What are some of the use cases that you see that are most pressing in customer? >> Yeah, what I've seen, that's really exciting about this Delta Lakehouse concept is that we're now seeing a lot of use cases around real time. So real time fraud detection, real time stock ticker pricing, anyone that's doing trading, they want that to work real time. Lots of use cases around that. Lots of use cases around how do we in real time drive more engagement on our web assets if we're a media company, right? We have all these assets how do we get people to get engaged? Stay on our sites. Continue engaging with the material we have. Those are real time use cases. And the interesting thing is, they're real time. So, you know, it's really important that you that now you don't want to recommend someone, hey, you should go check out this restaurant if they just came from that restaurant, half an hour ago. So you want it to be real time, but B, that it's also all based on machine learning. These are a lot of this is trying to predict what you want to see, what you want to do, is it fraudulent? And that's also interesting because basically more and more machine learning is coming in. So that's super exciting to see, the combination of real time and machine learning on the Lakehouse. And finally, I would say the Lakehouse is really important for this because that's where the data is flowing in. If they have to take that data that's flowing into the lake and actually copy it into a separate warehouse, that delays the real time use cases. And then it can't hit those real time deadlines. So that's another catalyst for this Lakehouse pattern. >> Would that be an example of how the metrics are changing? Cause I've been looking at some people saying, well you can tell if someone's doing well there's a lot of data being transferred. And then I was saying, well, wait a minute. Data transfer costs money, right? And time. So this is interesting dynamic, in a way you don't want to have a lot of movement, right? >> Yeah, movement actually decreases for a lot of these real time use cases. 'Cause what we saw in the past was that they would run a batch processing to process all the data. So once they process all the data. But actually if you look at the things that have changed since the data that we have yesterday it's actually not that much. So if you can actually incrementally process it in real time, you can actually reduce the cost of transfers and storage and processing. So that's actually a great point. That's also one of the main things that we're seeing with the use cases, the bill shrinks and the cost goes down, and they can process less. >> Yeah, and it'd be interesting to see how those KPIs evolve into industry metrics down the road around the supercloud of evolution. I got to ask you about the open source concept of data platforms. You guys have been a pioneer in there doing great work, kind of picking the baton off where the Hadoop World left off as Dave Vellante always points out. But if working across clouds is super important. How are you guys looking at the ability to work across the different clouds with data bricks? Are you going to build that abstraction yourself? Does data sharing and model sharing kind of come into play there? How do you see this data bricks capability across the clouds? >> Yeah, I mean, let me start by saying, we just we're big fans of open source. We think that open source is a force in software. That's going to continue for, decades, hundreds of years, and it's going to slowly replace all proprietary code in its way. We saw that, it could do that with the most advanced technology. Windows, you know proprietary operating system, very complicated, got replaced with Linux. So open source can pretty much do anything. And what we're seeing with the Delta Lakehouse is that slowly the open source community is building a replacement for the proprietary data warehouse, Delta Lake, machine learning, real time stack in open source. And we're excited to be part of it. For us, Delta Lake is a very important project that really helps you standardize how you layout your data in the cloud. And when it comes a really important protocol called data sharing, that enables you in a open way actually for the first time ever share large data sets between organizations, but it uses an open protocol. So the great thing about that is you don't need to be a Databricks customer. You don't need to even like Databricks, you just need to use this open source project and you can now securely share data sets between organizations across clouds. And it actually does so really efficiently just one copy of the data. So you don't have to copy it if you're within the same cloud. >> So you're playing the long game on open source. >> Absolutely. I mean, this is a force it's going to be there if if you deny it, before you know it there's going to be, something like Linux, that is going to be a threat to your propriety. >> I totally agree by the way. I was just talking to somebody the other day and they're like hey, the software industry someone made the comment, the software industry, the software industry is open source. There's no more software industry, it's called open source. It's integrations that become interesting. And I was looking at integrations now is really where the action is. And we had a panel with the Clouderati we called it, the people have been around for a long time. And it was called the innovator's dilemma. And one of the comments was it's the integrator's dilemma, not the innovator's dilemma. And this is a big part of this piece of supercloud. Can you share your thoughts on how cloud and integration need to be tightened up to really make it super? >> Actually that's a great point. I think the beauty of this is, look the ecosystem of data today is vast, there's this picture that someone puts together every year of all the different vendors and how they relate, and it gets bigger and bigger and messy and messier. So, we see customers use all kinds of different aspects of what's existing in the ecosystem and they want it to be integrated in whatever you're selling them. And that's where I think the power of open source comes in. Open source, you get integrations that people will do without you having to push it. So us, Databricks as a vendor, we don't have to go tell people please integrate with Databricks. The open source technology that we contribute to, automatically, people are integrating with it. Delta Lake has integrations with lots of different software out there and Databricks as a company doesn't have to push that. So I think open source is also another thing that really helps with the ecosystem integrations. Many of these companies in this data space actually have employees that are full-time dedicated to make sure make sure our software works well with Spark. Make sure our software works well with Delta and they contribute back to that community. And that's the way you get this sort of ecosystem to further sort of flourish. >> Well, I really appreciate your time. And I, my final question for you is, as we're kind of unpack and and kind of shape and frame supercloud for the future, how would you see a roadmap or architecture or outcome for companies that are going to clearly be in the cloud where it's open source is going to be dominating. Integrations has got to be seamless and frictionless. Abstraction layer make things super easy and take away the complexity. What is supercloud to them? What does the outcome look like? How would you define a supercloud environment for an enterprise? >> Yeah, for me, it's the simplification that you get where you standardize an open source. You get your data in one place, in one format in one standardized way, and then you can get your insights from it, without having to buy lots of different idiosyncratic proprietary software from different vendors. That's different in each environment. So it's this slow standardization that's happening. And I think it's going to happen faster than we think. And I think in a couple years it's going to be a requirement that, does your software work on all these different departments? Is it based on open source? Is it using this Delta Lake house pattern? And if it's not, I think they're going to demand it. >> Yeah, I feel like we're close to some sort of defacto standard coming and you guys are a big part of it, once that clicks in, it's going to highly accelerate in the open, and I think it's going to be super valuable. Ali, thank you so much for your time, and congratulations to you and your team. Like we've been following you guys since the beginning. Remember the early days and look how far it's come. And again, you guys are really making a big difference in making a super cool environment out there. Thanks for coming on sharing. >> Thank you so much John. >> Okay, this is supercloud 22. I'm John Furrier stay with more for more coverage and more commentary after this break. (light hearted music)

>> Live from Toronto, Canada, it's theCUBE, covering Global Cloud and Block Chain Summit 2018. Brought to you by theCUBE. >> Hello everyone, welcome back to theCUBE live coverage in Toronto for the Block Chain-Cloud Convergence Show. This is the Global Cloud Block Chain Summit part of the Futurist Event that's going on the next two days after this. Our next guest is Kesem Frank, AION co-founder and CEO of MavenNet. Doing a lot of work in the enterprise and also block chain space around the infrastructure, making it really interoperable. Of course, Jenna Pilgrim, co-founder and COO of a new opportunity called Network Effects. Welcome to the cube, thanks for joining us. >> Thanks, thanks for having us. >> Thanks, John. >> You guys were just on a panel, The Real World Applications of Block Chain. IBM was on it, which, been doing a lot of work there. This is real world, low hanging fruit, block chain, everyone's pretty excited about. A lot of people get it, and some don't. Some are learning. So you've got the believers, the I want to believe, and then the nonbelievers. Let's talk about the I want to believe and the believers in block chain. Some real world applications going on. As it's evolving, so there's evolution of the standards, technology, but people are putting it to use. What's going on in the sector around some of the real world cases you guys talked about? >> I think we're seeing a lot of collaboration as far as real world applications go, because I think people are sort of starting to understand that if a distributed network is going to work or is going to be secure, it needs diversity and it needs mass scale. If lots of different parties can work together, then they can actually form a community that's really working. As far as real world applications, there's some really interesting one as far as supply chain. Kathryn Harrison at IBM talked about their pilot about shipping, bringing together the global supply chain of distribution. There's a bunch of interesting ones about food providence and bringing together different parties just to make sure that people know what they're eating and that they are able to keep themselves safe, so I think those are two definitely interesting ones. >> Kesem, block chain, supply chain, value chains, these are kind of key words that mean something together. >> Right. >> Making things work in a new way, making things more efficient, seems to be a trend. You're kind of in that world. Is it efficient? (laughing) How's the tech working? What are some of the core threshold issues that people have to get over? >> So you know, John, that's exactly the question to ask. A lot of folks out there are looking at block chain and the promise it represents, and the one big question that keeps echoing over and over is when is this going mainstream? When are we going to see something, a domain, a use case, that is actually natively on a block chain? I think that, essentially, we kind of owe it to ourselves and to everyone that cares about this stuff to ask what's working today, August 2018 and what is still kind of pending? I co-founded a project called AION. For us, interoperability is really one of the key facets that you need to be able to solve for to make block chains real. And again, here's the 60 second argument. If you're going to grow all these solutions that are centric around the use case, they solve for different pinpoints and different stakeholders care about them. They don't really create the cohesive kind of ecosystem until they can all talk to each other, and then you have to ask yourself is the original hypothesis where it's going to be one main net, one chain that's going to rule them all, and everybody gets to play on it and everybody deploys their Dapps on stuff like Fabric or R3 or Ethereum, or whatever it might be. That is absolutely not the way we're seeing enterprise actually shaping into this domain of block chain. What we're seeing is big consortiums that already have value, tangible today, out of doing stuff on chain, and the biggest thing to solve is how do I take, to Jenna's point around supply chain or food providence, whatever it is, how do I actually open it so I can now start writing insurance events, payment events, banking, underwriting, auditing, regulation? There's this gigantic ecosystem that needs to be enabled, and again we are actively saying it's not going to be by an organic model where you and I do everything on top of a single solution. There will be a multitude of solutions, and what we need to solve for is how do we convert them from disparate islands that don't talk to each other into a cohesive ecosystem? >> This is a great point. We were talking on our intro, and we talked last night on our panel, about standards. If you look at all the major inflection points where wealth was created and value was created around innovation and entrepreneurship and industry inflection points, there's always some sort of standard thing that happened. >> Right. >> Whether it's the OSI model during the early days of the internet to certain protocols that made things happen with the internet. Here, it's interesting because if you have one chain and rule the world, it's got to be up and running. >> Yeah. >> It's not. There's no one thing yet, so I see that trend the cloud has, private cloud, public cloud, but public cloud was first but people had data centers. >> Right. >> Both not compatible, now the trend is multi-cloud. You can almost connect the dots of saying multi-chain >> Right. >> Might be a big trend. >> Right. >> This is kind of what you're teasing out here. >> That's exactly what we're about, and I think it's very interesting, the point you're making about dissimilarities between the two domains. We are in a cloud convention, and to me it means two things. One, we absolutely see the mainstream people, the mainstream players in industry, starting to take this seriously. It used to be a completely disparate world where you guys are a bunch of crazies with your Bitcoin and ether and what not. They're definitely taking this seriously now. The second thing, when you think of cloud as a model, how cloud evolved, we used to have these conversations around are you crazy, you're telling me that my data is not going to be on premise? >> It's not secure, now it's the most secure. >> Oh my God! It's in the cloud, what's a cloud? (laughing) You think of the progression model that was applicable back then, right? 