>>Welcome back to the cubes coverage here in Seattle for AWS marketplace seller conference, the combination of the Amazon partner network, combined with the marketplace from the AWS partner organization, the APO and John Forer host of the queue, bringing you all the action and what it all means. Our next guest is Trisha kata, Malva, chief strategy officer at DataRobot. Great to have you. Thanks for coming on. >>Thank you, John. Great to be here. >>So DataRobot obviously in the big data business data is the big theme here. A lot of companies are in the marketplace selling data solutions. I just ran into snowflake person. I ran into another data analyst company, lot of, lot of data everywhere. You're seeing security. You're seeing insights a lot more going on with data than ever before. It's one of the most popular categories in the marketplace. Talk about DataRobot what you guys are doing. What's your product in there? Yeah, >>Absolutely. John. So we are an artificial intelligence machine learning platform company. We have been around for 10 years. This is this year marks our 10th anniversary and we provide a platform for data scientists and also citizen data scientists. So essentially wanna be data scientists on the business side to rapidly experiment with data and to get insights and then productionize ML models. So the 100% workflow that goes into identifying the data that you need for machine learning and then building models on top of that and operationalizing a, >>How big is the company, roughly employee count? What's the number in >>General general, about a thousand employees. And we have customers all over the world. Our biggest verticals are financial services, insurance, manufacturing, healthcare pharma, all the highly regulated, as well as our tech presence is also growing. And we have people spread across multiple geographies and I can't disclose a customer number, but needless to say, we have hundreds of customers across the >>World. A lot of customers. Yeah, yeah. You guys are well known in the industry have been following some of the recent news lately as well. Yeah. Obviously data's exploding. What in the marketplace are you guys offering? What's the pitch, someone hits the marketplace that wants to buy DataRobot what's the pitch. >>The pitch is if you're looking to get real value from your data science, personal investments and your data, then you have DataRobot that you can download from your AWS marketplace. You can do a free trial and essentially get from, get value from data in a matter of minutes and not months or quarters, that's generally associated with IML. And after that, if you want to purchase you, it's a private offer on, in the marketplace. So you need to call DataRobot representative, but AWS marketplace offers a fantastic distribution channel for us. >>Yeah. I mean, one of the things I heard Chris say, who's now heading up the marketplace and the partner network was the streamlining, a lot of the benefits for the sellers and for the buyers to have a great experience buyers. Clearly we see this as a macro trend, that's gonna only get stronger in terms of self-service buying bundling, having the console on AWS for low level services like infrastructure. But now you've got other business applications that like analytics applies to. You're seeing that work. Now he said things like than the keynote, I wanna get your reaction to like, we're gonna make this more like a C I C D pipeline. We're gonna have more native services built into AWS. What that means to me is that sounds like, oh, if I have a solution, like DataRobot, that can be more native into AWS level services. How do you see that working out for you guys is that play well for your strategy and your customers? What's the, what's the what's resonating with the >>Customers. It plays extremely well with the strategy. So I call this as a win, win, win strategy, win for DataRobot win for customers and win for AWS, which is our partner. And it's a win for DataRobot because the amount of people, the number of eyeballs that look at AWS marketplace, a significantly higher than, than the doors that we can go knock on. So it's a distribution multiplier for us. And the integration into AWS services that you're talking about. It is very important because in this day and age, we need to be interoperable with cloud player services that they offer, whether it is with SageMaker or Redshift, we support all of those. And it's a win for customers because customers, it is a very important growing buyer persona for DataRobot. Yeah. And they already have pre-committed spend with AWS and they can use the, those spend dollars for DataRobot to procure DataRobot. So it eases their procurement life cycle as >>Well. It's a forced multiplier on, on the revenue side, correct? I mean, as well as, as on the business front cost of sales, go down the cost of order dollar. Correct. This is good. Goodness. >>It's it's definitely sorry, just to finish my thought on the win for the partner for AWS. It's great win for them because they're getting the consumption from the partner side, to your point on the force multiplier. Absolutely. It is a force multiplier on the revenue side, and it's great for customers and us, because for us, we have seen that the deal size increases when there is the cloud commit that we can draw down for, for our customers, the procurement cycle shortens. And also we have multiple constituencies within the customers working together in a very seamless fashion. >>How has the procurement going through AWS helped your customers? What specific things are you seeing that are popping out as benefits to the customer? >>So from a procurement standpoint, we, we are early in our marketplace journey. We got listed about a year ago, but the amount of revenue that has gone through marketplace is pretty significant at DataRobot. We experienced like just in, by, I think this quarter until this quarter, we got like about 20 to 30 transactions that went through AWS marketplace. And that is significant within just a year of us operating on the marketplace. And the procurement becomes easier for our customers. Yeah. Because they trust AWS and we can put our legal paperwork through the AWS machine as well, which we haven't done yet. But if we do that, that'll be a further force multiplier because that's the, the less friction there is. >>I like how you say that it's a machine. Yeah. And if you think about the benefits too, like one of the things that I see happening, and I love to get your thoughts because I think this is what's happening here. Infrastructure services, I get that IAS done hardware I'm oversimplifying, but all the, all the goodness, but as customers have business apps and vertical market solutions, you got more AI involved. You need more data that's specialized for that use case. Or you need a business application. Those, you don't hear words like let's provision that app. I mean, your provision hardware and, and infrastructure, but the, the new net cloud native is that you provision turn on the apps. So you're seeing the wave of building apps are composing Lego blocks, if you will. So it seems like the customers are starting to assemble the solution, almost like deploying a service, correct. And just pressing a button. And it happens. This seems to be where the, the business apps are going. >>Yeah, absolutely. You agree for us? We are, we are a data science platform and for us being very close to the data that the customers have is very important. And where if, if the customer's data is in Redshift, we are close to there. So being very close to the hyperscale or ecosystem in that entire C I C D pipeline, and also the data platform pipeline is very important. >>You know, what's interesting is, is the data is such a big part of, I mean, DevOps infrastructure has code has been the movement for decade. Yeah. So throw security in there. It's dev SecOps. Yeah. That is the developer now. Yeah. They're running essentially what used to be it now the new ops is security and data. Yeah. You see, in those teams really level up to be highly high velocity data meshes, semantic layer. These are words I'm hearing in the industry around the big waves of data, having this mesh. Yeah. Having it connected. So you're starting to see data availability become more pervasive. And, and we see this as a way that's powering this next gen data science revolution where it's like the business person is now the data science person. >>That's exactly. That is, that is what DataRobot does the best. We were founded with the vision that we wanted to democratize the access to AI within enterprises. It shouldn't be restricted to a small group of people don't get me wrong. Data scientists also love DataRobot. They use DataRobot. But the mission is to enhance many, many hundreds of people within an organization to use data science, like how you use Tableau on a regular basis, how you use Microsoft Excel on a regular basis. We want to democratize AI. And when you want to democratize AI, you need to democratize access to data, which is, which could be stored in data marketplaces, which could be stored in data warehouses and push all the intelligence that we grab from that data into the E R P into the apps layer. Because at the end of the day, business users, customers consume predictions through applications layer. >>You know, it's interesting, you mentioned that comment about, you know, trying not to, to offend data scientists, it's actually a rising tide that the tsunami of data is actually making that population bigger too. Right. So correct. You also have data engineering, which has come out of the woodwork. We covered a lot on the cube, which is, you know, we call data as code. So infrastructure as code kind of a spoof on that. But the reality is that there's a lot more data engineering. I call that the smallest population. Those are the, those are the alphas, the alpha geeks. Yeah. Hardcore data operating systems, kind of education, data science, big pool growing. And then the users yeah. Are the new data science practitioners. Correct? Exactly. So kind of a, the landscape is you see that picture too, right? >>For sure. I mean, we, we have presence in all of those, right? Like data engineers are very important. Data scientists. Those are core users of DataRobot like, how can you develop thousands and hundreds of thousands of models without having to hand code? If you have to hand code, it takes months and years to solve one problem for one customer in one location. I mean, see how fast the microeconomic conditions are moving. And data engineers are very important because at the end of the day, yes, you do. You create the model, but you need to operationalize that model. You need to monitor that model for data drift. You need to monitor how the model is performing and you need to productionize the insights that you gain. And for that engineering effort is very important behind the scenes. Yeah. And the users at the end of the day, they are the ones who consume the predictions. >>Yeah. I mean the volume and, and the scale and scope of the data requires a lot of automation as well. Correct. Cause you had that on top of it. You gotta have a platform that's gonna do the heavy lifting. >>Correct. Exactly. The platform is we call it as an augmented platform. It augments data scientists by eliminating the tedious work that they don't want to do in their everyday life, which some of which is like feature engineering, right? It's a very high value add work. However, it takes like multiple iterations to understand which features in your data actually impact the outcome. >>This is where the SAS platform is a service is evolved and we call that super cloud, right. This new model where people can scale it out and up. So horizontally, scalable cloud, but vertically integrated into the applications. It's an integrator dilemma. Not so much correct innovators dilemma, as we say in the queue. Yeah. So I have to ask you, I'm a, I'm a buyer I'm gonna come to the marketplace. I want DataRobot why should they buy DataRobot what's in it for them? What's the key features of DataRobot for a company to hit the subscribe, buy button. >>Absolutely. Do you want to scale your data science to multiple projects? Do you want to be ahead of your competition? Do you want to make AI real? That is our pitch. We are not about doing data science for the sake of data science. We are about generating business value out of data science. And we have done it for hundreds of customers in multiple different verticals across the world, whether it is investment banks or regional banks or insurance companies or healthcare companies, we have provided real value out of data for them. And we have the knowhow in how to solve, whether it is your supply chain, forecasting, problem, demand, forecasting problem, whether it is your foreign exchange training problem, how to solve all these use cases with AI, with DataRobot. So if you want to be in the business of using your data and being ahead of your competitors, DataRobot is your tool log choice. >>Sure. Great to have you on the cube as a strategy officer, you gotta look at the chess board, right. And we're kind of in the mid game, I call it the cloud opening game was, you know, happened. Now we're in the mid game of cloud computing where you're seeing a lot of refactoring of opportunities where technologies and data is the key to success, being things secure and operationally, scalable, etcetera, et cetera. What's the key right now for the ecosystem as a strategy, look at the chessboard for data robots. Obviously marketplace is important strategy. Yeah. And bet for, for DataRobot. What else do you see for your company to be successful? And you could share with, with customers watching. >>Yeah. For us, we are in the intelligence layer, the data, the layer below us is the data layer. The layer about us is the applications and the engagement layer. DataRobot I mean, interoperability and ecosystem is important for every company, but for DataRobot it's extra important because we are in that middle of middle layer of intelligence. And we, we have to integrate with all different data warehouses out there enable our customers to pull the data out in a very, very faster way and then showcase all the predictions into, into their tool of choice. And from a chessboard perspective, I like your phrase of we are in the mid cycle of the cloud revolution. Yeah. And every cloud player has a data science platform, whether it is simple one or more complex one, or whether it has been around for quite some time or it's been latent features. And it is important for us that we have complimentary value proposition with all of them, because at the end of the day, we want to maximize our customer's choice. And DataRobot wants to be a neutral platform in supporting all the different vendors out there from a complementary standpoint, because you don't want to have a vendor lock in for your customers. So you create models in SageMaker. For example, you monitor those in DataRobot or you create models in DataRobot and monitor those in AWS so that you have to provide like a very flexible >>That's a solution architecture. >>Correct? Exactly. You have to provide a very flexible tech stack for your customers. >>Yeah. That's the choice. That's the choice. It's all good. Thank you for coming on the cube, sharing the data robot. So I really appreciate it. Thank >>You for coming. Thank you very much for the opportunity. >>Okay. Breaking it all down with the partners here, the marketplace, it's the future, obviously where people are gonna buy the buyers and sellers coming together, the partner network and marketplace, the big news here at 80 seller conference. I'm John ferry with the cube will be right back with more coverage after this short break.