10 years, 15 years back, where we started privately and we tell them OK, we'll take this side step of hybrid and then fully public. Took them a while, took them almost 20 years to get their heads around it. >> There's no one trajectory. What's interesting about block chain and crypto with token economics, there's no one trend you can map an analog to, you can't say this is going to be like this trend of the past. It's almost developing it's own kind of trajectory. A lot of organic community involvement. Different tech involvement. >> Totally. >> Different engineering mindsets coming together. You're seeing an engineering-led culture big time going on. That's propelling it up to the conversations of let's lay down the pipes, let's start running apps, but I'll do it within a two year window (laughing). >> I think the big thing to understand about that is yes, you need a whole host of developer talent to build distributed systems, but at the end of the day those systems still have to be used by people. They still have to be used by society, you still have to understand how to talk to your chief executives about what's happening within your company or what your tech teams are doing. There's a growing need for marketers, for PR people, for people who speak, I don't want to say plain English, but people who understand how-- >> Translate it to the real world. >> Yeah, they need to translate it, and how to bridge the gap between legacy systems and how do you take what you were doing before and transform it to a distributed ledger system? How do you do that without just paving the cow path? >> It's interesting, it's almost intoxicating, 'cause you got two elements that get people excited. You got the token economics, which gets people to go, "Whoa," the economics and the liquidity of money and/or value creation capture equations completely changing some of the business model stuff, which could be translated to software and Dapps and software general stuff or SaaS, et cetera. Then you got the plumbing or the networking side of it where things like latency, interoperability, absolutely matter, so with all that going on in real time, it's kind of happening at 30,000 feet and trying to change the airplane engine out. People are failing, and so there's some false promises, there's also false hopes that have not been achieved, so this clouds up the real big picture which is this is an innovative environment. We're seeing that trend. But when you get to the end of the day, what are people working on, to me, is the tell sign. Kesem, what's your project, talk about AION and the work you're doing, specifically give some examples of some of the things that you're doing in the trenches. >> Sure. >> What are you trying to solve, what are some examples you're running into and how does that relate to how things might evolve going forward? >> Sure, so there is a multitude of different problems that we work on but if you want to stick just to the fundamentals? Let's take one gigantic issue that everyone's kind of tackling from different perspectives, let's talk about scale. Scale is, especially in block chains especially challenging just because of how the technology works. How decentralized can you get before you're faced with gigantic latencies and before transaction cost are kind of through the roof? When you think about it, that is all a result of how we kind of contemplate these early stage networks. It was always the one network that is going to scale to infinity. Absolutely not the way it's going to work out. So from my perspective, again, sticking to this one issue, if you could actually give me a decentralized rail that maintains consensus throughout two networks, I can now actually have two trusted kind of go-tos instead of always putting the full brunt of the throughput on one single network. For us, that's kind of a no brainer application to interoperability. If you could actually give me all these trusted networks that work in tandem, I could now start splicing throughputs across many different parallel kind of rails. Not to similar than how we can solve for super computing. We understood there is a limit on how fast can a single CPU go and we started going wide. >> That's an interesting point, I want to just double click on that for a second because if you think about it, why would I have multiple rails and multiple systems? Maybe the use cases are different for them. >> Correct. >> You don't want to have to pick one cloud or one chain to rule them all because it's not optimized. We saw that with monolithic systems and cloud is all about levels of granularity and micro service and micro everything, right? >> Correct. >> And I would also say that gets into a security issue as well, right? You're talking about multiple layers but you also will have multiple layers of permission. You'll have multiple layers of how much information someone can see and what I think is emerging, if data is the new oil, then what's emerging is for the first time we're now able to trust data that we do not own. For corporations who say, "I don't know to market to you "if I don't know everything about you." But at the end of the day, they want to be able to leverage your data but they don't need to secure it and I think that cybersecurity issue is a huge, huge thing that's definitely coming. >> I want to get both of your thoughts on this, because we were talking about this last night. We were riffing on the notion that with cloud compute and data really drove scale. So Amazon is a great example and their value now is things like Kinesis and Aurora, some of their fastest growing services. You got SageMaker, probably will be announced at re:Invent coming up as the fastest growing service, right now it's Aurora. All data concepts. So the dataization really made cloud, great. >> True. >> Okay what's the analog for crypto and block chain? Tokenization is an interesting concept. There's almost an extension of cloud where you're saying, hey, with tokenization, the tokenization phase, how do you explain that to a common person? You say, is token going to be the token and the money aspect of and the economics the killer app? How's it transverse the infrastructures, plural? >> Yeah, or is the wallet going to be the browser? Or how are all of these things happening? >> How do you make sense of this? What's your reaction to that trend? >> So I actually get excited when I think about what token, on the most profound level, actually means. When you kind of think of where value happens in the context of these gigantic enterprises, right? You think of Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook, any of them, and you kind of think of what the product is, it's all about the data and it's all about how do you convince people to give up data so they can monetize on it. And then you have two distinct, like literally gigantic groups of stakeholders at play. You have the users, that essentially get something free, right? I get to post on Facebook or I get to write an e-mail on Gmail. Then you have the stakeholders that actually extract all that value from my activities. A token, I think most profoundly represents, how do we actually get to a unified group where the user himself is the stakeholder that gets to extract the data? And again, the proposition is pretty straightforward. The more you use a network and the more the network becomes valuable and grows, the more value the token that drives at it. >> So it changes the value capture equation? >> Correct, different model altogether. >> The value creators get to capture the value and obviously network effects plays a big part in this? >> Yes. >> Which is your wheelhouse. (laughing) >> Yeah, definitely. I think it really comes down to core principles. Now you're able to really get down, to what Kesem was talking about, about when you're designing a token or if you're designing an incentive mechanism, you're really going down to the sort of deep game theory of why people do specific things and if we can financially incentivize people to do good rather than punish them or fine them for doing bad then we can actually create value for everyone. We're designing a new economy that now has the ability to propel itself in a fair and prosperous way, if done correctly, obviously that's the disclaimer afterwards, but. >> I love what you're saying there because if you look at collective intelligence a lot of the AI concepts came around from collective intelligence, predictive analytics, prescriptive analytics all came around using data to create value. I always talk about fake news because we have a cloud of media business that's kind of tokenized now but fake news it two things, it's payload, fake news, the fake content and then the infrastructure dynamics that they arbitraged, with network effects. They targeted specific people, fake payload, but the distribution was a network effect. Again, this was the perverse incentive that no one was monitoring, there was no- >> Well and I think in that case, yes there is news that is inherently false information but then there's also a whole spectrum of trueness, if you want to call it that so now we have this technology that allows us to overlay on top of that and say, "Well what is the providence of my information?" And with different layers of block chain systems you're actually able to prove the providence of your information without exposing the user's privacy and without exposing the whole supply chain of the media because there's like media buyers, go through all kinds of hands. >> And we believe the answer to fake news, frankly, is data access, collective intelligence and something like a block chain where you have incentive systems to filter out the fake news. >> Totally. >> Exactly. >> Reputation systems, these things are not new concepts. >> It's all about stake at the end of the day, right? It's how do you keep a stakeholder accountable for their action? You need backing so I think we're definitely on the same page. >> I love, I could talk about fake news all day because we think we can solve that with our CUBEcoin token coming out soon. I want to shift gears and talk about some of the examples we've seen with cloud. >> Sure. >> And try to map that to some navigation for people in how to get through the block chain token world. One of the key things about the cloud was something they called shadow IT. Shadow IT was people who said, hey, you know what? I could just put my credit card down and move this non core thing out in this cloud and prove to my boss, show them, not pitch 'em on the Power Point deck, to say look it, I just did this for that cost in this timeframe, and that started around 2009/2010 timeframe, the early digerati or the clouderati kind of did that but around 2012 it became, wow, this shadow IT is actually R and D practice. >> Mm-hmm. >> Right. >> You started to see that now, so the question that we see for people evaluating in the enterprise is how do you judge what's a good project? Certainly people are kicking the tires and doing a little bit, I won't call it shadow IT, but they're taking on some projects as you were talking about on the panel. How should they, the enterprises in general, the large companies, start thinking about how to enable a shadow IT-like dynamic and how should they evaluate the kind of projects? I think that's an area people just don't know what to look for. Your thoughts? >> I want to add a premise to that, because I think that's absolutely the right question to ask. We also need to add the why. Why should we, as people that do native crypto currency, even care about enterprises? A lot of people kind of theorized when Bitcoin was created to say it was anti institutional is an understatement, right? Aren't we meant to kill enterprise? The thing is, I don't think it's going to be a big bang. I don't think it's going be we wake up and nobody's using banking anymore or nobody's using the traditional healthcare or government and you know whatever insurance policies. We care about block chain in the context of enterprise because we think block chain is a fundamentally better model of doing things. It kind of does away with the black box where I need to be in business, I need to blindly trust you and it introduces a much more transparent and democratic model of doing things. We absolutely want to introduce and make block chain mainstream because that's important for us. When you think of how we do it, to your question, AION is all about interoperability, right? We create a solution that helps scale and helps different networks, decentralized networks, communicate to each other. What we also do with MavenNet, the company I run, is essentially make that enterprise friendly. It's extremely hard to do adoption and implementation within an enterprise, they're very immune to change. >> Antibodies as they say. >> Oh. >> The antibodies to innovation, they kill innovation. >> Totally, so going back to your original question, it all starts with a P and L. If somebody is going to authorize, you know, an actual production system in enterprise for block chain, it needs to create a tangible value, a tangible return, quickly and that's the key. The model that actually scales is you start by flushing out inefficiency plate. You show the enterprise how you could actually achieve, I don't know 20%/30%, that's the order of magnitude that they care about, efficiency by moving some part of your value chain on top of a block chain. >> It has to have an order of magnitude difference or so. I mean cloud was a great example, too, it changes the operating model. >> Yeah. >> They achieve what they wanted to achieve faster and more efficiently and operated it differently. >> Correct. >> And people were starting at it like a three headed monster like what is this thing, right? The cloud thing. And throwing all kinds of fud out there, but ultimately at the end of the day, it's a new operating model for the same thing that they're trying to do with the old stuff. >> Mm-hmm. >> I mean, it's almost that simple. >> Yeah, I think in some cases you need to really, in my previous life at the Block Chain Research Institute, we encouraged a lot of our clients to really take a step back and say, well will I actually, A, will I have this problem in eight years or seven years or 20 years or 50 years, if we're really fundamentally building a new financial system or a new way of doing things that is fundamentally different? Are we building it on old technology? We need to make sure that, and that's why you've seen banks were the first in the door to say, "Yeah, payments, that sounds great, that sounds great." But the real applications that we're seeing from banks are in loyalty, they're in AMLKYC, they're in the sort of fringe operations. Something like payments is going to take a really long time to push through because of those legacy systems because payments is the fundamentals of what banks do. >> This is an interesting point, I want to get your thoughts to end the segment because I think one of the things that we've certainly seen with cloud that over the generational shifts that have happened, the timeframe for innovation is getting shorter and shorter, so timeframe is critical so if the communities are fumbling around hitting that time to value, it seems to be trending to faster and we don't want to hear slower because these systems are inadequate, they're antiquated. >> Mm-hmm. >> These are the systems that are disrupted so the timing of, whether it's standards, or interoperability or business models, operating models, they got to be faster. >> Yeah. >> That's the table stakes. >> I think it all comes down to collaborative governance. >> People have to figure out block chain faster. >> Yeah. >> What's holding us back? Or what's accelerating us? What's the key for the community at large from the engineering community and the business community to make it go faster? Your thoughts? >> Right, so I think we're still searching for the next killer app. If Bitcoin is the reason we're all sitting here today and I profoundly believe that. >> Yeah. >> What is the next thing that drives change on a global scale? That's kind of what we're trying, collectively as an industry, to figure out. Sure, many kind of roadblocks on the way. Some of them educational, perceptional, regulation, technology, but the next big wave that's going to accelerate us to the next ten years of block chain is that next killer app. Organizations such as myself, Jenna, that's our day job, we wake up and that's what we do. >> I mean I've always said, and Dr. Wong, who's the founder of Alibaba Cloud agreed with me, I've been saying that the TCPIP protocol, that standard really enabled a lot of interoperability and created lots of diverse value up the stacks of the OSI model, Open Systems Interconnect, seven layer model, actually never got standardized. It's kind of stopped at TCPIP and that was good, everyone snapped at the line, that created massive value. >> But that's a collaborative governance thing. That's people coming together and saying that these are the standards that we wish to adhere to. >> We need the moment right now. >> Yeah, so you see organizations like the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance coming out with a prospective list of standards that they think the community should adhere here. You know you have the ERC20 standard, you have all these different organizations, the World Economic Forum is playing a role in that and the UN is playing a role, especially when it comes to identity and those kind of really big, societal issues but I think that it comes down to that everyone plays a role that I'm doing my best, I think it's going to be somewhere in the realm of data so that's where I've chosen to sort of make my course. >> I think this is a good conversation to have, and I think we could continue it. I mean, I read on Medium, everyone's reading these fat protocols, thin protocols but at the end of the day what does that matter if there's no like scale? >> Yeah. >> You can have all the fat protocols you want, more of a land grab I would say but there's certainly models but is that subordinate or is that the cart before the horse? This is the conversation I think is in the hallways. >> Totally agree, totally agreed. >> Guys, thanks so much for coming on theCUBE, really appreciate it. Breaking down real world applications of block chain we're at the Global Cloud and Block Chain Summit. It's an inaugural event and think it's going to be the kind of format we're going to see more of, cloud and block chain coming together. Collision course or is it going to come in nicely and land together and work together? We'll see, of course theCUBE's covering it. Thanks for watching. Stay with us for more all day coverage. Part of the Futurist Conference coming up the next two days. We're in Toronto, we'll be back with more after this short break. (theCUBE theme music)

>> Narrator: Live from New York City, it's the CUBE covering CyberConnect 2017 brought to you by Centrify and the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology. >> Okay welcome back everyone. This is the CUBE's live coverage in New York City exclusively with the CyberConnect 2017, it's an inaugural event presented by Centrify. It's not a Centrify event. Centrify one of the fastest growing security startups in Silicon Valley and around the world. It is underwriting this great event bringing industry, government and practitioners together to add value on top of the great security conversations. I'm John Furrier, your host with Dave Vellante, my co-host, my next guest is Bill Mann who's the Chief Product Officer with Centrify. Welcome back to the CUBE, great to see you. >> Hey, great to be here. >> Thanks and congratulations for you guys doing what I think is a great community thing, underwriting an event, not just trying to take the event, make it about Centrify, it's really an organically driven event with the team of customers you have, and industry consultants and practitioners, really, really great job, congratulations. >> Bill: Thank you. >> Alright so now let's get down to the meat of the conversation here at the show in the hallways is general's conversation, General Alexander talking about his experience at the NSA and the Fiber Command Center. Really kind of teasing out the future of what cyber will be like for an enterprise whether it's a slow moving enterprise or a fast moving bank or whatever, the realities are this is the biggest complexity and challenge of our generation. Identity's at the heart of it. You guys were called the foundational element of a new solution that has people have to coming together in a community model sharing data, talking to each other, why did he call you guys foundational? >> I think he's calling us foundational because I think he's realizing that having strong identity in an environment is kind of the keys to getting yourself in a better state of mind and a better security posture. If we look at the kind of the foundational principles of identity, it's really about making sure you know who the people are within your organization, by doing identity assurance so that's a foundational principle. The principle of giving people the least amount of access within an organization, that's a foundational principle. The principle of understanding what people did and then using that information and then adjusting policy, that's a foundational principle. I think that's the fundamental reason why he talks about it as a foundational principle and let's face it, most organizations are now connected to the Cloud, they've got mobile user, they've got outsourced IT so something's got to change, right. I mean the way we've been running security up until now. If it was that great, we wouldn't have had all the threats, right? >> And all kinds of silver bullets have been rolling out, Dave and I were commenting and Dave made a point on our intro today that there's no silver bullet in security, there's a lot of opportunities to solve problems but there's no, you can't buy one product. Now identity is a foundational element. Another interesting thing I want to get your reaction to was on stage was Jim from Aetna, the Chief Security Officer and he was kind of making fun with himself by saying I'm not a big computer science, I was a history major and he made a comment about his observation that when civilizations crumble, it's because of trust is lost. And kind of inferring that you can always connect the dots that trust in fundamental and that email security and most of the solutions are really killing the trust model rather than enhancing it and making it more secure so a holistic view of trust stability and enhancement can work in security. What's your reaction to that? >> So it's a complicated area. Trust is complicated let me just kind of baseline that for the moment. I think that we unfortunately, need to have better trust but the way we're approaching trust at the moment is the wrong way so let me give you a simple example. When we go, when we're at home and we're sleeping in our homes and the doors and windows are closed, we inherently trust the security of our environment because the doors and windows are closed but reality is the doors and windows can be really easily opened right, so we shouldn't be trusting that environment at all but we do so what we need to instead do is get to a place where we trust the known things in our environment very, very well and understand what are the unknown things in our environment so the known things in our environment can be people right, the identity of people, can be objects like knowing that this is really Bill's phone, it's a registered phone and it's got a device ID is better than having any phone being used for access so like I said, trust, it's complicated. >> John: But we don't know it has malware on there though. You could have malware. >> You could have malware on there but look, then you've got different levels of trust, right. You've got zero trust when you don't know anything about it. You've got higher levels of trust when you know it's got no malware. >> So known information is critical. >> Known information is critical and known information can then be used to make trust decisions but it's when we make decisions on trust without any information and where we infer that things are trustworthy when they shouldn't be like the home example where you think the doors are closed but it's so easy to break through them, that's when we infer trust so trust is something that we need to build within the environment with information about all the objects in the environment and that's where I think we can start building trust and that's I think how we have to approach the whole conversation about trust. Going back to your example, when you receive an email from somebody, you don't know if it came from that person right. Yet I'm talking to you, I trust that I'm talking to you, right, so that's where the breakdown happens and once we have that breakdown, society can breakdown as well. >> But going back to your device example so there are situations today. I mean you try to log on to your bank from your mobile device and it says do you want to remember this device, do you want to trust this device? Is that an example of what you're talking about and it might hit me a text with a two factor authentication. >> That's an example, that's absolutely an example of trust and then so there's a model in security called the zero trust model and I spoke about it earlier on today and that model of security is the foundational principles of that is understanding who the user is, understanding what endpoint or device they're coming from and that's exactly what you've described which is understanding the context of that device, the trustworthy of the device, you know the location of that device, the posture of that device. All of those things make that device more trustworthy than knowing nothing about that device and those are the kind of fundamental constructs of building trust within the organization now as opposed to what we've got at the moment is we're implying trust without any information about really trust right. I mean most of us use passwords and most of us use password, password so there's no difference between both of you, right and so how can I trust-- >> I've never done that. >> I know but how can we trust each other if we're using you know, data like that to describe ourselves. >> Or using the data in your Linkedin profile that could be socially engineered. >> Bill: Exactly. >> So there's all kinds of ways to crack the passwords so you brought up the trust so this is a, spoofing used to be a common thing but that's been resolved that some, you know same calling some techniques and other things but now when you actually have certificates being compromised, account compromised, that's where you know, you think you know who that person is but that's not who it is so this is a new dynamic and was pointed out in one of the sessions that this account, real compromises of identity is a huge issue. What are you guys doing to solve that problem? Have you solved that problem? >> We're addressing parts of solving that problem and the part of the problem that we're trying to solve is increasing the posture of multi factor authentication of that user so you know more certainty that this is really who that person is. But the fact of the matter is like you said earlier on, trying to reduce the risk down to zero is almost impossible and I think that's what we have to be all clear about in this market, this is not about reducing risk to zero, it's about getting the risk down to something which is acceptable for the type of business you are trying to work on so implementing MFA is a big part of what Centrify advocates within organizations. >> Explain MFA real quick. >> Oh, multi factor authentication. >> Okay, got it. >> Something that we're all used to when we're using, doing online banking at the moment but unfortunately most enterprises don't implement MFA for all the use cases that they need to be able to implement before. So I usually describe it as MFA everywhere and the reason I say MFA everywhere, it should be for all users, not a subset of the users. >> Should be all users, yeah. >> And it should be for all the accesses when they're accessing salesforce.com for concur so all the application, all the servers that they access, all the VPNs that they access, all the times that they request any kind of privilege command, you should reauthenticate them as well at different points in time. So implementing MFA like that can reduce the risk within the organization. >> So I buy that 100% and I love that direction, I'd ask you then a hard question. Anyone who's an Apple user these days knows how complicated MFA could be, I get this iCloud verification and it sends me a code to my phone which could be hacked potentially so you have all these kinds of complexities that could arise depending upon how complicated the apps are. So how should the industry think about simplifying and yet maintaining the security of the MFA across workloads so application one through n. >> So let me kind of separate the problems out so we focus on the enterprise use case so what you're describing is more the consumer use case but we have the same problem in the enterprise area as well but at least in the enterprise area I think that we're going to be able to address the problems sooner in the market. >> John: Because you have the identity baseline? >> One, we have the identity and there's less applications that the enterprise is using. >> It's not Apple. >> It's not like endpoints. >> But take Salesforce, that's as much of a pain, right. >> But with applications like Salesforce, and a lot of the top applications out there, the SaaS applications out there, they already support SAML as a mechanism for eliminating passwords altogether and a lot of the industry is moving towards using API mechanisms for authentication. Now your example for the consumer is a little bit more challenging because now you've got to get all these consumer applications to tie in and so forth right so that's going to be tougher to do but you know, we're focused on trying to solve the enterprise problem and even that is being a struggle in the industry. It's only now that you're seeing standards like SAML and OWASP getting implemented whereby we can make assertions about an identity and then an application can then consume that assertion and then move forward. >> Even in those situations if I may Bill, there's take the trust to another level which is there's a trusted third party involved in those situations. It might be Twitter, Linkedin, Facebook or Google, might be my bank, it might be RSA in some cases. Do you envision a day where we can eliminate the trusted third party with perhaps blockchain. >> Oh I actually do. Yeah, no, I do, I think the trusted third party model that we've got is broken fundamentally because if a break in to the bank, that's it, you know the third party trust but I'm a big fan of blockchain mainly because it's going to be a trusted end party right so there's going to be end parties that are vouching for Bill's identity on the blockchain so and it's going to be harder to get to all those end minors and convince them that they need to change their or break into them right. So yeah I'm a big fan of the trust model changing. I think that's going to be one of the biggest use cases for blockchain when it comes to trust and the way we kind of think about certificates and browsers and SSL certificates and so forth. >> I think you're right on the money and what i would add to that is looking at this conference, CyberConnect, one theme that I see coming out of this is I hear the word reimagining the future here, reimagining security, reimagining DNS, reimagining so a lot of the thought leaders that are here are talking about things like okay, here's what we have today. I'm not saying throwing it away but it's going to be completely different in the new world. >> Yeah and I think you know the important thing about the past is got to learn from the past and we got to apply some of the lessons to the future and things are just so different now. We know with microservices versus monolithic application architectures you know security used to be an afterthought before but you know, you talk to the average developer now, they want to add security in their applications, they realize that right so, and that's going to, I mean, maybe I'm being overly positive but I think that's going to take us to a better place. >> I think we're in a time. >> We need to be overly positive Bill. >> You're the chief officer, you have to have a 20 mouth stare and I think you know legacy always has been a thing we've heard in the enterprise but I just saw a quote on Twitter on the internet and it was probably, it's in quotes so it's probably right, it's motivating, a motivating quote. If you want to create