>>Welcome back everybody to AWS reinvent. You're watching the cube, the leader in high tech coverage. My name is Dave Volante with my co-host David Nicholson. We're here all week. We got two sets, 20 plus thousand people here live at AWS reinvent. 21 of course last year was virtual. We got a hybrid event running. We had two studios running before the show running. A lot of pre-records really excited to have ninja Bardelli Walla, who is the chief product officer at data robot. Really interesting AI company. We're going to talk about insights with machine intelligence and then shout. It's great to see you again. It's been awhile. >>Great to see you as well. And I'm so happy to be on the cube. I think eight years since I first came on. >>When you launched the company that you founded back then Peck Sada on the cube, that was part >>Of the inner robot >>Family part of data, robot family. And of course, friend of the cube. Chris Lynch is the executive chairman of data robot. So a lot of connections, I always joke a hundred people in our industry, 99 seats, but tell us about data robot. What's the, what's the scoop these days. >>Thanks. Thanks very much for the opportunity to speak with both of you. Uh, I think we're seeing some very interesting trends. Uh, we've all been in the industry long enough to recognize, uh, that hype cycles they're cycles. They go in waves and, uh, the level of interest in AI has never been higher. Uh, every company in the world is looking for the opportunity to take advantage of AI, to improve their business processes, whether it's to improve their revenue it's to lower their cost profile or it's to lower their risk. What we're seeing that's most interesting is that, uh, we spend a lot of time working with companies on what we consider applied AI. That is how do we solve real business problems, uh, with the technology and not just run a bunch of experiments. You know, it's very tempting for a lot of us, Dave and David, uh, to, to do, uh, you know, spin up a spark cluster with 10,000 nodes and slosh a bunch of data through it. >>But the question we always ask at data robot is what is the business value of doing this? Why are we using these AI techniques and in order to solve what problem? So the biggest trend we see a data robot and one that we feel we're very well positioned to solve is that companies are coming out of that experimental phase. There's still a lot of experimentation going on and they're saying, okay, we, we stood up a cluster. Uh, we got a bunch of Python notebooks running around here, but we haven't really seen a return on our investment yet data robot, can you help us actually make AI real and concrete in terms of achieving a specific business outcome for us? >>Well, and I want to test something on your niche. That's something we've talked about a lot on the cube is a change in the way in which companies are architecting their data. When we first, it was like, okay, create a Hadoop cluster. And that spark came along to make that easier, but it was still this highly technical, highly centralized, hyper specialized roles where the business, people who have a really good understanding of the outcome had to kind of beg to get what they wanted because it was so technical and the success was defined as, Hey, it worked or we ran the experiment and it looks like it has promise. So now it seems like with companies like data robot, you're democratizing AI, allowing organizations to inject AI into their business processes, their applications. And it seems to be more business led. One of you could comment on that. >>I think that is a various dude observation. Uh, we launched this concept a little bit earlier this year of AI cloud. And the idea behind AI cloud is if you want to democratize AI, which is in fact has been DataRobot's vision since 2012, we were the first company on the cloud. The first AI cloud that ever existed was data robots in 2014. And the entire idea was that we knew that data scientists would always play a very important role in an organization, but yet the demand for AI would vastly outstrip the supply. And so in order to solve that challenge, we built AI cloud. We've actually spent over a million engineering hours in building this technology over the, over the last decade and put this together in a way where all of the different personas and the organizations, you have people who create AI applications. >>Those are the folks we usually think about, but those are the data scientists. Those are the analysts, those are the data engineers, but then you actually have to put it into production. You've got to run the system. So you also have to democratize this capability for the folks who are going to operate the system for the folks in risk and compliance. We're actually going to, uh, ensure that the system is operating in accordance with your policies and compliance regimes. And then the third wave of democratization, which we've just embarked on is then how do you bring AI into the hands of the actual business people? How do you put on a mobile device or a web browser, or in context, in an application with the decision, the ability for AI to drive a decision in your organization, which leads to an action, which helps drive you towards the outcome you're trying to optimize for. >>So AI cloud is about this pervasive tapestry, bringing together the creators, the consumers, the individuals who operate these systems into a single system that can lower the barrier to entry for people who don't have the skills, but allow you to plug in and go deep underneath the covers and modify whatever you need to, if you have that level of technical skill and that ability for us to kind of slide, slide the slider in one direction or the other, I could slide it to the right and say, I want all automation, something data robot has pioneered and is absolutely the leader in, but we can also, especially in these last couple of years, say, I want to be able to use as much code as I want to bring in. And the beauty of the model is that customers can choose how much they want to let the machine drive or how much they want to let the human being drive. David. I love that, >>That idea of a slider, because now you're talking about generalists getting access to really powerful tools. >>Yeah, no, exactly. And I, I'm curious, what's your view on where we are culturally with AI at this point? And what I mean by culturally is the idea that, okay, that's great. You put powerful tools in the hands of business users. Um, do most of us still need to have a lot of visibility under the covers to understand the inner workings so that we trust what we're being told? You know, I'm fine pulling a lever and having a little biscuit come out of SWOT as long as I've gotten a tour of the kitchen at some point in time. Yes. I mean, where are we with that? Where where's the level of >>Absolutely fantastic question and it's one that's, it's actually pervasive to the way data robot operates. So trust gets, uh, engendered by multiple different capabilities that you build throughout the platform. The first one is around, uh, explainability. So when you get a prediction from a system, just like you mentioned, you know, if, if the stakes are not very high, you know, you, uh, we're here in Las Vegas, of course I'm thinking of slot machines. If you get a biscuit at the end of it and it tastes pretty good. Hey, great. Right? When you're making a mission critical business decision, you don't want to be in the position where you don't understand why the system is making the decision. It does. So we have historically invested an enormous amount of effort in explainability tools, having the system actually at a prediction level, explain to you, why is it making the recommendation it's making? >>For example, the system says this customer has a high likelihood of churn. Why? Because their account balance has been declining over the last five months. Uh, number two, because their credit score has been going down. And what gives you the trust is actually the machine and the human able to communicate in the same language and same vernacular about the business value. So that's one part of it. The second part is about transparency, right? So one of the things that the automated machine learning movement, that data robot pioneered, uh, has been, I'd say rightfully criticized for frankly, is that it's too much of a black box. It's too much magic. I load my dataset. I press the start button and data robot does everything else for me. Well, that's not very satisfying when you have a 10 or a hundred million dollar decision coming on the other side, even if the technology is actually doing the job correctly, which data robot usually does. >>So where we've morphed and evolved our position in the market and where I have driven our technology portfolio at data robot is to say, you know what? There is a very important aspect of trust that needs to be brought to bear here, which is that if somebody wants to see code, let them see code. And in fact, the beauty of AI cloud is that on the same platform, the people who don't like code, but are, are very good at understanding the business domain con uh, the business domain knowledge and the context. They now have the ability to do that. But when they're at the stage before they're going to deploy anything to production. Now you can raise your hand at data robot and actually use our workflow and say, I need a coder to review this. I want the professional data scientist who has all this knowledge who understands and has read up on the latest advances in hyper parameter tuning to look at the model and tell me that this is going to be okay. And so we allow both the less technical folks and the very deep technical data scientists, the ability to collaborate on the same environment, which allows you to build trust in terms of the human side of, Hey, I don't want to just let anybody throw a model into production. I like, >>I mean, I see those, the transparency and the explainability is almost two sides of the same coin, right? Because you know, if you're gonna be accused of gender bias, you can say, no, here's how the system may, it's not like, you know, you think about the internet. It tells you it's a cat, but you don't really know how the machine determined that you're breaking apart, blowing away that black box. And the other thing I like what you said was you have data producers and data consumers, and you also talked about context because a lot of times the data producers, they don't necessarily care about the context or the PI data pipeline. People necessarily care about the context. So, okay. So now we're at the point where you're democratizing data, you're doing some great work. What are some of the blockers that you see today that you're obliterating with data robot? Maybe you could talk about that a little bit. Sure. >>So, so I think, uh, you know, one very important concept is that, uh, in a democracy, we talked about democratization. You still have rules, you still have governance. It's not a free for all the free for all version of that is called NRG. That's not what any company wants, right? So we have to blend the freedom and flexibility that we want businesses to have with the compliance and regulatory observability that we need in order to be successful. So what we're seeing in, in our, in our customer base and what companies are coming to data robot to discuss is, okay, we've tried these experiments. Now we want to actually get to real business value. And one of the things that's really unique about data robot is that we have put, uh, we have, we've worked in our system on over 1 million projects, training models, inside data robot. >>We have seen every type of use case across different industries, whether it's healthcare or manufacturing, uh, or, or retail, uh, we have the ability to understand those different data sets and actually to come up with models. So we have that breadth of information there if you aggregate that over time, right? So again, we did not come to AI. This is not a fad for us. We didn't start as one kind of company than slap the AI label on and say, Hey, we're an AI company now, right? We have been AI native since day one. And in that process, what we have found is working on these, this million plus projects on these data sets across these industries, we have a very good sense of which projects will actually deliver value and which don't. And that gets to a previous point that you were making, which is that you have to know and partner with an organization who it's not just about the technology. So we have fantastic people who we call our customer facing data scientists who will tell the customer, look, I know you think this is a really high value use case, but we've tried it at other customers. And unfortunately it didn't work very well. Let's steer you, cause you need with a, with a technology that is largely at the early stage and the maturity that organizations have with it, you need to help them in order to deliver success. And no vendor has delivered more successful production deployment of AI than data road. >>No, don't go down that path. It's a dead end as a cul-de-sac. So just avoid it. So we talked about transparency, explainability governance. Can you get that to the point where it's self-serve as you, as you put data in the hands of business, people where the context lives, the domain experts, can you get to self-serve and federate that governance? Yes. >>So you can, uh, that's one of the key principles of what we, what we do at data robot. And it comes back to a concept that I learned, uh, you, you both will remember. We were in the Sarbanes-Oxley crazy world of, I dunno, was that 15 years of saved data warehousing. >>Everybody wanted to talk about socks. You know, my wife would hear me on the phone. She'd be like, what is your sudden obsession with socks? I'm like, no, no, it's not what you fit. And so, um, but what came from Sarbanes Oxley are, are these, uh, longstanding principles around the segregation of duties and segregation of responsibilities. You can have democracy democratization with governance, if you have the right segregation of duties. So for example, I have somebody who can generate lots of different models, right? But I don't allow them to, to, uh, in a self-service way, just deploy into production. I actually have a workflow system which will go through multiple rigorous approvals and say, these three people have signed off, they've done an audit, uh, an, an audit assessment of this model. It's good to go, let's go and drop it into production. So the way that you get to self-service with governance is to have the right controls and policies and frameworks that surround the self-service model with the right checks and balances that implement the segregation of duties I'm talking >>And you get that right. And then you can automate it and then you can really scale, right? You gotta have your back because it's such a great topic. We, we barely scratched the surface. It was great to see you again, congratulations on all the success. And, uh, as I say any time, let's do this again. Fantastic. Thank >>You so much. All right, you're welcome. And thank you for watching you watching the cubes coverage of AWS reinvent 2021, Dave Volante for David Nicholson. Keep it right there. You're watching the cube, the leader in high-tech coverage.

>> Voiceover: Live from Las Vegas. It's theCUBE covering UiPath Forward Americas 2019. Brought to you by UiPath. >> Welcome back to the Bellagio, everybody. You are watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage, this is Day 2 of UiPath's Forward III Conference and Kourtney Bradbeary is here R&D specialist at American Fidelity. She's joined by Michael Setticasi, who's the senior director of business development at Boston-based DataRobot, but Michael's from Seattle. Guys, welcome to theCUBE. >> Kourtney B.: Thank you. >> Kourtney, let's start with you. I know you guys, you kind of do benefit solutions, but maybe talk a little a bit about the company and some of the big trends that are driving what you guys are doing. >> Kourtney B: Absolutely. So I work with American Fidelity, it's an insurance company based out of Oklahoma, but our main focus is providing solutions to our customer pain points. So we're a niche-based organization that focuses mainly on education, so the public sector, so education in municipalities in providing solutions and benefits to our employers and our employees that we work with. >> Cool, and Michael, you guys, obviously data science is your thing, but describe a little bit more about what you guys do. >> Yeah, we're an AI enterprise company. What we're really trying to do is democratize the use of AI machine learning within organizations, and we really appeal to both data scientists and business users that understand their business and data and want to do more. >> So Kourtney, you're title is really interesting. R&D special projects, so you got this little sandbox that you get to play with, RPA is on the hype cycle and now it's in the trough of disillusionment, but it's kind of an early play around with things. How did you get in to RPA? Where you guys at? What's this R&D thing going on? Right, so with research and development, I guess there's a lot of space to work with emerging technologies, and AI, and RPA, and how those two things come together and anything new that we see and exciting we're able to apply that technology. It's one thing to think, "Oh, AI, that's cool. Let's do that." But if it doesn't benefit your customer at the end of the day, if it's not driving decisions in your organization, then we don't want to do AI just 'cause it's cool. We really want to do AI because it's what benefits our customer. So we got into RPA because when we saw a demo, and it was like, whoa. If that's real, if that's what we think it's going to be, that's a game changer. So you have RPA, and you have AI kind of coming up at the same time and whenever it was, first coming out a few years ago, they're silo, they're separate. What we've started to do recently is to bring the two industries together and really bring together the RPA component and the AI component to really become IPA, or Intelligent Process Automation, so that way we can really start to transform businesses. >> So this is interesting to me, Michael, because as Kourtney was saying, most people think of these things as separate and more aspirational down the road. You guys are AI experts, what are you seeing in terms of these two domains coming together? >> You hear about intelligent automation everywhere, right? We are pushing it hard, and we're seeing a lot of customers and potential prospects look at it, but I have to give credit to American Fidelity. They are ahead of the curve. They're combining this ability to use an RPA process and a machine learning model to really automate things and provide better customer service and get to the endpoint faster and more efficiently. So I think they're ahead of the curve, but you're going to see more and more of this in the marketplace. >> So Kourtney, a lot of the customers that we talk to, this is kind of my observation, is they're automating obviously mundane processes but frankly really crappy processes. They're really screwed up in a lot of ways. And they're throwing RPA at the problem, it sounds like you have a little different philosophy around how to apply automation. Can you explain that? >> Right, so you don't want to automate something that's bad because then it's going to break a lot, and it's just not a good idea. So what we've tried to do is whenever we get request in the door, there's always a stopping, if somebody has to make a decision, in the past, it's been "Okay, well we can automate the first part and the last part", but it's kind of have to stop in the middle for you to make a decision. And what DataRobot has allowed us to do, in the past, it was really hard to actually apply machine learning, 'cause you had to have these data scientists and they'd have to spend months trying to figure out what model for the data, and is it, you know, retraining a model is really difficult. DataRobot makes a data scientist's job so much easier and actually applicable to the workplace where you could scale, enable scaling, because without DataRobot or without a service like that, it's impossible to scale. So it allows us to implement AI with our RPA to then not just automate the mundane processes, but the small decisions that we make everyday, just 'cause we do our jobs everyday and we know how to do our jobs, AI enables us to automate those processes, as well. >> And you're doing that in an unattended way, or is it an attended automation? >> Both, both. So there's some processes that we have to have a human select things and make certain decisions along the way, or there's some processes that are completely unattended. With any automation, your goal is always to automate 100%, but in reality, you're usually going to get about 80% of a process automated. So what we try to do, we go for the hundred percent, rarely get that, but then you can take out the 20% for human review. And so maybe of the 20% that's not fully automated, maybe we can make stop points for human interaction there, but there have been some processes that we have been able to fully automate. >> So Michael, the data scientists complain that 80% of their time is spent in wrangling data and getting the data ready to actually build a model. I presume that's what you guys do, you solve that problem, right? >> We definitely solve some of that, right? If you get the data all in one place, DataRobot takes care of a lot of the data preparation that's involved in data science. We've also have ways to kind of manage the best places you store your data, so that if other people use the platform, they can see where to get it to. But overall, I would just say, when you look at UiPath and the way it's growing, it's such an exciting growing company like we heard Daniel yesterday mention their growth from customer from year to year, how they're the fastest enterprise software growing company out there. So you combine that RPA market with this growing machine learning market, and there's a ton of excitement. I mean, that's what you're seeing at the conference today. >> So you guys have data scientists on staff, is that right, or-- >> Correct! >> Okay, and so what does this mean for them? Does it mean you just need less of them, or they spend more of their time doing productive work? >> It means they spend more of their time doing productive work, instead of trying to figure out what model to fit, 'cause if you're a data scientist, or an actuary, or any, data analyst, or any of those things, you might know five models that you try to fit everything to. What DataRobot enables us to do is not be stuck to those five models that we know. It enables us to combine models, and choose models based on that data, so it really helps us with the modeling. >> Are you, I should've asked this before, are you still in R&D? Or are you in production? Or where are you at in terms of majority? >> Oh no, we're in production. We have two IPA processes in production today, and we're working on increasing that as we go. We have over a hundred an fifty RPA processes in production, as well as, many many just machine learning, so we're working on combining those now. So we have many machine learning, we have many RPA, and we're working on increasing our IPA. >> What have you seen as the business impact? Do we have enough data yet to sort of-- >> Absolutely. We don't try to focus on ROI. What we try to focus on is how is this impacting our customer, and how is this impacting employees' lives. There's obviously a lot of fear around automation but at American Fidelity, what we try to do is show how this is going to improve our employees' lives and we're by no means trying to cut jobs. We're actually going to have a net increase of jobs over the next five years. We're re skilling our workforce. We're really focusing on how it improves our employees, rather than focusing on ROI. >> So you're not on the ROI treadmill? So how did you get your CFO to sort of agree to all of this? >> So we do track ROI. It's not something we share publicly. But we focus more on our humans and our employees than our ROI. >> Is that because, I mean you're not, virtually every customer I've talked to says, "Well, we're not firing people. We're just getting more productive, or shifting them to more interesting tasks, et cetera, et cetera," and if you do the ROI calculations, you say "Oh, I don't need as many humans to do this anymore", and so you'd say, "Okay, FTE cost" and then you apply that, it's kind of a BS number, 'cause it's not like you're cutting people, so it's not a hard ROI. Is that why you don't focus on ROI? Or you just think it's worthless metric? >> No... >> Actually, I'm sorry. You said you do have it, you just don't share it publicly. >> Right, we just don't share our ROI publicly. And I don't think it's made up, or it's fake. I've never met an organization that says they have more people than they have work for people. There's always work. I really enjoy the first video opening of UiPath, it's, "since the beginning of time, humans have worked", and everyone thinks that automation is going to get rid of jobs, there's a lot of controversy over that, but realistically, if you think about the first industrial revolution, that was, after the first industrial revolution hit, that was the biggest economic upturn that had seen since that time. We're in that same space now. It's just hard to see it with where we're at. It's only going to increase, work is only going to increase. It's definitely going to change. I think it's naive to think that jobs won't change. And there will be jobs that will be eliminated, job functions, but I don't think there's elimination of humans needed, if that makes sense. >> Well yeah, it does. You guys sound like you're pretty visionary about how to apply technology to your business. And Michael, I mean, Kourtney's right, machines have always replaced humans, this is nothing new, first time ever that it's in cognitive function, so that scares people a little bit, but what else are you seeing in the marketplace that you can share with us? >> We're just seeing increased use of automation. So like, you might think when you talk DataRobot, you're using us for the top 1% things that a company might do, right? If you're a bank, you might use us to help out, figure out, how you can more efficiently lend customer's money, and make sure that you're making good investments, but what we're finding is, automation and machine learning models are being used everywhere. They're being used in marketing now, right? An example could be this show. We'll get leads from this show. Let's run some machine learning to understand what leads to follow up on first, because we'll get the best result. We're seeing machine learning in HR, right? Making sure their employees are happy, tracking employee churn through machine learning, so I think what we're seeing is it's being adopted more broadly, which means you need more people. We're not replacing people. >> So, why UiPath? >> Whenever we started the vendor process and started looking at several vendors, the UiPath product just was unmatched, frankly. There was a lot of vendors that had more code base, and there was then UiPath that anyone can learn. And that's what we really liked 'cause in American Fidelity, we've chosen to go with, we have a COE but we've also chosen to go with a democratized model where everyone in the organization will be able to build robots. We're training people to build robots. We have, each department has people that are dedicated. A certain portion of their time is building robots and UiPath really made that available with their products for anybody to be able to learn. >> So you have a COE. >> Kourtney B.: Yes. It was interesting, Craig LeClaire this morning, I don't know if you saw his keynote, but he kind of made this statement, it was sort of a off-handed statement, he said, "COE, maybe that's asking too much". He didn't use term tiger team, but I inferred, it's like, rather just kind of get a tiger team of some experts, but talk a little bit more about your COE. >> So, we kind of go with a hybrid model. If you think about, typical, it's weird because RPA is only a few years old, and we're thinking typical RPA, but people usually either go with a COE or completely democratized. We've really gone with a hybrid model, so we have a COE with governance where we've set a loose framework of what to follow, and we have code standards, when you say, follow these things. We have a knowledge library that we share. But we only have a handful of full-time RPA developers, and everyone help, those developers help, teach and help grow that knowledge throughout the organization, so that way we have people in every area that can also develop. So our developers are not our own key developers. Our developers are focused on the IPA, on the AI, whereas our other people throughout the organization are focused more on RPA so we can really make a big difference more quickly. >> Do you have a software robot that automates auditing and checks for compliance? >> Yes, so we have, one of our robots, the function that it does is audit one of our inputs, so we do have robots in almost every area that, yeah, we do have audit robots. >> Has it cut the auditing bill? Is that part of the ROI? You don't have to answer that. (giggles) >> Michael, our last question for you is where do you see this all going? This is very interesting to me because I've inferred from a lot of the conversations that, like that PepsiCo guy was up yesterday, talking about an AI fabric throughout the organization, not just tactical projects, and that kind of interested me, but I expected it's much further off. I'm hearing from Kourtney that it's actually real today. What's your sort of prediction or forecast for the adoption of this more advanced intelligent process automation? Is it kind of just starting now and it's going to explode? Or am I just missing the mark here? >> No, I think you're a hundred percent on. I mean, first off, I think, like I mentioned earlier, RPA and machine learning separately, are in these incredible growth stages. Right, and we think our message to customers now is if you're not thinking about how you're doing AI and machine learning, you're already behind 'cause your competition is. And so you better get thinking about it. I think we're going to get to that level with intelligent automation, with RPA plus machine learning very soon. I do think right now we're in that infancy stage where people are looking for used cases, and they want to hear great stories, and so I do think American Fidelity is ahead of the curve, but they're not going to be ahead of the curve for long. It's catching up. If you're not doing it, we're going to eventually get to that point where you'll have someone like Elon Musk or Masayoshi Son, say, if you're not thinking of intelligent automation, you're already going to be left behind. >> All right, congratulations on the work that you've done. >> Kourtney B.: Thank you. >> It's a really awesome story. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE. >> Yeah, yeah, thanks for having us. >> Thanks for having us. >> All right, keep it right there, everybody. We'll be back from UiPath Forward day number 2. You're watching theCUBE. Be right back. (upbeat music)

(gentle music playing) >> For centuries, we've been captivated by the concept of machines doing the job of humans. And over the past decade or so, we've really focused on AI and the possibility of intelligent machines that can perform cognitive tasks. Now in the past few years, with the popularity of machine learning models ranging from recent ChatGPT to Bert, we're starting to see how AI is changing the way we interact with the world. How is AI transforming the way we do business? And what does the future hold for us there. At theCube, we've covered Oracle's AI and ML strategy for years, which has really been used to drive automation into Oracle's autonomous database. We've talked a lot about MySQL HeatWave in database machine learning, and AI pushed into Oracle's business apps. Oracle, it tends to lead in AI, but not competing as a direct AI player per se, but rather embedding AI and machine learning into its portfolio to enhance its existing products, and bring new services and offerings to the market. Now, last October at Cloud World in Las Vegas, Oracle partnered with Nvidia, which is the go-to AI silicon provider for vendors. And they announced an investment, a pretty significant investment to deploy tens of thousands more Nvidia GPUs to OCI, the Oracle Cloud Infrastructure and build out Oracle's infrastructure for enterprise scale AI. Now, Oracle CEO, Safra Catz said something to the effect of this alliance is going to help customers across industries from healthcare, manufacturing, telecoms, and financial services to overcome the multitude of challenges they face. Presumably she was talking about just driving more automation and more productivity. Now, to learn more about Oracle's plans for AI, we'd like to welcome in Elad Ziklik, who's the vice president of AI services at Oracle. Elad, great to see you. Welcome to the show. >> Thank you. Thanks for having me. >> You're very welcome. So first let's talk about Oracle's path to AI. I mean, it's the hottest topic going for years you've been incorporating machine learning into your products and services, you know, could you tell us what you've been working on, how you got here? >> So great question. So as you mentioned, I think most of the original four-way into AI was on embedding AI and using AI to make our applications, and databases better. So inside mySQL HeatWave, inside our autonomous database in power, we've been driving AI, all of course are SaaS apps. So Fusion, our large enterprise business suite for HR applications and CRM and ELP, and whatnot has built in AI inside it. Most recently, NetSuite, our small medium business SaaS suite started using AI for things like automated invoice processing and whatnot. And most recently, over the last, I would say two years, we've started exposing and bringing these capabilities into the broader OCI Oracle Cloud infrastructure. So the developers, and ISVs and customers can start using our AI capabilities to make their apps better and their experiences and business workflow better, and not just consume these as embedded inside Oracle. And this recent partnership that you mentioned with Nvidia is another step in bringing the best AI infrastructure capabilities into this platform so you can actually build any type of machine learning workflow or AI model that you want on Oracle Cloud. >> So when I look at the market, I see companies out there like DataRobot or C3 AI, there's maybe a half dozen that sort of pop up on my radar anyway. And my premise has always been that most customers, they don't want to become AI experts, they want to buy applications and have AI embedded or they want AI to manage their infrastructure. So my question to you is, how does Oracle help its OCI customers support their business with AI? >> So it's a great question. So I think what most customers want is business AI. They want AI that works for the business. They want AI that works for the enterprise. I call it the last mile of AI. And they want this thing to work. The majority of them don't want to hire a large and expensive data science teams to go and build everything from scratch. They just want the business problem solved by applying AI to it. My best analogy is Lego. So if you think of Lego, Lego has these millions Lego blocks that you can use to build anything that you want. But the majority of people like me or like my kids, they want the Lego death style kit or the Lego Eiffel Tower thing. They want a thing that just works, and it's very easy to use. And still Lego blocks, you still need to build some things together, which just works for the scenario that you're looking for. So that's our focus. Our focus is making it easy for customers to apply AI where they need to, in the right business context. So whether it's embedding it inside the business applications, like adding forecasting capabilities to your supply chain management or financial planning software, whether it's adding chat bots into the line of business applications, integrating these things into your analytics dashboard, even all the way to, we have a new platform piece we call ML applications that allows you to take a machine learning model, and scale it for the thousands of tenants that you would be. 