the future, you've got to create a better version of the past and they kind of use taxis versus Uber obviously to answer of a shift in user behavior so that's happening in this industry. There's a shift of user experience, user expectations, changing internet infrastructure, you mentioned blockchain, a variety of other things so we're actually in a time where the better mouse trap actually will work. If you could come out with a great product that changes the economics and the paradigm or use case of an old legacy. So in a way by theory if you believe that, legacy shouldn't be a problem. >> You know and I certainly believe that. Having a kid who's in middle school at the moment, and the younger generation, to understand security way more than we ever used to and you know, this generation, this coming generation understands the difference between a password and a strong password and mobile be used as a second factor authentication so I think that the whole tide will rise here from a security perspective. I firmly believe that. >> Dave: You are an optimist. >> Well about government 'cause one thing that I liked about the talk here from the general was he was pretty straight talk and one of his points, I'm now generalizing and extrapolating out is that the HR side of government has to change in other words the organizational behavior of how people look at things but also the enterprise, we've heard that a lot in our Cloud coverage. Go back eight years when the Clouderati hit, oh DevOps is great but I can't get it through 'cause I've got to change my behavior of my existing staff. So the culture of the practitioners have to change. >> Bill: Yes, absolutely. >> 'Cause the new generation's coming. >> Oh absolutely, absolutely. I was speaking to a customer this morning who I won't mention and literally they told me that their whole staff has changed and they had to change their whole staff on this particular project around security because they found that the legacy thinking was there and they really wanted to move forward at a pace and they wanted to make changes that their legacy staff just wouldn't let 'em move forward with so basically, all of their staff had been changed and it was a memorable quote only because this company is a large organization and it's struggling with adopting new technologies and it was held back. It was not held back because of product or strategies, >> John: Or willingness. >> Or willingness. It was held back by people who were just concerned and wanted to stick to the old way of doing things and that has to change as well so I think you know, there's times will change and I think this is one of those times where security is one of those times where you got to push through change otherwise I mean I'm also a believer that security is a competitive advantage for an organization as well and if you stick with the past, you're not going to be able to compete in the future. >> Well, and bad user behavior will always trump good security. It was interesting to hear Jim Routh today talk about unconventional message and I was encouraged, he said, you know spoofing, we got DMARC, look alike domains, we got sink holes, display name deception, we've got, you know we can filter the incoming and then he talked about compromised accounts and he said user education and I went oh, but there's hope as an optimist so you've got technologies on the horizon to deal with that even right so you. >> I'm also concerned that the pace at which the consumer world is moving forward on security, online banking and even with Google and so forth that the new generation will come into the workforce and be just amazed how legacy the environments are right, 'cause the new generation is used to using you know, Google Cloud, Google Mail, Google everything and everything works, it's all integrated already and if they're coming to the workplace and that workplace is still using legacy technologies right, they're not going to be able to hire those people. >> Well I'll give you an example. When I went to college, I was the first generation, computer science major that didn't have to use punch cards and I was blown away like actually people did that like what, who the hell would ever do that? And so you know, I was the younger guy coming up, it was like, I was totally looking down. >> Dave: That's ridiculous. >> I would thank God I don't do that but they loved it 'cause they did it. >> I mean I've got the similar story, I was the first generation in the UK. We were the first Mac-Lab in the UK, our university had the first large Mac, Apple Macintosh Lab so when I got into the workplace and somebody put a PC in front of me, I was like hold on, where's the mouse, where's the windows, I couldn't handle it so I realized that right so I think we're at that kind of junction at the moment as well. >> We got two minutes left and I want to ask you kind of a question around the comment you just made a minute ago around security as a competitive advantage. This is really interesting, I mean you really can't say security is a profit center because you don't sell security products if you're deploying state of the art security practices but certainly it shouldn't be a cost center so we've seen on our CUBE interviews over the past year specifically, the trend amongst CCOs and practitioners is when pressed, they say kind of, I'm again generalizing the trend, we're unbundling the security department from IT and making it almost a profit center reporting to the board and or the highest levels, not like a profit center but in a way, that's the word they use because if we don't do that, our ability to make a profit is there so you've brought up competitive strategy, you have to have a security and it's not going to be underneath an IT umbrella. I'm not saying everyone's doing it but the trend was to highlight that they have to break out security as a direct report as if it was a profit center because their job is so critical, they don't want to be caught in an IT blanket. Do you see that trend and your comment and reaction to that statement? >> I see that trend but I see it from a perspective of transparency so I think that taking security out of the large umbrella of IT and given its own kind of foundation, own reporting structure is all about transparency and I think that modern organizations understand now the impact a breach can have to a company. >> John: Yeah, puts you out of business. >> Right, it puts you out of business right. You lose customers and so forth so I think having a security leader at the table to be able to describe what they're doing is giving the transparency for decision makers within the organization and you know, one of my other comments about it being a competitive advantage, I personally think let's take the banking arena, it's so easy to move from bank A to bank B and I personally think that people will stay with a certain bank if that bank has more security features and so forth. I mean you know, savings, interest rates going to be one thing and mortgage rates are going to be one thing but if all things are even. >> It's a product feature. >> It's a product feature and I think that again, the newer generation is looking for features like that, because they're so much more aware of the threat landscape. So I think that's one of the reasons why I think it's a competitive advantage but I agree with you, having more visibility for an organization is important. >> You can't make a profit unless the lights are on, the systems are running and if you have a security hack and you're not running, you can't make a profit so it's technically a profit center. Bill I believe you 100% on the competitive strategy. It certainly is going to be table stakes, it's part of the product and part of the organization's brand, everything's at stake. Big crisis, crisis of our generation, cyber security, cyber warfare for the government, for businesses as a buzz thing and business, this is the Centrify presented event underwritten by Centrify here in New York City. CyberConnect 2017, the CUBE's exclusive coverage. More after this short break. (electronic jingle)

>> Announcer: Live from San Francisco, it's theCube. Covering DevNet Create 2017, brought to you by Cisco. >> Hey welcome back everyone. Live here in San Francisco, exclusive coverage with theCube at Cisco's inaugural DevNet Create event. I'm John Furrier with my co-host Peter Burris. We're breaking down the new foray into the open source world with a big presence. Cisco expanding their DevNet core developer classic program and creating an open source model with collaboration, 90% of that activity is non-Cisco, really a good formula. And to help us this down is Krish Subramanian, Principal Analyst at Rishidot Research, formerly of Red Hat, formerly of a start up that was recently sold. Can't talk about it because it's not released yet. Friend of theCube, Cube alumni, part of the Clouderati, going way back. Krish, we've seen a lot of the waves of how cloud has evolved from the early days. I remember when EngineYard was a startup, Haruku was a couple guys, we were having our meetups. >> And the AWS was still like people who weren't able to make money. >> They were poo-pooing the hell out of it. It was EC2 and S3 with a couple different, I mean RightScale did everything back then, so think about the changes. And now Cisco here with the formula, they have the right formula, I got to give them props for that, doing it right. They're not trying to come in and do a land grab and sort of, "Ahh, we're Cisco", throwing their elbows around. Really doing it right, your thoughts? >> Yeah, definitely, come back to what some other legacy companies tried to do. Cisco didn't try to jump in and say, "Hey, we are going to run public cloud, compete with Amazon", and sort of take them down. They sort of waited for right moment, they initially started with the InterCloud, which will go much further, but when IoT came into picture, they were there right for that and they were there taking advantage of that. And with the increasing focus on developers, they are going right to capture the minds of developers. Especially for IoT, that is critical for Cisco to go-- >> Well, I'm really glad you're on with Peter. We have two analysts here who know the industry up and down, from every dimension. Of course, I'll add my color, but I want to ask both of you guys a couple questions. One, do you think Cisco's making the right moves by coming out and really focusing on their core competency, which is the network? They also bought AppDynamics, so that is a big purchase. So, you got apps meets infrastructure, programmable infrastructure, which means infrastructure as code. You really can't have infrastructure as code unless Cisco gets behind it, they're the leader. So, with IoT looming, this seems like a good move for Cisco. What do you think? >> Yeah, definitely, they are going in the right direction, so it's really like IoT's still in the early stages and we have to wait and see how it is going to evolve, but Cisco is very persistent. Especially I like the AppDynamics acquisition because they are clearly telling the world that we understand that applications are the future and developers need the right tools if they are to develop their apps on Cisco infrastructure. And with the emphasis on programmability, Cisco is taking right steps towards capturing developer attention and I hope with successful events like this, they will be able to get there. >> Peter, I want to go to you for a second because we just found out, in talking to Suzy, I did not know this, but in your previous life, when you ran research at META Group, folks may not know what that was, it was a big research firm at the time, you did some really similar work around the infrastructure developer. >> Yeah >> Okay, and our comment was, "What is old is now new". I got a degree in operating systems and computer science and that seems to be the model. What is this notion of an infrastructure developer? It was mentioned in the keynote today. Does that exist in this new scenario? Do you see it being viable? It seems like the messaging is tight. What is your reaction to this notion? You've done a lot of work on that. >> Well, as a way of answering the question John, and I'll play off of something you just said, when we talk about the degree with which this is relevant to Cisco, here's what I say. Everybody's always looking for what is it that's different from today, relative to yesterday? And there's a lot of things that are different. One of the most important ones is that yesterday's computing industry emphasized a priority set of models about how you do things. So, if you thought about the network, the network had a modeled structure. You sat there and you designed a network to be as relevant to as many things as possible. Same with the database. You sat there and you designed the database to be as relevant to whatever notion of applications. When we start talking about the new world, now what we're discovering is the data is going to force a reconfiguration. That's what big data is. In many respects, it's non-structured, non-modeled data, but we still want to do analytics. Same thing with the network. We want the network to evolve and emerge, have emerging characteristics that allow us to do things that we never really anticipated when we first put this stuff down. And so, the thing that an infrastructure developer, at least as we conceived it, and we were way ahead and probably wrong for that reason, but the way we conceive it is someone has to take some degree of responsibility for starting to characterize, fill that gap, characterize the services in the infrastructure that need to be made available to application developers in a way that makes coherent and consistent sense so that an application written to an infrastructure, in fact, may become a service to another application at some point in time in the future, because they make consistent assumptions about where they operate within that margin between the application and the infrastructure. >> John: Does that environment exist today, in your opinion? >> It does in certain places. It does in certain places. I think the whole notion of containers is making, in Kubernetes for example, is making some very powerful presumptions about how applications are going to interact with each other in the future. Now, we had SOA, but we also talked about Conway's law, it just never happened because the structure of the organizations that were using SOA just guaranteed you end up with monolithic, crap applications anyway. >> Explain Conway's law real quick for people who didn't-- >> Yeah, Conway's law is, it's been mentioned in theCube a couple times, basically, it's a suggestion that the structure of the application is a reflection of the structure of the organization that created it. And so, if you have a silo-based application development organization that's looking at the application for the finance group, or the marketing group, you are going to get a structured, siloed-oriented application, no matter what underlying technology you use. And that's been that way forever. >> And so, Krish, I want to get your thoughts because let's take that to the next level. So, one of the benefits of cloud was horizontally scalable model. That really kind of, to me, was the big ah-ha moment around software. And with DevOps, which is now called cloud native, which is the same thing, infrastructures code was, hey, I'm not not an infrastructure person. I just want it to be available for me and help me configure it out and programmable, as Suzy was saying. Okay, so if you take what Peter's saying about data, you've lived through the infrastructure as a service, platform as a service, SAS wars or evolution, however you want to look at it. And, now you see that kind of coalescing into SAS and infrastructure and PAS kind of folding away and kind of becoming less of a contentious conversation. But, now that same thing's happening with data, we believe. I mean I think, maybe he may disagree, but now data's now the new data layer. What's your thoughts on that? Because now, if