'Cause this is a big problem for most of the ML use cases. It's very easy to build something for a proof of concept or a pilot or a demo. But then if you need to take this and then deploy it across your thousands of customers or your thousands of regions or facilities, then it becomes messy. So this is where we spend our time making it easy to take these things into production in the context of your business application or your business use case that you're interested in right now. >> So you mentioned chat bots, and I want to talk about ChatGPT, but my question here is different, we'll talk about that in a minute. So when you think about these chat bots, the ones that are conversational, my experience anyway is they're just meh, they're not that great. But the ones that actually work pretty well, they have a conditioned response. Now they're limited, but they say, which of the following is your problem? And then if that's one of the following is your problem, you can maybe solve your problem. But this is clearly a trend and it helps the line of business. How does Oracle think about these use cases for your customers? >> Yeah, so I think the key here is exactly what you said. It's about task completion. The general purpose bots are interesting, but as you said, like are still limited. They're getting much better, I'm sure we'll talk about ChatGPT. But I think what most enterprises want is around task completion. I want to automate my expense report processing. So today inside Oracle we have a chat bot where I submit my expenses the bot ask a couple of question, I answer them, and then I'm done. Like I don't need to go to our fancy application, and manually submit an expense report. I do this via Slack. And the key is around managing the right expectations of what this thing is capable of doing. Like, I have a story from I think five, six years ago when technology was much inferior than it is today. Well, one of the telco providers I was working with wanted to roll a chat bot that does realtime translation. So it was for a support center for of the call centers. And what they wanted do is, Hey, we have English speaking employees, whatever, 24/7, if somebody's calling, and the native tongue is different like Hebrew in my case, or Chinese or whatnot, then we'll give them a chat bot that they will interact with and will translate this on the fly and everything would work. And when they rolled it out, the feedback from customers was horrendous. Customers said, the technology sucks. It's not good. I hate it, I hate your company, I hate your support. And what they've done is they've changed the narrative. Instead of, you go to a support center, and you assume you're going to talk to a human, and instead you get a crappy chat bot, they're like, Hey, if you want to talk to a Hebrew speaking person, there's a four hour wait, please leave your phone and we'll call you back. Or you can try a new amazing Hebrew speaking AI powered bot and it may help your use case. Do you want to try it out? And some people said, yeah, let's try it out. Plus one to try it out. And the feedback, even though it was the exact same technology was amazing. People were like, oh my God, this is so innovative, this is great. Even though it was the exact same experience that they hated a few weeks earlier on. So I think the key lesson that I picked from this experience is it's all about setting the right expectations, and working around the right use case. If you are replacing a human, the level is different than if you are just helping or augmenting something that otherwise would take a lot of time. And I think this is the focus that we are doing, picking up the tasks that people want to accomplish or that enterprise want to accomplish for the customers, for the employees. And using chat bots to make those specific ones better rather than, hey, this is going to replace all humans everywhere, and just be better than that. >> Yeah, I mean, to the point you mentioned expense reports. I'm in a Twitter thread and one guy says, my favorite part of business travel is filling out expense reports. It's an hour of excitement to figure out which receipts won't scan. We can all relate to that. It's just the worst. When you think about companies that are building custom AI driven apps, what can they do on OCI? What are the best options for them? Do they need to hire an army of machine intelligence experts and AI specialists? Help us understand your point of view there. >> So over the last, I would say the two or three years we've developed a full suite of machine learning and AI services for, I would say probably much every use case that you would expect right now from applying natural language processing to understanding customer support tickets or social media, or whatnot to computer vision platforms or computer vision services that can understand and detect objects, and count objects on shelves or detect cracks in the pipe or defecting parts, all the way to speech services. It can actually transcribe human speech. And most recently we've launched a new document AI service. That can actually look at unstructured documents like receipts or invoices or government IDs or even proprietary documents, loan application, student application forms, patient ingestion and whatnot and completely automate them using AI. So if you want to do one of the things that are, I would say common bread and butter for any industry, whether it's financial services or healthcare or manufacturing, we have a suite of services that any developer can go, and use easily customized with their own data. You don't need to be an expert in deep learning or large language models. You could just use our automobile capabilities, and build your own version of the models. Just go ahead and use them. And if you do have proprietary complex scenarios that you need customer from scratch, we actually have the most cost effective platform for that. So we have the OCI data science as well as built-in machine learning platform inside the databases inside the Oracle database, and mySQL HeatWave that allow data scientists, python welding people that actually like to build and tweak and control and improve, have everything that they need to go and build the machine learning models from scratch, deploy them, monitor and manage them at scale in production environment. And most of it is brand new. So we did not have these technologies four or five years ago and we've started building them and they're now at enterprise scale over the last couple of years. >> So what are some of the state-of-the-art tools, that AI specialists and data scientists need if they're going to go out and develop these new models? >> So I think it's on three layers. I think there's an infrastructure layer where the Nvidia's of the world come into play. For some of these things, you want massively efficient, massively scaled infrastructure place. So we are the most cost effective and performant large scale GPU training environment today. We're going to be first to onboard the new Nvidia H100s. These are the new super powerful GPU's for large language model training. So we have that covered for you in case you need this 'cause you want to build these ginormous things. You need a data science platform, a platform where you can open a Python notebook, and just use all these fancy open source frameworks and create the models that you want, and then click on a button and deploy it. And it infinitely scales wherever you need it. And in many cases you just need the, what I call the applied AI services. You need the Lego sets, the Lego death style, Lego Eiffel Tower. So we have a suite of these sets for typical scenarios, whether it's cognitive services of like, again, understanding images, or documents all the way to solving particular business problems. So an anomaly detection service, demand focusing service that will be the equivalent of these Lego sets. So if this is the business problem that you're looking to solve, we have services out there where we can bring your data, call an API, train a model, get the model and use it in your production environment. So wherever you want to play, all the way into embedding this thing, inside this applications, obviously, wherever you want to play, we have the tools for you to go and engage from infrastructure to SaaS at the top, and everything in the middle. >> So when you think about the data pipeline, and the data life cycle, and the specialized roles that came out of kind of the (indistinct) era if you will. I want to focus on two developers and data scientists. So the developers, they hate dealing with infrastructure and they got to deal with infrastructure. Now they're being asked to secure the infrastructure, they just want to write code. And a data scientist, they're spending all their time trying to figure out, okay, what's the data quality? And they're wrangling data and they don't spend enough time doing what they want to do. So there's been a lack of collaboration. Have you seen that change, are these approaches allowing collaboration between data scientists and developers on a single platform? Can you talk about that a little bit? >> Yeah, that is a great question. One of the biggest set of scars that I have on my back from for building these platforms in other companies is exactly that. Every persona had a set of tools, and these tools didn't talk to each other and the handoff was painful. And most of the machine learning things evaporate or die on the floor because of this problem. It's very rarely that they are unsuccessful because the algorithm wasn't good enough. In most cases it's somebody builds something, and then you can't take it to production, you can't integrate it into your business application. You can't take the data out, train, create an endpoint and integrate it back like it's too painful. So the way we are approaching this is focused on this problem exactly. We have a single set of tools that if you publish a model as a data scientist and developers, and even business analysts that are seeing a inside of business application could be able to consume it. We have a single model store, a single feature store, a single management experience across the various personas that need to play in this. And we spend a lot of time building, and borrowing a word that cellular folks used, and I really liked it, building inside highways to make it easier to bring these insights into where you need them inside applications, both inside our applications, inside our SaaS applications, but also inside custom third party and even first party applications. And this is where a lot of our focus goes to just because we have dealt with so much pain doing this inside our own SaaS that we now have built the tools, and we're making them available for others to make this process of building a machine learning outcome driven insight in your app easier. And it's not just the model development, and it's not just the deployment, it's the entire journey of taking the data, building the model, training it, deploying it, looking at the real data that comes from the app, and creating this feedback loop in a more efficient way. And that's our focus area. Exactly this problem. >> Well thank you for that. So, last week we had our super cloud two event, and I had Juan Loza on and he spent a lot of time talking about how open Oracle is in its philosophy, and I got a lot of feedback. They were like, Oracle open, I don't really think, but the truth is if you think about database Oracle database, it never met a hardware platform that it didn't like. So in that sense it's open. So, but my point is, a big part of of machine learning and AI is driven by open source tools, frameworks, what's your open source strategy? What do you support from an open source standpoint? >> So I'm a strong believer that you don't actually know, nobody knows where the next slip fog or the next industry shifting innovation in AI is going to come from. If you look six months ago, nobody foreseen Dali, the magical text to image generation and the exploding brought into just art and design type of experiences. If you look six weeks ago, I don't think anybody's seen ChatGPT, and what it can do for a whole bunch of industries. So to me, assuming that a customer or partner or developer would want to lock themselves into only the tools that a specific vendor can produce is ridiculous. 'Cause nobody knows, if anybody claims that they know where the innovation is going to come from in a year or two, let alone in five or 10, they're just wrong or lying. So our strategy for Oracle is to, I call this the Netflix of AI. So if you think about Netflix, they produced a bunch of high quality shows on their own. A few years ago it was House of Cards. Last month my wife and I binge watched Ginny and Georgie, but they also curated a lot of shows that they found around the world and bought them to their customers. So it started with things like Seinfeld or Friends and most recently it was Squid games and those are famous Israeli TV series called Founder that Netflix bought in, and they bought it as is and they gave it the Netflix value. So you have captioning and you have the ability to speed the movie and you have it inside your app, and you can download it and watch it offline and everything, but nobody Netflix was involved in the production of these first seasons. Now if these things hunt and they're great, then the third season or the fourth season will get the full Netflix production value, high value budget, high value location shooting or whatever. But you as a customer, you don't care whether the producer and director, and screenplay writing is a Netflix employee or is somebody else's employee. It is fulfilled by Netflix. I believe that we will become, or we are looking to become the Netflix of AI. We are building a bunch of AI in a bunch of places where we think it's important and we have some competitive advantage like healthcare with Acellular partnership or whatnot. But I want to bring the best AI software and hardware to OCI and do a fulfillment by Oracle on that. So you'll get the Oracle security and identity and single bill and everything you'd expect from a company like Oracle. But we don't have to be building the data science, and the models for everything. So this means both open source recently announced a partnership with Anaconda, the leading provider of Python distribution in the data science ecosystem where we are are doing a joint strategic partnership of bringing all the goodness into Oracle customers as well as in the process of doing the same with Nvidia, and all those software libraries, not just the Hubble, both for other stuff like Triton, but also for healthcare specific stuff as well as other ISVs, other AI leading ISVs that we are in the process of partnering with to get their stuff into OCI and into Oracle so that you can truly consume the best AI hardware, and the best AI software in the world on Oracle. 'Cause that is what I believe our customers would want the ability to choose from any open source engine, and honestly from any ISV type of solution that is AI powered and they want to use it in their experiences. >> So you mentioned ChatGPT, I want to talk about some of the innovations that are coming. As an AI expert, you see ChatGPT on the one hand, I'm sure you weren't surprised. On the other hand, maybe the reaction in the market, and the hype is somewhat surprising. You know, they say that we tend to under or over-hype things in the early stages and under hype them long term, you kind of use the internet as example. What's your take on that premise? >> So. I think that this type of technology is going to be an inflection point in how software is being developed. I truly believe this. I think this is an internet style moment, and the way software interfaces, software applications are being developed will dramatically change over the next year two or three because of this type of technologies. I think there will be industries that will be shifted. I think education is a good example. I saw this thing opened on my son's laptop. So I think education is going to be transformed. Design industry like images or whatever, it's already been transformed. But I think that for mass adoption, like beyond the hype, beyond the peak of inflected expectations, if I'm using Gartner terminology, I think certain things need to go and happen. One is this thing needs to become more reliable. So right now it is a complete black box that sometimes produce magic, and sometimes produce just nonsense. And it needs to have better explainability and better lineage to, how did you get to this answer? 'Cause I think enterprises are going to really care about the things that they surface with the customers or use internally. So I think that is one thing that's going to come out. And the other thing that's going to come out is I think it's going to come industry specific large language models or industry specific ChatGPTs. Something like how OpenAI did co-pilot for writing code. I think we will start seeing this type of apps solving for specific business problems, understanding contracts, understanding healthcare, writing doctor's notes on behalf of doctors so they don't have to spend time manually recording and analyzing conversations. And I think that would become the sweet spot of this thing. There will be companies, whether it's OpenAI or Microsoft or Google or hopefully Oracle that will use this type of technology to solve for specific very high value business needs. And I think this will change how interfaces happen. So going back to your expense report, the world of, I'm going to go into an app, and I'm going to click on seven buttons in order to get some job done like this world is gone. Like I'm going to say, hey, please do this and that. And I expect an answer to come out. I've seen a recent demo about, marketing in sales. So a customer sends an email that is interested in something and then a ChatGPT powered thing just produces the answer. I think this is how the world is going to evolve. Like yes, there's a ton of hype, yes, it looks like magic and right now it is magic, but it's not yet productive for most enterprise scenarios. But in the next 6, 12, 24 months, this will start getting more dependable, and it's going to change how these industries are being managed. Like I think it's an internet level revolution. That's my take. >> It's very interesting. And it's going to change the way in which we have. Instead of accessing the data center through APIs, we're going to access it through natural language processing and that opens up technology to a huge audience. Last question, is a two part question. And the first part is what you guys are working on from the futures, but the second part of the question is, we got data scientists and developers in our audience. They love the new shiny toy. So give us a little glimpse of what you're working on in the future, and what would you say to them to persuade them to check out Oracle's AI services? >> Yep. So I think there's two main things that we're doing, one is around healthcare. With a new recent acquisition, we are spending a significant effort around revolutionizing healthcare with AI. Of course many scenarios from patient care using computer vision and cameras through automating, and making better insurance claims to research and pharma. We are making the best models from leading organizations, and internal available for hospitals and researchers, and insurance providers everywhere. And we truly are looking to become the leader in AI for healthcare. So I think that's a huge focus area. And the second part is, again, going back to the enterprise AI angle. Like we want to, if you have a business problem that you want to apply here to solve, we want to be your platform. Like you could use others if you want to build everything complicated and whatnot. We have a platform for that as well. But like, if you want to apply AI to solve a business problem, we want to be your platform. We want to be the, again, the Netflix of AI kind of a thing where we are the place for the greatest AI innovations accessible to any developer, any business analyst, any user, any data scientist on Oracle Cloud. And we're making a significant effort on these two fronts as well as developing a lot of the missing pieces, and building blocks that we see are needed in this space to make truly like a great experience for developers and data scientists. And what would I recommend? Get started, try it out. We actually have a shameless sales plug here. We have a free deal for all of our AI services. So it typically cost you nothing. I would highly recommend to just go, and try these things out. Go play with it. If you are a python welding developer, and you want to try a little bit of auto mail, go down that path. If you're not even there and you're just like, hey, I have these customer feedback things and I want to try out, if I can understand them and apply AI and visualize, and do some cool stuff, we have services for that. My recommendation is, and I think ChatGPT got us 'cause I see people that have nothing to do with AI, and can't even spell AI going and trying it out. I think this is the time. Go play with these things, go play with these technologies and find what AI can do to you or for you. And I think Oracle is a great place to start playing with these things. >> Elad, thank you. Appreciate you sharing your vision of making Oracle the Netflix of AI. Love that and really appreciate your time. >> Awesome. Thank you. Thank you for having me. >> Okay. Thanks for watching this Cube conversation. This is Dave Vellante. We'll see you next time. (gentle music playing)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> OpenAI The company, and ChatGPT have taken the world by storm. Microsoft reportedly is investing an additional 10 billion dollars into the company. But in our view, while the hype around ChatGPT is justified, we don't believe OpenAI will lock up the market with its first mover advantage. Rather, we believe that success in this market will be directly proportional to the quality and quantity of data that a technology company has at its disposal, and the compute power that it could deploy to run its system. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE insights, powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we unpack the excitement around ChatGPT, and debate the premise that the company's early entry into the space may not confer winner take all advantage to OpenAI. And to do so, we welcome CUBE collaborator, alum, Sarbjeet Johal, (chuckles) and John Furrier, co-host of the Cube. Great to see you Sarbjeet, John. Really appreciate you guys coming to the program. >> Great to be on. >> Okay, so what is ChatGPT? Well, actually we asked ChatGPT, what is ChatGPT? So here's what it said. ChatGPT is a state-of-the-art language model developed by OpenAI that can generate human-like text. It could be fine tuned for a variety of language tasks, such as conversation, summarization, and language translation. So I asked it, give it to me in 50 words or less. How did it do? Anything to add? >> Yeah, think it did good. It's large language model, like previous models, but it started applying the transformers sort of mechanism to focus on what prompt you have given it to itself. And then also the what answer it gave you in the first, sort of, one sentence or two sentences, and then introspect on itself, like what I have already said to you. And so just work on that. So it it's self sort of focus if you will. It does, the transformers help the large language models to do that. >> So to your point, it's a large language model, and GPT stands for generative pre-trained transformer. >> And if you put the definition back up there again, if you put it back up on the screen, let's see it back up. Okay, it actually missed the large, word large. So one of the problems with ChatGPT, it's not always accurate. It's actually a large language model, and it says state of the art language model. And if you look at Google, Google has dominated AI for many times and they're well known as being the best at this. And apparently Google has their own large language model, LLM, in play and have been holding it back to release because of backlash on the accuracy. Like just in that example you showed is a great point. They got almost right, but they missed the key word. >> You know what's funny about that John, is I had previously asked it in my prompt to give me it in less than a hundred words, and it was too long, I said I was too long for Breaking Analysis, and there it went into the fact that it's a large language model. So it largely, it gave me a really different answer the, for both times. So, but it's still pretty amazing for those of you who haven't played with it yet. And one of the best examples that I saw was Ben Charrington from This Week In ML AI podcast. And I stumbled on this thanks to Brian Gracely, who was listening to one of his Cloudcasts. Basically what Ben did is he took, he prompted ChatGPT to interview ChatGPT, and he simply gave the system the prompts, and then he ran the questions and answers into this avatar builder and sped it up 2X so it didn't sound like a machine. And voila, it was amazing. So John is ChatGPT going to take over as a cube host? >> Well, I was thinking, we get the questions in advance sometimes from PR people. We should actually just plug it in ChatGPT, add it to our notes, and saying, "Is this good enough for you? Let's ask the real question." So I think, you know, I think there's a lot of heavy lifting that gets done. I think the ChatGPT is a phenomenal revolution. I think it highlights the use case. Like that example we showed earlier. It gets most of it right. So it's directionally correct and it feels like it's an answer, but it's not a hundred percent accurate. And I think that's where people are seeing value in it. Writing marketing, copy, brainstorming, guest list, gift list for somebody. Write me some lyrics to a song. Give me a thesis about healthcare policy in the United States. It'll do a bang up job, and then you got to go in and you can massage it. So we're going to do three quarters of the work. That's why plagiarism and schools are kind of freaking out. And that's why Microsoft put 10 billion in, because why wouldn't this be a feature of Word, or the OS to help it do stuff on behalf of the user. So linguistically it's a beautiful thing. You can input a string and get a good answer. It's not a search result. >> And we're going to get your take on on Microsoft and, but it kind of levels the playing- but ChatGPT writes better than I do, Sarbjeet, and I know you have some good examples too. You mentioned the Reed Hastings example. >> Yeah, I was listening to Reed Hastings fireside chat with ChatGPT, and the answers were coming as sort of voice, in the voice format. And it was amazing what, he was having very sort of philosophy kind of talk with the ChatGPT, the longer sentences, like he was going on, like, just like we are talking, he was talking for like almost two minutes and then ChatGPT was answering. It was not one sentence question, and then a lot of answers from ChatGPT and yeah, you're right. I, this is our ability. I've been thinking deep about this since yesterday, we talked about, like, we want to do this segment. The data is fed into the data model. It can be the current data as well, but I think that, like, models like ChatGPT, other companies will have those too. They can, they're democratizing the intelligence, but they're not creating intelligence yet, definitely yet I can say that. They will give you all the finite answers. Like, okay, how do you do this for loop in Java, versus, you know, C sharp, and as a programmer you can do that, in, but they can't tell you that, how to write a new algorithm or write a new search algorithm for you. They cannot create a secretive code for you to- >> Not yet. >> Have competitive advantage. >> Not yet, not yet. >> but you- >> Can Google do that today? >> No one really can. The reasoning side of the data is, we talked about at our Supercloud event, with Zhamak Dehghani who's was CEO of, now of Nextdata. This next wave of data intelligence is going to come from entrepreneurs that are probably cross discipline, computer science and some other discipline. But they're going to be new things, for example, data, metadata, and data. It's hard to do reasoning like a human being, so that needs more data to train itself. So I think the first gen of this training module for the large language model they have is a corpus of text. Lot of that's why blog posts are, but the facts are wrong and sometimes out of context, because that contextual reasoning takes time, it takes intelligence. So machines need to become intelligent, and so therefore they need to be trained. So you're going to start to see, I think, a lot of acceleration on training the data sets. And again, it's only as good as the data you can get. And again, proprietary data sets will be a huge winner. Anyone who's got a large corpus of content, proprietary content like theCUBE or SiliconANGLE as a publisher will benefit from this. Large FinTech companies, anyone with large proprietary data will probably be a big winner on this generative AI wave, because it just, it will eat that up, and turn that back into something better. So I think there's going to be a lot of interesting things to look at here. And certainly productivity's going to be off the charts for vanilla and the internet is going to get swarmed with vanilla content. So if you're in the content business, and you're an original content producer of any kind, you're going to be not vanilla, so you're going to be better. So I think there's so much at play Dave (indistinct). >> I think the playing field has been risen, so we- >> Risen and leveled? >> Yeah, and leveled to certain extent. So it's now like that few people as consumers, as consumers of AI, we will have a advantage and others cannot have that advantage. So it will be democratized. That's, I'm sure about that. But if you take the example of calculator, when the calculator came in, and a lot of people are, "Oh, people can't do math anymore because calculator is there." right? So it's a similar sort of moment, just like a calculator for the next level. But, again- >> I see it more like open source, Sarbjeet, because like if you think about what ChatGPT's doing, you do a query and it comes from somewhere the value of a post from ChatGPT is just a reuse of AI. The original content accent will be come from a human. So if I lay out a paragraph from ChatGPT, did some heavy lifting on some facts, I check the facts, save me about maybe- >> Yeah, it's productive. >> An hour writing, and then I write a killer two, three sentences of, like, sharp original thinking or critical analysis. I then took that body of work, open source content, and then laid something on top of it. >> And Sarbjeet's example is a good one, because like if the calculator kids don't do math as well anymore, the slide rule, remember we had slide rules as kids, remember we first started using Waze, you know, we were this minority and you had an advantage over other drivers. Now Waze is like, you know, social traffic, you know, navigation, everybody had, you know- >> All the back roads are crowded. >> They're car crowded. (group laughs) Exactly. All right, let's, let's move on. What about this notion that futurist Ray Amara put forth and really Amara's Law that we're showing here, it's, the law is we, you know, "We tend to overestimate the effect of technology in the short run and underestimate it in the long run." Is that the case, do you think, with ChatGPT? What do you think Sarbjeet? >> I think that's true actually. There's a lot of, >> We don't debate this. >> There's a lot of awe, like when people see the results from ChatGPT, they say what, what the heck? Like, it can do this? But then if you use it more and more and more, and I ask the set of similar question, not the same question, and it gives you like same answer. It's like reading from the same bucket of text in, the interior read (indistinct) where the ChatGPT, you will see that in some couple of segments. It's very, it sounds so boring that the ChatGPT is coming out the same two sentences every time. So it is kind of good, but it's not as good as people think it is right now. But we will have, go through this, you know, hype sort of cycle and get realistic with it. And then in the long term, I think it's a great thing in the short term, it's not something which will (indistinct) >> What's your counter point? You're saying it's not. >> I, no I think the question was, it's hyped up in the short term and not it's underestimated long term. That's what I think what he said, quote. >> Yes, yeah. That's what he said. >> Okay, I think that's wrong with this, because this is a unique, ChatGPT is a unique kind of impact and it's very generational. People have been comparing it, I have been comparing to the internet, like the web, web browser Mosaic and Netscape, right, Navigator. I mean, I clearly still remember the days seeing Navigator for the first time, wow. And there weren't not many sites you could go to, everyone typed in, you know, cars.com, you know. >> That (indistinct) wasn't that overestimated, the overhyped at the beginning and underestimated. >> No, it was, it was underestimated long run, people thought. >> But that Amara's law. >> That's what is. >> No, they said overestimated? >> Overestimated near term underestimated- overhyped near term, underestimated long term. I got, right I mean? >> Well, I, yeah okay, so I would then agree, okay then- >> We were off the charts about the internet in the early days, and it actually exceeded our expectations. >> Well there were people who were, like, poo-pooing it early on. So when the browser came out, people were like, "Oh, the web's a toy for kids." I mean, in 1995 the web was a joke, right? So '96, you had online populations growing, so you had structural changes going on around the browser, internet population. And then that replaced other things, direct mail, other business activities that were once analog then went to the web, kind of read only as you, as we always talk about. So I think that's a moment where the hype long term, the smart money, and the smart industry experts all get the long term. And in this case, there's more poo-pooing in the short term. "Ah, it's not a big deal, it's just AI." I've heard many people poo-pooing ChatGPT, and a lot of smart