you inject data into what was the old cloud stack, new things are really possible. >> Yeah, the thing is, data brings in a new dimensionality to what we are seeing right now. Everything from infrastructure to application, everything requires a mindset change in terms of seeing them as services. So, even if it is a physical hardware you are dealing with, you have to make it more service-like by putting an API in front of it. So, it's changing the way how we consume these services. But, data is the one that is bringing business value to customers. When you make data easily, sort of like, inter operate with the services, let's say call it, for lack of a better term, a services ocean kind of IT model you have in your enterprise. So, when you offer to bring data into it, it offers you a lot of opportunities which didn't exist in the past. It opens up new avenues in which you could manipulate data, make sense out of it and probably get more value than what you were getting in the past. >> What's interesting, if you bring micro services, if you think about Docker and Kubernetes, as you were saying, and you bring data now into the equation and the notion of microservices, you can apply all that microservices knowledge to data. That's what you were saying, from what I hear. Or concepts of-- >> Sort of like you will bring data close to take, earlier as Peter pointed out, data was in silos, representative of the organizational structure. So, by taking a more services approach and spreading the services across these siloed, PAS, siloed organization, you are bringing the entire organization into one single umbrella, sharing the data and thereby benefiting much more than what they were getting in the past. >> So John, in the opening, one of the things we talked about, and I'll repeat it here because he's probably going to see it and I'd love to hear your comments on it, is that we went to hardware-defined networking. And then we went to software-defined networking. And, Wikibon's working on a proposition and I'm sure we'll find reasons why it's not going to play out, but again, I'd like to hear your position, is what I'll call data-defined infrastructure. So, we were on theCube last week at Informatica and we heard a lot about the role that metadata's going to play in discovery of data resources and whatnot. I can imagine adding metadata when we start talking about dependencies and time and location and things that are relevant to how a network or how an infrastructure might configure itself to serve the data, becoming a feature of the programmability of the underlying infrastructure so that we end up, in five years, we do talk about data-defined infrastructure. Just as today, we're talking about software-defined infrastructure, where the infrastructure, literally, responds to the needs of the data because that, ultimately, is the most flexible way of think about this. What do you think? >> Yeah, I fully agree with you. In fact, data brings in a new dimensionality to the equation where applications, it's a morph based on what is there in the data. So, on-the-fly, the infrastructure needs to be modified. So, data sort of brings in a new way of doing infrastructure from what we have done in the past. I fully agree with the role of data in that and how, through the application, that influences how we deal with infrastructure. It does change completely. >> All right, so I got to ask you guys a question. Journeys, is journey to DevOps, journey to digital transformation, certainly has a lot of cloud, has a lot of open source involved with it. We're seeing the Ford CEO get fired, he hasn't been on the job for four years, right? So, you guys both work with end users and advise them, so what's your advise to CXOs where, hey the clock now is, I thought four years was short. It really should be seven to 10 on the transformation scale, but people are getting axed in their third year, so they got to show results. How does an executive make all this stuff happen in such a short time? Or should they just reset expectations? >> When the executive comes in, he, or she, not only should look at their core business, they should also think that they are a technology business and change the mindset completely. That mindset change needs a push from the top that's going to accelerate the change down the lane and I think the executive should think that they are becoming a CEO, or CXO, of a technology company, rather than a manufacturing company or a automobile company kind of thing. >> I think that's true, but look, we haven't studied what happened at Ford in detail because I'm sure there's some subtleties in there that we just don't fully understand, but on the surface, it sounds like he might have gotten a little bit of a raw deal, just from the pure standpoint of-- >> Well the stock was down 39%, so my guess is total Wall Street hatchet job, but -- >> Peter: Exactly. >> We don't know a lot of the politics, but Val Bercovici, who was on earlier, who has a lot of experience in organizations that net app since 97, or late 90s, brought an interesting point, you were saying earlier. Tesla creates a car that's a service. And so, to me, I hate to use the cliche, "Everything as a service", but essentially, that's what software's going to. So, where you make up a day, that's why I'm kind of poking at the data thing because I think you're on to som-- >> But it's the end of the day, Tesla still has to have a shop that bends metal, there's still some car manufacturing things that have to happen. And, in many respects, whether the old CEO is saying, well the value proposition is, someday this autonomous vehicle is going to happen, but right now, we still got to build cars that can compete in the world market. There's a lot of subtleties here. There are-- >> Yeah, but Tesla does upgrade with software over the network. >> For an 80 to $100,000 price point and there's about four billion people that are going to buy cars in the next five years that may, or may not, be able to buy a 80,000 to $100,000 car. So anyway, coming back to your core point, I think what it really means is that if you're in a situation where you don't have visibility in a how, some of these new, digital approaches are going to create value for your business, you're doomed. So, I think the first thing you got to do is you got to be very explicit. This is how digital technology's going to create value for my business, that's number one. And, be able to articulate that to, virtually, anybody that's capable of understanding it, including Wall Street. But, to do that, you have to step back and say, and what is it about that digital technology that's going to create value for my business. And the thing that's going to do it, or not, is the data. >> And the asset configuration around, the work around the assets. >> Especially the asset configuration, as it's defined by the data. And, increasingly, there's an economics terms, what we're going to see happen over the next 10 years is the asset specificities are going to go down dramatically. In other words, the ability to which, or the degree to which an asset can only be configured to a specific purpose. Software's going to change that dynamic dramatically. And that, in many respects, is one of the fundamental, underlying things that's going on here. But, at the end of the day, you have to say, what role is data going to play in my business? How am I going to articulate that role by saying that I'm going to incorporate digital in this way? And then, put in place a plan that demonstrates that you're competent about some of these things. And, if your shareholders don't like it, they're not going to like it from anybody, not just you. >> Krish, I want to get your thoughts on the Cloud Native Compute Foundation. Why it's so successful. Why, in your opinion, do you think, there just booming with vendors, a lot of cash infusion, a lot of activity, projects went from one, three, 10. We had Dan on earlier, a lot of growth in the cloud native. And then, also, Kubernetes as a, kind of as an emerging, really interesting dynamic, vis-a-vis multicloud. So why cloud native is so popular and the impact of Kubernetes. >> Cloud native is popular because of late, developers are understanding that the role we are building applications is not going to work in cloud. When containers came into picture, that really made it easy for developers to develop cloud native apps. It got them to take advantage of the more distributed nature of the underlying infrastructure. So, the containers are the main reason why cloud native has become the household term, even in the enterprises. That could be one of the reason why Cloud Native Foundation is popular. Because they came at the right time to host all these development projects and evangelize with the developers and take steps in that. As far as Kubernetes is concerned, it worked at Google's CE. If it can work at Google's CE and then solve Google's problem, it should be able to help-- >> If it's good for Google, it's good for me. That's their strategy. >> And also, people are slowly realizing that as more and more enterprises go to cloud, they are realizing that going with a single cloud provider may not solve all their problems because different cloud providers have different set of services. So, they want to take advantage of all that. But, they want a single pane of glass to manage everything. Kubernetes is this general to be that at the cloud-- >> Krish, thanks for coming on. Peter, thanks for the comments, I'll just wrap up the analyst segment by saying, in my opinion, I think Cisco's making a good move here because, to your point about Google and Kubernetes is, and that's one of many examples of great software being contributed to open source. And open source, for all the times I've been involved with it since I was in college, is this more great software coming to the table now than ever before and that's creating great innovation. So, combined with the cloud and cloud native and Kubernetes, a perfect storm of innovation is coming. And it's coming, not from vendors, it's coming from open source. And, so the smart vendors are putting their toe in the water and really figuring it out. And again, the-- >> Peter: It is coming from vendor support though. >> Well the vendors are smart by putting their people in open source as a proxy for contribution. That's the open source model. That, to me, is the new R&D. It's a new innovation strategy, coupled with some proprietary R&D. Not saying they should be going all open source. >> I agree with it completely. In fact, I would even go one step further and say open source is completely disrupting the traditional enterprise software in modern business. Think about someone like Capital One putting critical software as open source and disrupting all the vendors in the space, so it's-- >> Well, let's continue the conversation in studio or tomorrow. Again, open source is horizontally scaling as well. Great stuff, great projects. More exclusive coverage from the inaugural event for Cisco's DevNet Create after this short break. (up-tempo music) >> Hi, I'm April Mitchell and I'm the senior director of strategy--

(techno music) >> Announcer: It's the Cube, covering Sapphire Now 2017, brought to you by SAP Cloud Platform, and HANA Enterprise Cloud. >> Hey, welcome back to our exclusive SAP coverage here in our studio in Palo Alto, our 4,500 square foot studio. I'm John Furrier. Our three days, we're on third day, of Sapphire Now 2017 coverage. I'm on the phone with RJ Bibby, who's the SAP Global Alliance Manager for SAP. Handles the relationship. RJ, great to have you on the phone and thanks for calling in from Orlando, really appreciate it. >> RJ: You bet, John. Love the Cube. Love SiliconANGLE. We're great partners. It's been a great week and looking forward to talking to you about it. >> Tell us what's going on on the ground. First, give us the updates on day three. So, pretty much everyone's coming-- And always a great activities at night as well. So, SAP, a lot of business done during the day. They work hard. They play hard. But, day three, what's it like? What's settling in as the storylines for Sapphire 2017? >> RJ: Yeah, absolutely. So, you're starting to feel-- You've gone through about-- We're in our third tour. For the partner's community, we're in day four, cause we had the partner day. Last night was the big partner night. We actually NetApped with our partners with Cisco and KPIT did a private event at Universal Studios at the Jimmy Fallon Theme Park that was highly successful. What was great about today, was in the morning, we kicked off will Bill McDermott on stage with Kobe Bryant and Derek Jeter. And it was all about leadership and mentorship and experience in being in the business, whatever industry that you're in for so long and how you just stay creative, hungry, and passionate. And it was packed. One of the comments was they couldn't believe, on the day after the big party night of all the partners that you still have a lot of energy on the floor. Ultimately, it's still about data, which is great for our business that we can get into at NetApp. There's a lot of buzzword bingo going on here, John, all week, whether it's machine to machine, blocked chain, Cloud-- And at the end of it, it's still our customers who we've talked to a lot this week, and wow. What are we going to do with out data? How do we analyze it? And how do we improve that user experience based on all this data that we have? And I think that's one of the things that I see on the floor that's almost overwhelming with the amount of people, 30,000, all the partners. Just a lot of information. And lastly, I'll say, the good news with that is everybody is hungry for content. Whether it's a mini-theater, whether it's at one of the booths, interactions one-on-one, it's people are hungry for what is happening in the industry. And I think that's exciting for all of us. >> Well, we do our part and try and get as much coverage as possible, even if we are going to do it from Palo Alto. Question for you on NetApp. I mean, you guys have been-- The scuttlebutt in Silicon Valley is that NetApp is doing very well with the Hyperscale (mumbles). I know for a fact. I've interviewed the former CEO and others within NetApp. They were really on early with AWS. And obviously, AWS a big part of the announcement at Sapphire. So, you guys are kind of like getting these relationships with these key players. It's changed a little bit of the business model, or culture within NetApp. What's different about NetApp right now? With resect to some of the big players that you've had relationships with. It's not this new relationship with SAP. You guys have a deep relationship. What's changing as the CloudWave hits, as the DataWave hits? Those are the biggest waves hitting the world right now. How are you guys playing in that world? And share some insight there. >> RJ: Absolutely. Great question. 'Cause the world is going through digital transformation and so is NetApp. So, we are actually celebrating our 25th year as a company right now and we've been a traditional, global technology and data management company. And, the digital shift to Hybrid Cloud is where we're moving. So, specifically with partners like AWS, Microsoft and Azure, the Hyperscalers like CenturyLink, it's how we can help our customers really collect, transport, analyze, protect data, in whatever environment they want to hold their data. Whether it's On-Premises, if your in a Cloud, you can choose whatever Hyperscaler you want. You still have to deal with the data. And then, how do we manage it? How do we consume it? Where is dead data that needs to be taken out? So, data's the currency and with our data fabric methodology and tools from software, hardware, we're really able to help manage that complete life cycle, whether it's SAP, or any other type of environment we hold. So, the exciting thing for us, and the stock prices is showing that at an all time high, is what Bill McDermott said on Monday, in the keynote, or excuse me, Tuesday, "Data is the currency. "Our new mission statement is we're trying "to empower our customers to change the world with data." So, back to the buzzWord bingo comment I made earlier, we're still dealing with fact that we have all these great technologies: all these censors, machine-to-machine, On-Print to Cloud. At the heart of everything is the data and what you do with it. And I think that one of the things that NetApp does and the best in the world of, is we continually evolve digital transformations with the tools on how we deal with data. So, that's high level. >> How about the data dynamic? >> Data is the fundamental story, in my opinion. Cloud has been around, the Clouderati. We were part of that from the beginning. Now, Cloud is mainstream. Amazon stock prices looking like a hockey stick now, it's going straight up. But, that took years of development, right? I mean, you saw the Cloud formation coming, really, in the mid-2000s and then, really at 2008, -09, -10 was the foundational years and then the rest is history. Data's now going through the same thing. As people get over themselves and say, "Okay, big data's not a dupe. It's everything." IOT is certainly highlighting a lot of that. SAP has recognized that legacy systems have to move to a MultiCloud and certainly multi-vendor world in a whole new way. But, at the end of the day, you still got to store this stuff. So, that's your business. How are you keeping up with the moving train of data as is architecturally shifts in the marketplace? >> RJ: Great question. I think that we have some of the best minds in Silicon Valley. Again, been there 25 years. I think with the deep relationships we have with companies like SAP. On the front end, I think the one thing that we bring as a value to SAP is the consumption model, life exists. Through owning the data and the user experience, we're able to enable and accelerate the license consumption to the edge. Right from application in to the system. From an architectural standpoint, it still comes down to the thing that we are creating and blabs and launching around, like the data fabric, the tool system, really software. The software that can help from an analytical perspective affect the user experience. Everybody wants it live. And the other part is the data protection and the DR aspect of it. And I think that's another core competency that we're continuing to develop as a service for the customer. So, I hop I've answered your question. >> Yup. >> RJ: But if-- >> (mumbles) a bottom line then, why NetApps? Say I'm a customer. Okay, I get the SAP. Why should I go with you guys over new the Delium see powerhouse over there, or the White-Box Storage? >> RJ: At the end of the day, we are best at capitalizing the value of data in the Hybrid Cloud. Nobody can help collect, analyze, test, and do life-cycle management live like NetApp can. And that's the reason that we are going more upstream, selling like we say at EPC, always selling to the CXO. I think we're changing the landscape from a true storage company on the infrastructure side to a full end-to-end Hybrid Cloud data management portfolio company. And it's been proven by the acquisition of Salazar from bringing Slash in to the portfolio, our cloning, and snapshot capabilities. So, anywhere in the stack at any time during the day when you're looking live at your operations or your data that you can take live snapshots. Just so if there's a glitch from a data protection side, or there's some type of spike from a request on the ticketing side or demand side of your system. So, I think that's some of the things that we're differentiating. And that's the reason that the AWSs and the Azures and the SAPs are so excited about co-innovating together to again, improving the customer experience with their data. >> RJ, final question. What's the net-net? What's the bumper sticker for you this year at Sapphire 2017? What's the walk-away revelation? >> RJ: Well, I think from the SAP side, it's the revelation on the push of Leonardo. I think that SAP-- I'd like to see them continue to hone out the 'what' and the 'if' from partners with Leonardo from blotching in machine-to-machine and IOT. For us, it is the beautiful fact that now at the center of everything that SAP and the ecosystem is trying to do is around the data side of it and it's the actual currency. And the fact that we have kind of the leading-edge tools to enhance the customer experience with our platform for customers' and partners' data is really, really exciting for us. And we're excited. We're all psyched to be partnered with the Cube. And everything we do is in the Cloud. So, I'm here to help. >> Alright. >> RJ, thanks so much for takin' the time callin' in from Orlando. RJ Bibby, SAP Global Alliance Executive with NetApp. He runs the the relationship with NetApp. And again, it's been a long-term relationship. I remember takin' photos on my phone, way back in the day, years ago. So, not a new relationship and continued momentum. Congratulations and thanks for sharing the insight from Orlando. 'Preciate it. >> RJ: You bet. Thanks for the partnership. Have a great day. >> 'Kay, more coverage from the Cube in Palo Alto on SAP, Sapphire 2017 after this short break. Stay with us. (techno music)

>> Announcer: Live, from Silicon Valley, it's the Cube. Covering Google Cloud Next 17. (ambient music) >> Okay, welcome back everyone. We are here live in Palo Alto for a special two days of coverage of Google Next 2017 events in San Francisco. Sold out, 10,000 plus people. Yeah, really, an amazing turn of events. Amazon Web Services Reinvent had 36,000, Google's nipping at their heels, although different, we're going to break down the differences with Google versus Amazon because they're really two different things and again, this is Cube coverage here in Palo Alto studio, getting reaction. Sponsored by Intel, thanks, Intel, for allowing us to continue the wall-to-wall coverage of the key events in the tech industry. Our next guest is Val Bercovici who's the boardmember of the Cloud Native Compute Foundation, boardmember. >> That's right. >> Welcome back, you were here last week from Mobile World Congress, great to see you. Silicon contributor, what your reaction to the Google keynote, Google news? Not a lot of news, we saw the SAP, that was the biggest news and the rest were showcasing customers, most of the customers were G Suite customers. >> Yeah, exactly. So, I would say my first reaction is bit of a rough keynote, you know, there's definitely not as quit as much polish as Microsoft had in their heyday and of course, Amazon nowadays in the Cloud era. But what's interesting to me is there's the whole battle around empathy right now. So, the next gen developers and the Clouderati talk about user empathy and that means understanding the workflow of the user and getting the user to consume more of your stuff, you know, Snapchat gets user empathy for the millennial generation but anybody else. Facebook as well. So, you see Google, we emphasize, even the Google Twitter account, it emphasizes developer productivity and they have pretty strong developer empathy. But what AWS has, Amazon with AWS is enterprise empathy, right, they really understand how to package themselves and make themselves more consumable right now for a lot of mainstream enterprises, they've been doing this for three, four years at their Reinvent events now. Whereas Google is just catching up. They've got great developer empathy but they're just catching up on enterprise empathy. Those are the main differences I see. >> Yeah, I think that's an important point, Val, great, great point, I think Amazon certainly has, and I wrote this in my blog post this morning, getting a lot of reaction from that, actually, and some things I want to drill down on the network and security side. Some Google folks DMing me we're going to do that. But really, Amazon's lead is way out front on this. But the rest, you know, call 'em IBM, not in any particular, IBM, Oracle, Google, SAP, others, put Salesforces, we're talking Sass and Adobe, they're all in this kind of pack. It's like a NASCAR, you know, pack and you don't know who's going to slimshot around and get out there. But they all have their own unique use cases, they're using their own products to differentiate. We're hearing Google and again, this is a red flag for me because it kind of smells like they're hiding the ball. G Suite, I get the workplace productivity is a Cloud app, but that's not pure Cloud conversations, if you look at the Gartner, Gartner's recent, last report which I had a chance to get a peek at, there's no mention of Sassifications, Google G Suite's not in there, so the way Cloud is strictly defined doesn't even include Sass. >> Yeah. >> If you're going to include Sass, then you got to include Salesforce in that conversation or Adobe or others. >> Exactly. >> So, this is kind of an optical illusion in my mind. And I think that's something that points to Google's lack of traction on customers in the enterprise. >> This is where behind the scenes, Kubernetes, is so important and why I'm involved with the the CNCF. If anything, the first wave of Clouded option particularly by enterprise was centered around the VM model. And you know, infrastructure's a service based on VMs, Amazon, AWS is the king of that. What we're seeing right now is developers in particular that are developing the next generation of apps, most of them are already on our phones and our tablets and our houses and stuff, which is, you know, all these Echo-style devices. That is a container-based architecture that these next gen applications are based on. And so, Kubernetes, in my mind, is really nothing more than Google's attempt to create as much of a container-based ecosystem at scale so that the natural home for container-based apps will be GCP as opposed to AWS. That's the real long term play in why Google's investing so heavily in Kubernetes. >> Is that counterintuitive? Is that a good thing? I mean, it sounds like they're trying to change the goalpost, if you will, to change the game because we had Joe Arnold on, the founder of Swiftstack and you know, ultimately, you know, Clouds are Clouds and inter-Clouding and multi-Cloud is important. Does Kubernete actually help the industry? Or is that more Google specific in your mind? >> I think it will help the industry but the industry itself is moving so rapidly, we're seeing server-less right now and functions of service, and so, I think the landscape is shifting away from what we would think of as either VM or container-based infrastructure service towards having the right abstractions. What I'm seeing is that, really, even the most innovative enterprises today don't really care about their per minute or per hour cost for a cycle of computer, a byte of, you know, network transferred or stored. They care about big table, big quarry, the natural language processing, visual search, and a whole category of these AI based applications that they want to base their own new revenue-generating products and services based on. So, it's abstraction now as a new battlefield. AWS brings that cult of modularity to it, they're delivering a lot of cool services that are very high level Lambda centered based on really cool modularity, whereas Google's doing it, which is very, very elegant abstraction. It's at the developer level, at the technical level, that's what the landscape is at right now. >> Are you happy with Google's approach because I think Google actually doesn't want to be compared to AWS in a way. I mean, from what I can see from the keynote... >> Only by revenue. (laughs) >> Well, certainly, they're going to win that by throwing G Suite on it but, I mean, this is, again, a philosophy game, right? I mean, Andy Jassy is very customer focused, but they don't have their own Sass app, except for Amazon which they don't count on the Cloud. So, their success is all about customers, building on Amazon. Google actually has its own customer and they actually include that in, as does Microsoft with Office 365. >> Yeah, that's the irony, is if we go back to enterprise empathy I think it's Microsoft has that legacy of understanding the enterprise better than all the others. And they're beginning to leverage that, we're definitely seeing, as you're sliding comfortably to a number two position behind AWS, but it really does come back to, you know, are you going to lead with a propeller head lead in technology which Google clearly has, they've got some of the most superior technology, we were rattling off some the speeds and feeds that one of their product managers shared with you this morning. They've had amazing technology, that's unquestioned. But they do have also is this reputation of almost flying in rarefied air when it comes to enterprises. >> What do you mean by that? >> What I mean by that is that most enterprise IT organizations, even the progressive ones, have a hard time relating to Google technology. It's too far out there, it's too advanced, in some cases, they just can't understand it. They've never been trained in college courses on it or even post-grad courses on it. MBA is older than three years old, don't even reference the Cloud. So, there's a lot of training, a lot of knowledge that has to be, you know, conducted on the enterprise side. AWS is packaged, that technology there is the modularity in such a way that's more consumable. Not perfect, but more consumable than any other Cloud render and that's why, with an early head start, they've got the biggest enterprise traction today. >> Yeah, I mean, and I'm really bullish on Google, I love the company, I've been following them since '98, a lot of friends here at Palo Alto, a lot of Googlers living in my neighborhood, they're all around us. Larry Page, seen him around town. Great, great company and very, always been kind of like an academic, speed of academic. Very strong, technically, and that is, clearly, they're playing that card, "We have the technology." So, I would just say that, to counter that argument would be if Google, I'm Google, I'm on the team, the guy in green and you know, lookit, what I want to do is, we want to be the intel for the Cloud. So, the hard and top is we don't really care if people are trained, should be so easy to use, training doesn't matter. So, I mean, that's really more of an arrogant approach, but I don't think Google's being arrogant in the Cloud. I think that ship has sailed, I think Google has kind of been humbled in the sense, in recognizing that the enterprise is hard, they're checking the boxes. They have a partner program. >> Yeah, you're right, I mean, if you take a look at their customers today, you've got Spotify, and Snap, and Evernote, and you know, Pokemon Go and Niantic, all of the leading edge technology companies that have gone mainstream that are, you know, startup oriented Snap, of course. They're on Google Cloud. But that's not enough, you know, the enterprise, I did a seminar just last week promoting Container World with Jim Forge from ADP. The enterprise is not homogeneous, the enterprise is complicated. The L word legacy is all over, what they have to budget and plan for. So, the enterprise is just a lot more complicated than Google will acknowledge right now. And I believe if they were to humanize some of their advanced technology and package it and price it in such a way that AWS, you know, where they're seeing success, they'll accelerate their inevitable sort of leap to being one of those top three contenders. >> So, I'm just reading some of my, I'm putting together because for the Google folks, I'm going to interview them, just prepping for this, but just networking alone, isolating Cloud resources. That's hard, right? So, you know, virtual network in the Cloud, Google's got the virtual network. You get multiple IP addresses, for instance, ability to move network interfaces and IPs between instances, and AS networking support. Network traffic logging, virtual network peering, manage NAT gateways, subnet level filtering, IP V stick support, use any CIDR including RC 1918. Multiple network interface instances, I mean, this is complicated! (laughs) It's not easy so, you