people saying, "No this is next gen, this is different and it's only going to get better." So I think people are estimating a big long game on this one. >> So you're saying it's bifurcated. There's those who say- >> Yes. >> Okay, all right, let's get to the heart of the premise, and possibly the debate for today's episode. Will OpenAI's early entry into the market confer sustainable competitive advantage for the company. And if you look at the history of tech, the technology industry, it's kind of littered with first mover failures. Altair, IBM, Tandy, Commodore, they and Apple even, they were really early in the PC game. They took a backseat to Dell who came in the scene years later with a better business model. Netscape, you were just talking about, was all the rage in Silicon Valley, with the first browser, drove up all the housing prices out here. AltaVista was the first search engine to really, you know, index full text. >> Owned by Dell, I mean DEC. >> Owned by Digital. >> Yeah, Digital Equipment >> Compaq bought it. And of course as an aside, Digital, they wanted to showcase their hardware, right? Their super computer stuff. And then so Friendster and MySpace, they came before Facebook. The iPhone certainly wasn't the first mobile device. So lots of failed examples, but there are some recent successes like AWS and cloud. >> You could say smartphone. So I mean. >> Well I know, and you can, we can parse this so we'll debate it. Now Twitter, you could argue, had first mover advantage. You kind of gave me that one John. Bitcoin and crypto clearly had first mover advantage, and sustaining that. Guys, will OpenAI make it to the list on the right with ChatGPT, what do you think? >> I think categorically as a company, it probably won't, but as a category, I think what they're doing will, so OpenAI as a company, they get funding, there's power dynamics involved. Microsoft put a billion dollars in early on, then they just pony it up. Now they're reporting 10 billion more. So, like, if the browsers, Microsoft had competitive advantage over Netscape, and used monopoly power, and convicted by the Department of Justice for killing Netscape with their monopoly, Netscape should have had won that battle, but Microsoft killed it. In this case, Microsoft's not killing it, they're buying into it. So I think the embrace extend Microsoft power here makes OpenAI vulnerable for that one vendor solution. So the AI as a company might not make the list, but the category of what this is, large language model AI, is probably will be on the right hand side. >> Okay, we're going to come back to the government intervention and maybe do some comparisons, but what are your thoughts on this premise here? That, it will basically set- put forth the premise that it, that ChatGPT, its early entry into the market will not confer competitive advantage to >> For OpenAI. >> To Open- Yeah, do you agree with that? >> I agree with that actually. It, because Google has been at it, and they have been holding back, as John said because of the scrutiny from the Fed, right, so- >> And privacy too. >> And the privacy and the accuracy as well. But I think Sam Altman and the company on those guys, right? They have put this in a hasty way out there, you know, because it makes mistakes, and there are a lot of questions around the, sort of, where the content is coming from. You saw that as your example, it just stole the content, and without your permission, you know? >> Yeah. So as quick this aside- >> And it codes on people's behalf and the, those codes are wrong. So there's a lot of, sort of, false information it's putting out there. So it's a very vulnerable thing to do what Sam Altman- >> So even though it'll get better, others will compete. >> So look, just side note, a term which Reid Hoffman used a little bit. Like he said, it's experimental launch, like, you know, it's- >> It's pretty damn good. >> It is clever because according to Sam- >> It's more than clever. It's good. >> It's awesome, if you haven't used it. I mean you write- you read what it writes and you go, "This thing writes so well, it writes so much better than you." >> The human emotion drives that too. I think that's a big thing. But- >> I Want to add one more- >> Make your last point. >> Last one. Okay. So, but he's still holding back. He's conducting quite a few interviews. If you want to get the gist of it, there's an interview with StrictlyVC interview from yesterday with Sam Altman. Listen to that one it's an eye opening what they want- where they want to take it. But my last one I want to make it on this point is that Satya Nadella yesterday did an interview with Wall Street Journal. I think he was doing- >> You were not impressed. >> I was not impressed because he was pushing it too much. So Sam Altman's holding back so there's less backlash. >> Got 10 billion reasons to push. >> I think he's almost- >> Microsoft just laid off 10000 people. Hey ChatGPT, find me a job. You know like. (group laughs) >> He's overselling it to an extent that I think it will backfire on Microsoft. And he's over promising a lot of stuff right now, I think. I don't know why he's very jittery about all these things. And he did the same thing during Ignite as well. So he said, "Oh, this AI will write code for you and this and that." Like you called him out- >> The hyperbole- >> During your- >> from Satya Nadella, he's got a lot of hyperbole. (group talks over each other) >> All right, Let's, go ahead. >> Well, can I weigh in on the whole- >> Yeah, sure. >> Microsoft thing on whether OpenAI, here's the take on this. I think it's more like the browser moment to me, because I could relate to that experience with ChatG, personally, emotionally, when I saw that, and I remember vividly- >> You mean that aha moment (indistinct). >> Like this is obviously the future. Anything else in the old world is dead, website's going to be everywhere. It was just instant dot connection for me. And a lot of other smart people who saw this. Lot of people by the way, didn't see it. Someone said the web's a toy. At the company I was worked for at the time, Hewlett Packard, they like, they could have been in, they had invented HTML, and so like all this stuff was, like, they just passed, the web was just being passed over. But at that time, the browser got better, more websites came on board. So the structural advantage there was online web usage was growing, online user population. So that was growing exponentially with the rise of the Netscape browser. So OpenAI could stay on the right side of your list as durable, if they leverage the category that they're creating, can get the scale. And if they can get the scale, just like Twitter, that failed so many times that they still hung around. So it was a product that was always successful, right? So I mean, it should have- >> You're right, it was terrible, we kept coming back. >> The fail whale, but it still grew. So OpenAI has that moment. They could do it if Microsoft doesn't meddle too much with too much power as a vendor. They could be the Netscape Navigator, without the anti-competitive behavior of somebody else. So to me, they have the pole position. So they have an opportunity. So if not, if they don't execute, then there's opportunity. There's not a lot of barriers to entry, vis-a-vis say the CapEx of say a cloud company like AWS. You can't replicate that, Many have tried, but I think you can replicate OpenAI. >> And we're going to talk about that. Okay, so real quick, I want to bring in some ETR data. This isn't an ETR heavy segment, only because this so new, you know, they haven't coverage yet, but they do cover AI. So basically what we're seeing here is a slide on the vertical axis's net score, which is a measure of spending momentum, and in the horizontal axis's is presence in the dataset. Think of it as, like, market presence. And in the insert right there, you can see how the dots are plotted, the two columns. And so, but the key point here that we want to make, there's a bunch of companies on the left, is he like, you know, DataRobot and C3 AI and some others, but the big whales, Google, AWS, Microsoft, are really dominant in this market. So that's really the key takeaway that, can we- >> I notice IBM is way low. >> Yeah, IBM's low, and actually bring that back up and you, but then you see Oracle who actually is injecting. So I guess that's the other point is, you're not necessarily going to go buy AI, and you know, build your own AI, you're going to, it's going to be there and, it, Salesforce is going to embed it into its platform, the SaaS companies, and you're going to purchase AI. You're not necessarily going to build it. But some companies obviously are. >> I mean to quote IBM's general manager Rob Thomas, "You can't have AI with IA." information architecture and David Flynn- >> You can't Have AI without IA >> without, you can't have AI without IA. You can't have, if you have an Information Architecture, you then can power AI. Yesterday David Flynn, with Hammersmith, was on our Supercloud. He was pointing out that the relationship of storage, where you store things, also impacts the data and stressablity, and Zhamak from Nextdata, she was pointing out that same thing. So the data problem factors into all this too, Dave. >> So you got the big cloud and internet giants, they're all poised to go after this opportunity. Microsoft is investing up to 10 billion. Google's code red, which was, you know, the headline in the New York Times. Of course Apple is there and several alternatives in the market today. Guys like Chinchilla, Bloom, and there's a company Jasper and several others, and then Lena Khan looms large and the government's around the world, EU, US, China, all taking notice before the market really is coalesced around a single player. You know, John, you mentioned Netscape, they kind of really, the US government was way late to that game. It was kind of game over. And Netscape, I remember Barksdale was like, "Eh, we're going to be selling software in the enterprise anyway." and then, pshew, the company just dissipated. So, but it looks like the US government, especially with Lena Khan, they're changing the definition of antitrust and what the cause is to go after people, and they're really much more aggressive. It's only what, two years ago that (indistinct). >> Yeah, the problem I have with the federal oversight is this, they're always like late to the game, and they're slow to catch up. So in other words, they're working on stuff that should have been solved a year and a half, two years ago around some of the social networks hiding behind some of the rules around open web back in the days, and I think- >> But they're like 15 years late to that. >> Yeah, and now they got this new thing on top of it. So like, I just worry about them getting their fingers. >> But there's only two years, you know, OpenAI. >> No, but the thing (indistinct). >> No, they're still fighting other battles. But the problem with government is that they're going to label Big Tech as like a evil thing like Pharma, it's like smoke- >> You know Lena Khan wants to kill Big Tech, there's no question. >> So I think Big Tech is getting a very seriously bad rap. And I think anything that the government does that shades darkness on tech, is politically motivated in most cases. You can almost look at everything, and my 80 20 rule is in play here. 80% of the government activity around tech is bullshit, it's politically motivated, and the 20% is probably relevant, but off the mark and not organized. >> Well market forces have always been the determining factor of success. The governments, you know, have been pretty much failed. I mean you look at IBM's antitrust, that, what did that do? The market ultimately beat them. You look at Microsoft back in the day, right? Windows 95 was peaking, the government came in. But you know, like you said, they missed the web, right, and >> so they were hanging on- >> There's nobody in government >> to Windows. >> that actually knows- >> And so, you, I think you're right. It's market forces that are going to determine this. But Sarbjeet, what do you make of Microsoft's big bet here, you weren't impressed with with Nadella. How do you think, where are they going to apply it? Is this going to be a Hail Mary for Bing, or is it going to be applied elsewhere? What do you think. >> They are saying that they will, sort of, weave this into their products, office products, productivity and also to write code as well, developer productivity as well. That's a big play for them. But coming back to your antitrust sort of comments, right? I believe the, your comment was like, oh, fed was late 10 years or 15 years earlier, but now they're two years. But things are moving very fast now as compared to they used to move. >> So two years is like 10 Years. >> Yeah, two years is like 10 years. Just want to make that point. (Dave laughs) This thing is going like wildfire. Any new tech which comes in that I think they're going against distribution channels. Lina Khan has commented time and again that the marketplace model is that she wants to have some grip on. Cloud marketplaces are a kind of monopolistic kind of way. >> I don't, I don't see this, I don't see a Chat AI. >> You told me it's not Bing, you had an interesting comment. >> No, no. First of all, this is great from Microsoft. If you're Microsoft- >> Why? >> Because Microsoft doesn't have the AI chops that Google has, right? Google is got so much core competency on how they run their search, how they run their backends, their cloud, even though they don't get a lot of cloud market share in the enterprise, they got a kick ass cloud cause they needed one. >> Totally. >> They've invented SRE. I mean Google's development and engineering chops are off the scales, right? Amazon's got some good chops, but Google's got like 10 times more chops than AWS in my opinion. Cloud's a whole different story. Microsoft gets AI, they get a playbook, they get a product they can render into, the not only Bing, productivity software, helping people write papers, PowerPoint, also don't forget the cloud AI can super help. We had this conversation on our Supercloud event, where AI's going to do a lot of the heavy lifting around understanding observability and managing service meshes, to managing microservices, to turning on and off applications, and or maybe writing code in real time. So there's a plethora of use cases for Microsoft to deploy this. combined with their R and D budgets, they can then turbocharge more research, build on it. So I think this gives them a car in the game, Google may have pole position with AI, but this puts Microsoft right in the game, and they already have a lot of stuff going on. But this just, I mean everything gets lifted up. Security, cloud, productivity suite, everything. >> What's under the hood at Google, and why aren't they talking about it? I mean they got to be freaked out about this. No? Or do they have kind of a magic bullet? >> I think they have the, they have the chops definitely. Magic bullet, I don't know where they are, as compared to the ChatGPT 3 or 4 models. Like they, but if you look at the online sort of activity and the videos put out there from Google folks, Google technology folks, that's account you should look at if you are looking there, they have put all these distinctions what ChatGPT 3 has used, they have been talking about for a while as well. So it's not like it's a secret thing that you cannot replicate. As you said earlier, like in the beginning of this segment, that anybody who has more data and the capacity to process that data, which Google has both, I think they will win this. >> Obviously living in Palo Alto where the Google founders are, and Google's headquarters next town over we have- >> We're so close to them. We have inside information on some of the thinking and that hasn't been reported by any outlet yet. And that is, is that, from what I'm hearing from my sources, is Google has it, they don't want to release it for many reasons. One is it might screw up their search monopoly, one, two, they're worried about the accuracy, 'cause Google will get sued. 