know, I think the strategy's going to be interesting to see how, does Google go into the point to point solution set, or they just say, "This is what we got, take it or leave it," and try to change the game? >> That's where they've been up until now and I don't think it's working because they have very formidable competitors that are not standing still. So, I think they're going to have to keep upping their game, again, not in terms of better technology but in terms of better packaging, better accessibility to their technology. Better trust, if you will, overseas. Cloud is a global game, it's not US only. And trust is so critical, there's a lot of skepticism in Europe today with the latest Wikileaks announcements, or Asia Today around. Any American based Cloud provider truly being able to isolate and protect my citizen's data, you know, within my borders. >> I think Google Cloud has one fatal flaw that I, looking at all the data, is that and the analysis that we've been looking at with Bookie Bontine and our research is that there's one thing that jumps out at me. I mean, the rest are all, I look at as, you know, Google's got such great technologies, they can move up fast, they can scale up to code. But the one thing that's interesting is their architecture, the way they handle their architecture is they can't let customers dictate data where data's stored. That is a huge issue for them. And if, to your point, if a user in Germany is using an app and it's got to stay in Germany. >> This is back to the empathy disconnect, right? As an abstraction layer for a developer, what I want is exactly what Google offers. I don't want to care as a developer where the bits and bytes are stored, I want this consistent, uniform API, I want to do cool stuff with the data. The operation side, particularly within legal parameters, regulatory parameters, you know, all sorts of other costs and quality assurance parameters, they really care about where that data is stored, and that's where having more enterprise empathy, and their thinking, and their offerings, and their pricing, and their packaging will leapfrog Google to where they want to be today. >> Val Bercovici, great analysis, I mean, I would totally agree just to lock that in, their developer empathy is so strong. And their operational one needs to be, they got a blind spot there where they got to work on that. And this is interesting because people who don't know Google are very strong operations, it's not like they don't have any ops chops. (Val laughs) They're absolutely in the five nines, they are awesome operations. But they've been operations for themselves. >> Exactly. >> So, that's the distinction you're getting at, right? >> Absolutely. >> Okay, so the next question I got to ask you is back to the developer empathy, 'cause I think it's a really big opportunity for Google. So, pointing out the fatal flaw in my opinions in the data locality thing. But I think the opportunity for Google to change the game, using the developer community opportunity because you mentioned the Kubernetes. There is a huge, open source, I don't want to say transformation but an evolution to the next generation, you're starting to see machine learning and AI start to tease out the leverage of not just data now. Data's become so massive now, you have data sets. That can be addressable and be treated like software programs. So, data as code becomes a new dynamic with AI. So, with AI, with open source, you're seeing a lot of activity, CNCF, the Cloud Native Compute Foundation, folks should check that out, that's an amazing group, analytics foundation. This is an awesome opportunity for Google to use Kubernetes as saying, "Hey, we will make orchestration of application workloads." >> Absolutely. >> This is something, Amazon's been great with open source, but they don't get a lot of love... >> Amazon has a blind spot on containers, let's not, you know, let's not call, you know, let's call it the speed of speed, let's not, you know, beat around the bush, they do have a blind spot around containers. It is something they strategically have to get a hold of, they've got some really interesting proprietary offerings. But it's not a natural home for a Docker workflow, it's not a natural home for a Kubernetes workflow yet. And it's something they have to work on and AI as a use case could not be more pertinent to business today because it's that quote, you know, "The future is here "but unevenly distributed." That's exactly where AI is today, the businesses that are figuring it out are really leaping ahead of their competitors. >> We're getting some great tweets, my phone's blowing up. Val, you've got great commentary. I want to bring up, so, I've been kind of over the top with the comment that I've been making. It's maybe mischaracterized but I'll say it again. There seems to be a Cold War going on inside the communities between, as Kubernetes have done, we've seen doc, or we've seen Docker Containers be so successful in this service list, server list vision, which is absolutely where Cloud Native needs to be in that notion of, you know, separating out fiscal gear and addressability, making it completely transparent, full dev ops, if you will. To who's going to own the orchestration and where does it sit on the stack? And with Kubernetes, to me, is interesting is that it tugs at some sacred cows in the container world. >> Yes. >> And it opens up the notion of multi-Cloud. I mean, assume latency can be solved at some point, but... >> It's actually core religion, what impressed me about he whole Kubernetes community, and community is its greatest strength, by the way, is the fact that they had a religion on multi-Cloud from day one. It wasn't about, "We'll add it later "'cause we know it's important," it's about portability and you know, even Docker lent that to the community. Portability is just a number one priority and now portability, at scale, across multiple Clouds, dynamically orchestrated, not through, you know, potential for human error, human interventions we saw last week. That the secret sauce there to stay. >> I think not only is, a Cold War is a negative connotation, but I think it's an opportunity to be sitting in the sun, if you will, on the beach with a pina colada because if you take the Kubernetes trend that's got developer empathy with portability, that speaks to what developers want, I want to have the ability to write code, ship it up to the network, and have it integrate in nicely and seamlessly so, you know, things can self-work and do all that. And AI can help in all those things. Connecting with operational challenges. So, what is, in your mind, that intersection? Because let's just say that Kubernetes is going to develop a nice trajectory which it has now and continues to be a nice way to galvanize a community around orchestration, portability, etc. Where does that intersect with some of the challenges and needs for operational effectiveness and efficiency? >> So, the dirtiest secret in that world is data gravity, rigtht? It's all well and fine to have workload portability across, you know, multiple instances and a cluster across multiple Clouds, so to speak. But data has weight, data has mass and gravity, and it's very hard to move particularly at scale. Kubernetes only in the last few releases with a furious pace in evolution, one four, one five, has a notion of provisioning persistent volumes, this thing they affectionately called pet sets that are not a stateful sets, I love that name. >> Cattle. >> Exactly. (laughs) So, Google is waking up and Kubernetes, I should say, in particular is waking up to the whole notion of managing data is really that last mile problem of Cloud portability and operational maturity. And planning around data gravity and overcoming where you can data gravity through meta-operational procedures is where this thing is going to really take off. >> I think that's where Google, I like Google's messaging, I like their posture on machine learning AI, I think that's key. But Amazon has been doing AI, they've got machine learning as a service, they've had Kineses for a while. In fact, Redshift and Kineses were their fastest growing services before Aurora became the big thing that they had. So, I think, you know, they're interested in the jets, with the trucks, and the snowmobile stuff. So I think certainly, Amazon's been doing that data and then rolling in as some sort of AI. >> And they've been humanizing it better, right? I can relate to some of Amazon's offering and sometimes I have it in the house. You know, so, the packaging and just the consumerability of these Amazon services today is ahead of where Google is and Google arguably has the superior technology. >> Yeah, and I think, you know, I was laying out my analysis of Google versus Amazon but I think it's not fair to try to compare them too much because Google is just making their opening moves on the chessboard. Because they had Diane Green, got to give her credit, she's really starting behind. And that's been talked about but they are serious, they're going to get there. The question is what does an enterprise need to do? So, your advice to enterprise would be what? Stick with the use cases that are either Google specific apps or Cloud Native, where do you go, how do you...? >> I would say to remember the lock-in days of the Linux vendors and even Microsoft in their heyday and definitely think multi-Cloud, you know, Cloud first is fine. But think, we need data first in a Cloud before I think a particular Cloud first. Always keep your options open, seek the highest levels of abstraction, particularly as you're innovating early on and fast failing in the Cloud. Don't go low right away, go low later on when you're operationalizing and scaled and looking to squeeze efficiencies out of a new product or service. >> Don't go low, you mean don't go low in the stack? >> Don't go low in the stack, exactly. Start very high in the stack. >> What would be an example? >> Lambda, you know, taking advantage of, if we bring in Kineses, IOT workflows, all sorts of sensor data coming in from the Edge. Don't code that for efficiency day one and switch to Kafka or something else that's more sophisticated, but keep it really high level as events triggering off, whether it's the IOTICK in the sensor inputs or whether it's S3 events, Dynamo, DB events. Write your functions that are very, very high level. >> Yeah. >> Get the workflows right. Pay a bit more money up front, pay premium for the fast... >> Well, there's also Bootstraps and the Training Channel Digimation, so, with Google, pick some things that are known out there. But you mentioned IOT and one of the things I was kind of disappointed in the keynote today, there wasn't much talk about IOT. You're not seeing IOT in the Google story. >> That may come up in tomorrow's keynote, it may come up tomorrow in a more technical context. But you're right, it's an area both Agar and AWS have a monster of a lead right now, as they've had really good SDKs out there to be able to create workflows without even being an expert in some of the devices that you know, you might own and maintain. >> Google's got some differentiation, they've got something, I'll highlight one that I like that I think is really compelling. Tensor flow. Tensor flow as got a lot of great traction and then Intel is writing chips with their Skylake product that actually runs much faster silicon... >> What was that, Nvidia? You know, it's a GPU game as much as a CPU game when it comes to machine learning. And it's just... >> What does that mean for you? I mean, that's exciting, you smile on that, I get geeked out on that because if you think about that, if you can have a relationship between the silicon and software, what does it mean from an impact standpoint? Do you think that's going to be a good accelerant for the game? >> Massive accelerant, you know, and this is where we get into sort of more rarefied air with Elon Musk's quote around the fact we'll need universal income for society. There a lot of static tasks that are automated today. There's more and more dynamic tasks now that these AI algorithms, through machine learning, can be trained to conduct in a very intelligent manner. So, more and more task based work all over the world, including in a robotic context but also call centers, stock brokerage, for example, it's been demonstrated that AI ML algorithms are superior to humans nine times out of ten in terms of recommending stocks. So, there's a lot of white collars, while it's blue collared work that just going to be augmented and then eliminated with these technologies and the fact that you have major players, economies at scales such as Intel and Nvidia and so forth accelerating that, making it affordable, fast, low power in certain edge context. That's, you know, really good for the industry. >> So, day one of two days of coverage here with Google, just thoughts real quick on what Google needs to do to really conquer the enterprise and really be credible, viable, successful, number two, or leader in the enterprise? >> I'm a big fan, you know, I've had personal experiences with fast following as opposed to leading and innovating sometimes in terms of getting market traction. I think they should unabashedly, unashamedly examine what Microsoft or what Amazon are doing right in the Cloud. Because you know, simple things like conducting a bit more of a smooth keynote, Google doesn't seem to have mastered it yet, right now in the Cloud space. And it's not rocket science, but shamelessly copying what works, shamelessly copying the packaging and the humanization that some of the advanced technologies that Amazon and Microsoft have done in particular. And then applying their technical superiority, you know, their uptime availability advantages, their faster networks, their strong consistency which is a big deal for developers across their regions. Emphasizing their strengths after they package and make their technology more consumable. As opposed to leading where the tech specs. >> And you have a lot of experience in the enterprise, table stakes out there that are pretty obvious that they need to check the boxes on, and would be what? >> A very good question, I would say, first and foremost, you really have to focus on more, you know, transparent pricing. Think something that is a whole black art in terms of optimizing your AWS usage in this industry that's formed around that. I think Google has and they enact blogs advertising a lot of advantages they have in the granularity, in the efficiency of their auto scaling up and down. But businesses don't really map that, they don't think of that first even though it can save them millions of dollars as they do move to Cloud first approaches. >> Yeah and I think Google got to shake that academic arrogance, in a way, that they've had a reputation for. Not that that's a bad thing, I'll give you an example, I love the fact that Google leads a lot of price performance on many levels in the Cloud, yet their SLAs are kind of wonky here and there. So, it's like, okay, enterprises like SLAs. You got to nail that. And then maybe keep their price a little high here, it can make more money, but... So, you were saying, is that enterprise might not get the fact that it's such a good deal. >> It's like enterprise sales 101, you talk about, you know, the operational benefits but you also talk about financial benefits and business benefits. Catching into those three contexts in terms of their technical superiority would do them a world of good as they seek more and more enterprise opportunities. >> Alright, Val Bercovici, CTO, also CTO, and also on the board of the Cloud Native Compute Foundation known as CNCF, a newly formed organization, part of the Linux Foundation. Really looking at the orchestration, looking at the containers, looking at Kubernetes, looking at a whole new world of app enablement. Val, thanks for the company, great to see you. Turning out to be guest contributor here on the Cube studio, appreciate his time. This is the Cube, two days of live coverage. Hope to have someone from Google on the security and network side coming in and calling in, we're going to try to set that up, a lot of conversations happening around that. Lot of great stuff happening at Google Next, we've got all the wall-to-wall coverage, reporters on the ground in San Francisco as well as analysts. And of course, in studio reaction here in Palo Alto. We'll be right back. (ambient music)

>> Voiceover: Live, from Orlando, Florida, it's theCube, covering SAPPHIRE NOW. Headline sponsored by SAP Hana Cloud, the leader in Platform-as-a-Service. With support from Console Inc. the Cloud internet company. Now, here's your host, John Furrier. >> Hey, welcome back everyone. We are here live at SAPPHIRE NOW, SAP's big user conference. This is theCube, SiliconANGLE's flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the signals from noise. Day three of wall-to-wall coverage, this is day three. We had awesome interviews, go to youtube.com/siliconangle and look for the playlist of SAPPHIRE NOW, it'd be great, great videos out there. We would not be here if it wasn't for our sponsors, so shout out to SAP Hana Cloud Platform, Console Inc., Console Cloud, the Interconnect Companies, for interconnecting the clouds, and, of course, EMC Capgemini, thanks for your support. Our next guest is Uddhav Gupta, who's the Global Vice President for the SAP Platform-as-a-Service. Great to see you, we'll shake hands. >> Good to see you, John. >> So, we have been so excited about Platform-as-a-Service going back, man, almost when the Clouderati started. You know, almost seven years ago, when we started SiliconANGLE. We saw pre-OpenStack, Amazon was already on a trajectory, OpenStack kind of, Rackspace kind of bootstraps that, and then the rest is history, now you have Cloud Foundry, all this stuff is coming together. So, you guys have a big part of that developer ecosystem. >> Yes, we do. >> What do you do for the platforms-of-service for SAP, and what are some of the things you're working on, what should the audience know about that you're working on. >> Absolutely, so, first of all, thank you for having me on the show. We at Hana Cloud Platform, is basically a idea that we came up with to help our customers solve the biggest problem of complicated application development. And when we spoke to the customers, the typical thing that came back to us is, I want to actually integrate applications, right? I have incipient backing systems, I have non-incipient backing systems, how to bring these two systems together? I typically build an application, a mash-up for the audience. The second scenario that we basically solve, is, a lot of customers came back and said, we want to just extend certain business processes that are running on the back end, and you know, build applications that actually sit and extend these processes. So, we started looking at all of that, we said, okay, it's very clear, that we want to simplify the core. But we also wanted to go out and provide a simplified application development stack, so that people actually go out and build these applications. And that's what Hana Cloud Platform is all about. >> So the approach is not so much come from the infrastructure of the service, but come down from the app. Okay, well Larry Ellison, at Oracle, he said as well, well, you come up from the hardware, they got SUN, and then he comes down from the top, and their middleware is Oracle, a similar approach. And that's a great message, because that's his focus, is obviously app, but they got SUN, so they can kind of clean and they can book in the middleware, if you will, or past layer. Um, how do you guys compare vis-a-vis that, because you don't have any hardware. >> Correct. >> You got partners. >> Correct. >> Um, like EMC, then you got the Vblock going back to the day. >> Exactly. >> How do you answer to that? >> So we have always been agnostic in terms of hardware, agnostic in terms of infrastructure. So the angle that we're going with is just like how we did with Hana. We said, we'll build the Hana software, and we'll have it available on multiple different platforms. We are doing the same thing with the Hana Cloud Platform. Today, we offered it off our own SAP data center. The road map is to basically partner with a number of infrastructure providers, like Amazon, like Azio, like other third-party hosting providers-- >> You'd okay the computers? >> Yeah, completely. So if you're actually looking at going ahead and deploying our software on Cloud Form Read, enabling it on OpenStack, so we can actually now take it to all of our infrastructure partners, and use them as suppliers. That way, we can actually concentrate on building a business Platform-as-a-Service layer, concentrate on building the mechanics. Building the intelligence of the Platform-as-a-Service, and leave the infrastructure game to the guys who are really good at that. Which are Amazon, Azio, and a few others. >> So, you guys have Hana, okay, Hana database as well, the platform is Hana Cloud Platform, so, back to the Oracle thing, and I bring up Oracles there, we can relate to that. They claim performance advantage, so Oracle on Oracle, with SUN, has been optimized. It's almost end-to-end stacked. You guys worried about performance at all? Can you share your thoughts on how you answer that? >> Of course, I mean, if you look at the whole team of Sapphire here, that's been about running a business life. You can't run a business life without having performance. So performance is the core of everything that we're doing. Whether it's running a database that's high-speed. Whether it's simplifying the entire application stack, the S/4Hana, running at high-speed. It's also about an innovation cycle around it that needs to also be high-speed. And when we're building the Hana Cloud Platform, we've actually look into those elements continuously, and saying, how can we help application development also run at high-performance? This is around the computer. This is around the database. This is around the tool set that we actually providing our partner ecosystem, as well as the customers, to build custom applications at really high speeds. >> Okay, talk about, um, the Hana Cloud Platform. Expand, and take a minute to explain, because, I think that, you know, seeing on the opening day, you guys aren't getting the kind of credit in the press and in the market, although you're being successful, um, as the cloud. Some people say, oh they have nothin'. Platform-as-a-service, it's just SAP ware. Answer that, explain, take a minute to explain, what you guys have done, in the market, how it's different, and then it does work for non-SAP customers. So, kind of dice that out for us, share that. Take a minute to explain that. >> Absolutely, going to Sapphire, a lot of our customers and a lot of the press, media, also thought that Hana Cloud Platform is just for SAP. Now, after two days of conversations with customers, they quickly realize, that we're not just, like, for SAP, we could actually be the Force.com or the application platform for merging data from SAP and non-SAP, right? So that's the first revelation a lot of the customers have got. I find many of the customers that had this, aha moment, when I was talking to them, and they're like, "Oh, I can actually solve a number of issues with this. "I can actually go out and provide a single "application development layer across "my entire backing system, which is SAP and non-SAP." So we've seen a lot of that reaction. >> So that's an integration game, too. And the thing I would share were the folks at my observation of theCube, and I'd love to get your thoughts on this, is that, it's not trying to win SAP end-to-end. SAP plays well wherever the customer desires it, right? So if they go to ERP, or not ERP. If you want to come and and do, say, HR stuff. And success factors. You're still going to have a little bit of SAP, but this is application layer at the Hana Cloud Platform, is for the rest of the enterprise. It's not to lock in for future SAP, right? >> It's not a lock-in story here, right? I'll give you an example. We are doing some really crazy stuff on Hana Cloud Platform, right. You know the Superbowl that took place in San Francisco. >> Of course, Superbowl 50. >> SAP had a whole fan energy zone set up there, where people were actually playing games. And we are continuously streaming data from those games into the Hana Cloud Platform, right? Now, nothing to do with SAP, nothing to do with anything that even closely SAP's associated with. It's fan data coming to the Hana Cloud Platform. And people seeing analytics on top of it, right? We're having other partners also do similar stuff. I'm talking to partners that are basically going ahead and serving the utility companies, but more on the utility to the consumers piece. With the outlying customers to basically go and create a aggregated view of the consumptions, right? And this is a look at something not what SAP's used to doing. Bringing in the Hana Cloud Platform is allowing them to do such things. >> Alright, so my final question really is around Apple. So, how does the Apple deal affect you guys in particular. Because, you guys can't hide in the shadows anymore. You got to go for- go big or go home with Hana Cloud Platform. So does that change your game in terms if you go to market, is your budget increased? I mean you got, the game is on. The Apple deal puts the pressure on you guys to take that relationship, and use it as a way to get into, obviously means for your development. Swift is a great programming language, got a lot of traction. So tell me, I mean, is it all in now? I mean Apple is Apple that, hey, you got to go for it. Go big or go home. >> Yeah, so, it's definitely go big. The other thing that we have with this whole Apple relationship that we announced, has also made a very beautiful point, if you think about it, right? There're certain applications that can be web applications that you can still render on a mobile device, sure. You can make them extremely responsive, you can do all of that kind of stuff. But the beauty of the IOS and the relationship that we built with Apple, it allows you to start now building native applications that run on the mobile, but consume all the technical services that we have, are made available in the Hana Cloud Platform. >> And the data's critical there, I mean, SAP's got ARP data, systems of record data. And now you're expanding out to other engagement data, non-SAP data by the way. >> Exactly, and all the other technology services that we're basically providing in the Hana Cloud Platform with it's content, with it's data, with it's integration, a whole bunch of stuff, right? >> So is your budget doubled? >> Well the budget is not doubled, definitely right. >> Yeah but you have to, you have to run now so it's pretty clear for you guys, right? I mean, explain, is that the mandate? I mean, because you guys have been kind of like, silent run- I say silent run, not stealth, but I mean you been, chipping away at it, it's been a ground game for SAP Hana Cloud, haven't seen a lot of stuff out there in the market. It seems to me that now, the pressure's on. So go knock it out of the park, right? >> Absolutely, the focus on basically building mobile applications, specific mobile applications, for certain industries, is definitely coming back. So a lot of investment is happening in that space for sure, from SAP, from Apple, also from our partners. So that investment is definitely happening. There's also a lot of traction that we are basically putting on marketing that uh, concept out, so that our partner, the customers also get a true pat forward and a grain in how they should actually invest their resources. >> What's you priorities this year? Education, onboarding new-- >> Our priorities this year is getting a whole bunch of developers to actually start using the Hana Cloud Platform. To that extent, what we've actually done is we've gone ahead and created open SAP courses that allows anybody to access education on Hana Cloud Platform, absolutely free. With the IOS relationship we've gone out and basically created IOS academy. A lot of people understand how to build IOS apps, with the Hana Cloud Platform, thereby bridging the 150,000 developers that are already in the Hana Cloud Platform, the two million developers of the SAP network, and the 30 million developers of the Apple world, all coming together to start building stuff on the Hana Cloud Platform. >> I'm sure you've got some internal debates, like percentage of penetration within that 35 million, I mean, not everyone's going to be interested in enterprise programming but, a good slice will look to build white spaces. >> Absolutely, because, guess what? You can only earn that much money by building consumer apps. The moment you are a developer and you really want to earn serious money, you basically start looking at building enterprise apps. >> Final final question, because I have one more, this is good conversation, uh, where are the white spaces? So the developers that are watching, or people that are interested, in innovating on SAP, where do you guys see the white spaces that are low-hanging fruit right now, that someone can get a position in here and work? >> So, there're a number of those. Uh, the very first one around building industry-specific apps, right? To a large part of the industry, UAX was our SAP gooey. But now, everybody want to actually start digitizing those processes. Nobody actually wants to go into a static screen, or a pre-defined screen. They want it to be very responsive to what they're doing at the moment. It's alive, right? So, building those apps is definitely a white space. The second big white space is around building industry content. What I mean by industry content is, a platform can basically provide you all the platform capabilities that are required. But you need a lot more of the content and the technologies services. This could be matching learning algorithms, this could be actually predictive algorithms, this could be data content that is coming in. Building and providing data as a micro-service within the platform is something that is very interesting for us. >> Thanks so much for coming on theCube, I'll give you the final word Uddhav Gupta, Global Vice President of SAP, Platform-as-a-Service. What's the vibe of the show, you mentioned, what's the hallway conversations that you're hearing. You know, what's going on with the night, certainly at night with all those events going on, last night I went to bed early, watched the Warriors game. Win by 30-something points. Night before I was out til 1:30 doing some networking to Lloyd Bardy, S. Ensher, EY, seeing all the SAP people. Lot of chatter, what are you hearing? What are you hearing in the hallways? >> The vibe is very very positive. People are starting to finally understand how we are bringing all the Cloud acquisitions that we made together. People are starting to understand that they have to move to the Cloud. So the whole thing about the myth, whether we move or do not move to the Cloud, it's now kind of settled down. People are understanding where SAP is with integration, where SAP is with moving to the Cloud. But, the beauty is, last year, same time, the questions I was getting, was is any of this real? The question that we're getting now is, how do I engage into it? How do I start doing it? So that transition's happened really beautifully. Whether you think about S/4Hana, whether you think about Hana Cloud Platform, just in general, what's happening in the past well is helping that quite a lot. >> You guys have done a good job and you've been kind of transitioning, now it's real. You got a straight-and-narrow for developers. I'm looking forward to tracking you guys and seeing the progress. Great hallway conversations, of course the biggest conversation was that Reggie Jackson was on theCube, on day one and he was awesome, also the great executives come on with great conversation. Thanks so much for sharing your insight on theCube, Hana Cloud Platform-as-a-Service. We are live here in Orlando, you're watchin' theCube.