'Cause a lot of people are jamming on this ChatGPT as, "Oh it does everything for me." when it's clearly not a hundred percent accurate all the time. >> So Lina Kahn is looming, and so Google's like be careful. >> Yeah so Google's just like, this is the third, could be a third rail. >> But the first thing you said is a concern. >> Well no. >> The disruptive (indistinct) >> What they will do is do a Waymo kind of thing, where they spin out a separate company. >> They're doing that. >> The discussions happening, they're going to spin out the separate company and put it over there, and saying, "This is AI, got search over there, don't touch that search, 'cause that's where all the revenue is." (chuckles) >> So, okay, so that's how they deal with the Clay Christensen dilemma. What's the business model here? I mean it's not advertising, right? Is it to charge you for a query? What, how do you make money at this? >> It's a good question, I mean my thinking is, first of all, it's cool to type stuff in and see a paper get written, or write a blog post, or gimme a marketing slogan for this or that or write some code. I think the API side of the business will be critical. And I think Howie Xu, I know you're going to reference some of his comments yesterday on Supercloud, I think this brings a whole 'nother user interface into technology consumption. I think the business model, not yet clear, but it will probably be some sort of either API and developer environment or just a straight up free consumer product, with some sort of freemium backend thing for business. >> And he was saying too, it's natural language is the way in which you're going to interact with these systems. >> I think it's APIs, it's APIs, APIs, APIs, because these people who are cooking up these models, and it takes a lot of compute power to train these and to, for inference as well. Somebody did the analysis on the how many cents a Google search costs to Google, and how many cents the ChatGPT query costs. It's, you know, 100x or something on that. You can take a look at that. >> A 100x on which side? >> You're saying two orders of magnitude more expensive for ChatGPT >> Much more, yeah. >> Than for Google. >> It's very expensive. >> So Google's got the data, they got the infrastructure and they got, you're saying they got the cost (indistinct) >> No actually it's a simple query as well, but they are trying to put together the answers, and they're going through a lot more data versus index data already, you know. >> Let me clarify, you're saying that Google's version of ChatGPT is more efficient? >> No, I'm, I'm saying Google search results. >> Ah, search results. >> What are used to today, but cheaper. >> But that, does that, is that going to confer advantage to Google's large language (indistinct)? >> It will, because there were deep science (indistinct). >> Google, I don't think Google search is doing a large language model on their search, it's keyword search. You know, what's the weather in Santa Cruz? Or how, what's the weather going to be? Or you know, how do I find this? Now they have done a smart job of doing some things with those queries, auto complete, re direct navigation. But it's, it's not entity. It's not like, "Hey, what's Dave Vellante thinking this week in Breaking Analysis?" ChatGPT might get that, because it'll get your Breaking Analysis, it'll synthesize it. There'll be some, maybe some clips. It'll be like, you know, I mean. >> Well I got to tell you, I asked ChatGPT to, like, I said, I'm going to enter a transcript of a discussion I had with Nir Zuk, the CTO of Palo Alto Networks, And I want you to write a 750 word blog. I never input the transcript. It wrote a 750 word blog. It attributed quotes to him, and it just pulled a bunch of stuff that, and said, okay, here it is. It talked about Supercloud, it defined Supercloud. >> It's made, it makes you- >> Wow, But it was a big lie. It was fraudulent, but still, blew me away. >> Again, vanilla content and non accurate content. So we are going to see a surge of misinformation on steroids, but I call it the vanilla content. Wow, that's just so boring, (indistinct). >> There's so many dangers. >> Make your point, cause we got to, almost out of time. >> Okay, so the consumption, like how do you consume this thing. As humans, we are consuming it and we are, like, getting a nicely, like, surprisingly shocked, you know, wow, that's cool. It's going to increase productivity and all that stuff, right? And on the danger side as well, the bad actors can take hold of it and create fake content and we have the fake sort of intelligence, if you go out there. So that's one thing. The second thing is, we are as humans are consuming this as language. Like we read that, we listen to it, whatever format we consume that is, but the ultimate usage of that will be when the machines can take that output from likes of ChatGPT, and do actions based on that. The robots can work, the robot can paint your house, we were talking about, right? Right now we can't do that. >> Data apps. >> So the data has to be ingested by the machines. It has to be digestible by the machines. And the machines cannot digest unorganized data right now, we will get better on the ingestion side as well. So we are getting better. >> Data, reasoning, insights, and action. >> I like that mall, paint my house. >> So, okay- >> By the way, that means drones that'll come in. Spray painting your house. >> Hey, it wasn't too long ago that robots couldn't climb stairs, as I like to point out. Okay, and of course it's no surprise the venture capitalists are lining up to eat at the trough, as I'd like to say. Let's hear, you'd referenced this earlier, John, let's hear what AI expert Howie Xu said at the Supercloud event, about what it takes to clone ChatGPT. Please, play the clip. >> So one of the VCs actually asked me the other day, right? "Hey, how much money do I need to spend, invest to get a, you know, another shot to the openAI sort of the level." You know, I did a (indistinct) >> Line up. >> A hundred million dollar is the order of magnitude that I came up with, right? You know, not a billion, not 10 million, right? So a hundred- >> Guys a hundred million dollars, that's an astoundingly low figure. What do you make of it? >> I was in an interview with, I was interviewing, I think he said hundred million or so, but in the hundreds of millions, not a billion right? >> You were trying to get him up, you were like "Hundreds of millions." >> Well I think, I- >> He's like, eh, not 10, not a billion. >> Well first of all, Howie Xu's an expert machine learning. He's at Zscaler, he's a machine learning AI guy. But he comes from VMware, he's got his technology pedigrees really off the chart. Great friend of theCUBE and kind of like a CUBE analyst for us. And he's smart. He's right. I think the barriers to entry from a dollar standpoint are lower than say the CapEx required to compete with AWS. Clearly, the CapEx spending to build all the tech for the run a cloud. >> And you don't need a huge sales force. >> And in some case apps too, it's the same thing. But I think it's not that hard. >> But am I right about that? You don't need a huge sales force either. It's, what, you know >> If the product's good, it will sell, this is a new era. The better mouse trap will win. This is the new economics in software, right? So- >> Because you look at the amount of money Lacework, and Snyk, Snowflake, Databrooks. Look at the amount of money they've raised. I mean it's like a billion dollars before they get to IPO or more. 'Cause they need promotion, they need go to market. You don't need (indistinct) >> OpenAI's been working on this for multiple five years plus it's, hasn't, wasn't born yesterday. Took a lot of years to get going. And Sam is depositioning all the success, because he's trying to manage expectations, To your point Sarbjeet, earlier. It's like, yeah, he's trying to "Whoa, whoa, settle down everybody, (Dave laughs) it's not that great." because he doesn't want to fall into that, you know, hero and then get taken down, so. >> It may take a 100 million or 150 or 200 million to train the model. But to, for the inference to, yeah to for the inference machine, It will take a lot more, I believe. >> Give it, so imagine, >> Because- >> Go ahead, sorry. >> Go ahead. But because it consumes a lot more compute cycles and it's certain level of storage and everything, right, which they already have. So I think to compute is different. To frame the model is a different cost. But to run the business is different, because I think 100 million can go into just fighting the Fed. >> Well there's a flywheel too. >> Oh that's (indistinct) >> (indistinct) >> We are running the business, right? >> It's an interesting number, but it's also kind of, like, context to it. So here, a hundred million spend it, you get there, but you got to factor in the fact that the ways companies win these days is critical mass scale, hitting a flywheel. If they can keep that flywheel of the value that they got going on and get better, you can almost imagine a marketplace where, hey, we have proprietary data, we're SiliconANGLE in theCUBE. We have proprietary content, CUBE videos, transcripts. Well wouldn't it be great if someone in a marketplace could sell a module for us, right? We buy that, Amazon's thing and things like that. So if they can get a marketplace going where you can apply to data sets that may be proprietary, you can start to see this become bigger. And so I think the key barriers to entry is going to be success. I'll give you an example, Reddit. Reddit is successful and it's hard to copy, not because of the software. >> They built the moat. >> Because you can, buy Reddit open source software and try To compete. >> They built the moat with their community. >> Their community, their scale, their user expectation. Twitter, we referenced earlier, that thing should have gone under the first two years, but there was such a great emotional product. People would tolerate the fail whale. And then, you know, well that was a whole 'nother thing. >> Then a plane landed in (John laughs) the Hudson and it was over. >> I think verticals, a lot of verticals will build applications using these models like for lawyers, for doctors, for scientists, for content creators, for- >> So you'll have many hundreds of millions of dollars investments that are going to be seeping out. If, all right, we got to wrap, if you had to put odds on it that that OpenAI is going to be the leader, maybe not a winner take all leader, but like you look at like Amazon and cloud, they're not winner take all, these aren't necessarily winner take all markets. It's not necessarily a zero sum game, but let's call it winner take most. What odds would you give that open AI 10 years from now will be in that position. >> If I'm 0 to 10 kind of thing? >> Yeah, it's like horse race, 3 to 1, 2 to 1, even money, 10 to 1, 50 to 1. >> Maybe 2 to 1, >> 2 to 1, that's pretty low odds. That's basically saying they're the favorite, they're the front runner. Would you agree with that? >> I'd say 4 to 1. >> Yeah, I was going to say I'm like a 5 to 1, 7 to 1 type of person, 'cause I'm a skeptic with, you know, there's so much competition, but- >> I think they're definitely the leader. I mean you got to say, I mean. >> Oh there's no question. There's no question about it. >> The question is can they execute? >> They're not Friendster, is what you're saying. >> They're not Friendster and they're more like Twitter and Reddit where they have momentum. If they can execute on the product side, and if they don't stumble on that, they will continue to have the lead. >> If they say stay neutral, as Sam is, has been saying, that, hey, Microsoft is one of our partners, if you look at their company model, how they have structured the company, then they're going to pay back to the investors, like Microsoft is the biggest one, up to certain, like by certain number of years, they're going to pay back from all the money they make, and after that, they're going to give the money back to the public, to the, I don't know who they give it to, like non-profit or something. (indistinct) >> Okay, the odds are dropping. (group talks over each other) That's a good point though >> Actually they might have done that to fend off the criticism of this. But it's really interesting to see the model they have adopted. >> The wildcard in all this, My last word on this is that, if there's a developer shift in how developers and data can come together again, we have conferences around the future of data, Supercloud and meshs versus, you know, how the data world, coding with data, how that evolves will also dictate, 'cause a wild card could be a shift in the landscape around how developers are using either machine learning or AI like techniques to code into their apps, so. >> That's fantastic insight. I can't thank you enough for your time, on the heels of Supercloud 2, really appreciate it. All right, thanks to John and Sarbjeet for the outstanding conversation today. Special thanks to the Palo Alto studio team. My goodness, Anderson, this great backdrop. You guys got it all out here, I'm jealous. And Noah, really appreciate it, Chuck, Andrew Frick and Cameron, Andrew Frick switching, Cameron on the video lake, great job. And Alex Myerson, he's on production, manages the podcast for us, Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and our newsletters. Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at SiliconANGLE, does some great editing, thanks to all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcast, wherever you listen. Publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Want to get in touch, email me directly, david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me at dvellante, or comment on our LinkedIn post. And by all means, check out etr.ai. They got really great survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, We'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (electronic music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR, this is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> A decade of big data investments combined with cloud scale, the rise of much more cost effective processing power. And the introduction of advanced tooling has catapulted machine intelligence to the forefront of technology investments. No matter what job you have, your operation will be AI powered within five years and machines may actually even be doing your job. Artificial intelligence is being infused into applications, infrastructure, equipment, and virtually every aspect of our lives. AI is proving to be extremely helpful at things like controlling vehicles, speeding up medical diagnoses, processing language, advancing science, and generally raising the stakes on what it means to apply technology for business advantage. But business value realization has been a challenge for most organizations due to lack of skills, complexity of programming models, immature technology integration, sizable upfront investments, ethical concerns, and lack of business alignment. Mastering AI technology will not be a requirement for success in our view. However, figuring out how and where to apply AI to your business will be crucial. That means understanding the business case, picking the right technology partner, experimenting in bite-sized chunks, and quickly identifying winners to double down on from an investment standpoint. Hello and welcome to this week's Wiki-bond CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we update you on the state of AI and what it means for the competition. And to do so, we invite into our studios Andy Thurai of Constellation Research. Andy covers AI deeply. He knows the players, he knows the pitfalls of AI investment, and he's a collaborator. Andy, great to have you on the program. Thanks for coming into our CUBE studios. >> Thanks for having me on. >> You're very welcome. Okay, let's set the table with a premise and a series of assertions we want to test with Andy. I'm going to lay 'em out. And then Andy, I'd love for you to comment. So, first of all, according to McKinsey, AI adoption has more than doubled since 2017, but only 10% of organizations report seeing significant ROI. That's a BCG and MIT study. And part of that challenge of AI is it requires data, is requires good data, data proficiency, which is not trivial, as you know. Firms that can master both data and AI, we believe are going to have a competitive advantage this decade. Hyperscalers, as we show you dominate AI and ML. We'll show you some data on that. And having said that, there's plenty of room for specialists. They need to partner with the cloud vendors for go to market productivity. And finally, organizations increasingly have to put data and AI at the center of their enterprises. And to do that, most are going to rely on vendor R&D to leverage AI and ML. In other words, Andy, they're going to buy it and apply it as opposed to build it. What are your thoughts on that setup and that premise? >> Yeah, I see that a lot happening in the field, right? So first of all, the only 10% of realizing a return on investment. That's so true because we talked about this earlier, the most companies are still in the innovation cycle. So they're trying to innovate and see what they can do to apply. A lot of these times when you look at the solutions, what they come up with or the models they create, the experimentation they do, most times they don't even have a good business case to solve, right? So they just experiment and then they figure it out, "Oh my God, this model is working. Can we do something to solve it?" So it's like you found a hammer and then you're trying to find the needle kind of thing, right? That never works. >> 'Cause it's cool or whatever it is. >> It is, right? So that's why, I always advise, when they come to me and ask me things like, "Hey, what's the right way to do it? What is the secret sauce?" And, we talked about this. The first thing I tell them is, "Find out what is the business case that's having the most amount of problems, that that can be solved using some of the AI use cases," right? Not all of them can be solved. Even after you experiment, do the whole nine yards, spend millions of dollars on that, right? And later on you make it efficient only by saving maybe $50,000 for the company or a $100,000 for the company, is it really even worth the experiment, right? So you got to start with the saying that, you know, where's the base for this happening? Where's the need? What's a business use case? It doesn't have to be about cost efficient and saving money in the existing processes. It could be a new thing. You want to bring in a new revenue stream, but figure out what is a business use case, how much money potentially I can make off of that. The same way that start-ups go after. Right? >> Yeah. Pretty straightforward. All right, let's take a look at where ML and AI fit relative to the other hot sectors of the ETR dataset. This XY graph shows net score spending velocity in the vertical axis and presence in the survey, they call it sector perversion for the October survey, the January survey's in the field. Then that squiggly line on ML/AI represents the progression. Since the January 21 survey, you can see the downward trajectory. And we position ML and AI relative to the other big four hot sectors or big three, including, ML/AI is four. Containers, cloud and RPA. These have consistently performed above that magic 40% red dotted line for most of the past two years. Anything above 40%, we think is highly elevated. And we've just included analytics and big data for context and relevant adjacentness, if you will. Now note that green arrow moving toward, you know, the 40% mark on ML/AI. I got a glimpse of the January survey, which is in the field. It's got more than a thousand responses already, and it's trending up for the current survey. So Andy, what do you make of this downward trajectory over the past seven quarters and the presumed uptick in the coming months? >> So one of the things you have to keep in mind is when the pandemic happened, it's about survival mode, right? So when somebody's in a survival mode, what happens, the luxury and the innovations get cut. That's what happens. And this is exactly what happened in the situation. So as you can see in the last seven quarters, which is almost dating back close to pandemic, everybody was trying to keep their operations alive, especially digital operations. How do I keep the lights on? That's the most important thing for them. So while the numbers spent on AI, ML is less overall, I still think the AI ML to spend to sort of like a employee experience or the IT ops, AI ops, ML ops, as we talked about, some of those areas actually went up. There are companies, we talked about it, Atlassian had a lot of platform issues till the amount of money people are spending on that is exorbitant and simply because they are offering the solution that was not available other way. So there are companies out there, you can take AoPS or incident management for that matter, right? A lot of companies have a digital insurance, they don't know how to properly manage it. How do you find an intern solve it immediately? That's all using AI ML and some of those areas actually growing unbelievable, the companies in that area. >> So this is a really good point. If you can you bring up that chart again, what Andy's saying is a lot of the companies in the ETR taxonomy that are doing things with AI might not necessarily show up in a granular fashion. And I think the other point I would make is, these are still highly elevated numbers. If you put on like storage and servers, they would read way, way down the list. And, look in the pandemic, we had to deal with work from home, we had to re-architect the network, we had to worry about security. So those are really good points that you made there. Let's, unpack this a little bit and look at the ML AI sector and the ETR data and specifically at the players and get Andy to comment on this. This chart here shows the same x y dimensions, and it just notes some of the players that are specifically have services and products that people spend money on, that CIOs and IT buyers can comment on. So the table insert shows how the companies are plotted, it's net score, and then the ends in the survey. And Andy, the hyperscalers are dominant, as you can see. You see Databricks there showing strong as a specialist, and then you got to pack a six or seven in there. And then Oracle and IBM, kind of the big whales of yester year are in the mix. And to your point, companies like Salesforce that you mentioned to me offline aren't in that mix, but they do a lot in AI. But what are your takeaways from that data? >> If you could put the slide back on please. I want to make quick comments on a couple of those. So the first one is, it's surprising other hyperscalers, right? As you and I talked about this earlier, AWS is more about logo blocks. We discussed that, right? >> Like what? Like a SageMaker as an example. >> We'll give you all the components what do you need. Whether it's MLOps component or whether it's, CodeWhisperer that we talked about, or a oral platform or data or data, whatever you want. They'll give you the blocks and then you'll build things on top of it, right? But Google took a different way. Matter of fact, if we did those numbers a few years ago, Google would've been number one because they did a lot of work with their acquisition of DeepMind and other things. They're way ahead of the pack when it comes to AI for longest time. Now, I think Microsoft's move of partnering and taking a huge competitor out would open the eyes is unbelievable. You saw that everybody is talking about chat GPI, right? And the open AI tool and ChatGPT rather. Remember as Warren Buffet is saying that, when my laundry lady comes and talk to me about stock market, it's heated up. So that's how it's heated up. Everybody's using ChatGPT. What that means is at the end of the day is they're creating, it's still in beta, keep in mind. It's not fully... >> Can you play with it a little bit? >> I have a little bit. >> I have, but it's good and it's not good. You know what I mean? >> Look, so at the end of the day, you take the massive text of all the available text in the world today, mass them all together. And then you ask a question, it's going to basically search through that and figure it out and answer that back. Yes, it's good. But again, as we discussed, if there's no business use case of what problem you're going to solve. This is building hype. But then eventually they'll figure out, for example, all your chats, online chats, could be aided by your AI chat bots, which is already there, which is not there at that level. This could build help that, right? Or the other thing we talked about is one of the areas where I'm more concerned about is that it is able to produce equal enough original text at the level that humans can produce, for example, ChatGPT or the equal enough, the large language transformer can help you write stories as of Shakespeare wrote it. Pretty close to it. It'll learn from that. So when it comes down to it, talk about creating messages, articles, blogs, especially during political seasons, not necessarily just in US, but anywhere for that matter. If people are able to produce at the emission speed and throw it at the consumers and confuse them, the elections can be won, the governments can be toppled. >> Because to your point about chatbots is chatbots have obviously, reduced the number of bodies that you need to support chat. But they haven't solved the problem of serving consumers. Most of the chat bots are conditioned response, which of the following best describes your problem? >> The current chatbot. >> Yeah. Hey, did we solve your problem? No. Is the answer. So that has some real potential. But if you could bring up that slide again, Ken, I mean you've got the hyperscalers that are dominant. You talked about Google and Microsoft is ubiquitous, they seem to be dominant in every ETR category. But then you have these other specialists. How do those guys compete? And maybe you could even, cite some of the guys that you know, how do they compete with the hyperscalers? What's the key there for like a C3 ai or some of the others that are on there? >> So I've spoken with at least two of the CEOs of the smaller companies that you have on the list. One of the things they're worried about is that if they continue to operate independently without being part of hyperscaler, either the hyperscalers will develop something to compete against them full scale, or they'll become irrelevant. Because at the end of the day, look, cloud is dominant. Not many companies are going to do like AI modeling and training and deployment the whole nine yards by independent by themselves. They're going to depend on one of the clouds, right? So if they're already going to be in the cloud, by taking them out to come to you, it's going to be extremely difficult issue to solve. So all these companies are going and saying, "You know what? We need to be in hyperscalers." For example, you could have looked at DataRobot recently, they made announcements, Google and AWS, and they are all over the place. So you need to go where the customers are. Right? >> All right, before we go on, I want to share some other data from ETR and why people adopt AI and get your feedback. So the data historically shows that feature breadth and technical capabilities were the main decision points for AI adoption, historically. What says to me that it's too much focus on technology. In your view, is that changing? Does it have to change? Will it change? >> Yes. Simple answer is yes. So here's the thing. The data you're speaking from is from previous years. >> Yes >> I can guarantee you, if you look at the latest data that's coming in now, those two will be a secondary and tertiary points. The number one would be about ROI. And how do I achieve? I've spent ton of money on all of my experiments. This is the same thing theme I'm seeing across when talking to everybody who's spending money on AI. I've spent so much money on it. When can I get it live in production? How much, how can I quickly get it? Because you know, the board is breathing down their neck. You already spend this much money. Show me something that's valuable. So the ROI is going to become, take it from me, I'm predicting this for 2023, that's going to become number one. >> Yeah, and if people focus on it, they'll figure it out. Okay. Let's take a look at some of the top players that won, some of the names we just looked at and double click on that and break down their spending profile. So the chart here shows the net score, how net score is calculated. So pay attention to the second set of bars that Databricks, who was pretty prominent on the previous chart. And we've annotated the colors. The lime green is, we're bringing the platform in new. The forest green is, we're going to spend 6% or more relative to last year. And the gray is flat spending. The pinkish is our spending's going to be down on AI and ML, 6% or worse. And the red is churn. So you don't want big red. You subtract the reds from the greens and you get net score, which is shown by those blue dots that you see there. So AWS has the highest net score and very little churn. I mean, single low single digit churn. But notably, you see Databricks and DataRobot are next in line within Microsoft and Google also, they've got very low churn. Andy, what are your thoughts on this data? >> So a couple of things that stands out to me. Most of them are in line with my conversation with customers. Couple of them stood out to me on how bad IBM Watson is doing. >> Yeah, bring that back up if you would. Let's take a look at that. IBM Watson is the far right and the red, that bright red is churning and again, you want low red here. Why do you think that is? >> Well, so look, IBM has been in the forefront of innovating things for many, many years now, right? And over the course of years we talked about this, they moved from a product innovation centric company into more of a services company. And over the years they were making, as at one point, you know that they were making about majority of that money from services. Now things have changed Arvind has taken over, he came from research. So he's doing a great job of trying to reinvent themselves as a company. But it's going to have a long way to catch up. IBM Watson, if you think about it, that played what, jeopardy and chess years ago, like 15 years ago? >> It was jaw dropping when you first saw it. And then they weren't able to commercialize that. >> Yeah. >> And you're making a good point. When Gerstner took over IBM at the time, John Akers wanted to split the company up. He wanted to have a database company, he wanted to have a storage company. Because that's where the industry trend was, Gerstner said no, he came from AMEX, right? He came from American Express. He said, "No, we're going to have a single throat to choke for the customer." They bought PWC for relatively short money. I think it was $15 billion, completely transformed and I would argue saved IBM. But the trade off was, it sort of took them out of product leadership. And so from Gerstner to Palmisano to Remedi, it was really a services led company. And I think Arvind is really bringing it back to a product company with strong consulting. I mean, that's one of the pillars. And so I think that's, they've got a strong story in data and AI. They just got to sort of bring it together and better. Bring that chart up one more time. I want to, the other point is Oracle, Oracle sort of has the dominant lock-in for mission critical database and they're sort of applying AI there. But to your point, they're really not an AI company in the sense that they're taking unstructured data and doing sort of new things. It's really about how to make Oracle better, right? >> Well, you got to remember, Oracle is about database for the structure data. So in yesterday's world, they were dominant database. But you know, if you are to start storing like videos and texts and audio and other things, and then start doing search of vector search and all that, Oracle is not necessarily the database company of choice. And they're strongest thing being apps and building AI into the apps? They are kind of surviving in that area. But again, I wouldn't name them as an AI company, right? But the other thing that that surprised me in that list, what you showed me is yes, AWS is number one. >> Bring that back up if you would, Ken. >> AWS is number one as you, it should be. But what what actually caught me by surprise is how DataRobot is holding, you know? I mean, look at that. The either net new addition and or expansion, DataRobot seem to be doing equally well, even better than Microsoft and Google. That surprises me. >> DataRobot's, and again, this is a function of spending momentum. So remember from the previous chart that Microsoft and Google, much, much larger than DataRobot. DataRobot more niche. But with spending velocity and has always had strong spending velocity, despite some of the recent challenges, organizational challenges. And then you see these other specialists, H2O.ai, Anaconda, dataiku, little bit of red showing there C3.ai. But these again, to stress are the sort of specialists other than obviously the hyperscalers. These are the specialists in AI. All right, so we hit the bigger names in the sector. Now let's take a look at the emerging technology companies. And one of the gems of the ETR dataset is the emerging technology survey. It's called ETS. They used to just do it like twice a year. It's now run four times a year. I just discovered it kind of mid-2022. And it's exclusively focused on private companies that are potential disruptors, they might be M&A candidates and if they've raised enough money, they could be acquirers of companies as well. So Databricks would be an example. They've made a number of investments in companies. SNEAK would be another good example. Companies that are private, but they're buyers, they hope to go IPO at some point in time. So this chart here, shows the emerging companies in the ML AI sector of the ETR dataset. So the dimensions of this are similar, they're net sentiment on the Y axis and mind share on the X axis. Basically, the ETS study measures awareness on the x axis and intent to do something with, evaluate or implement or not, on that vertical axis. So it's like net score on the vertical where negatives are subtracted from the positives. And again, mind share is vendor awareness. That's the horizontal axis. Now that inserted table shows net sentiment and the ends in the survey, which informs the position of the dots. And you'll notice we're plotting TensorFlow as well. We know that's not a company, but it's there for reference as open source tooling is an option for customers. And ETR sometimes like to show that as a reference point. Now we've also drawn a line for Databricks to show how relatively dominant they've become in the past 10 ETS surveys and sort of mind share going back to late 2018. And you can see a dozen or so other emerging tech vendors. So Andy, I want you to share your thoughts on these players, who were the ones to watch, name some names. We'll bring that data back up as you as you comment. >> So Databricks, as you said, remember we talked about how Oracle is not necessarily the database of the choice, you know? So Databricks is kind of trying to solve some of the issue for AI/ML workloads, right? And the problem is also there is no one company that could solve all of the problems. For example, if you look at the names in here, some of them are database names, some of them are platform names, some of them are like MLOps companies like, DataRobot (indistinct) and others. And some of them are like future based companies like, you know, the Techton and stuff. >> So it's a mix of those sub sectors? >> It's a mix of those companies. >> We'll talk to ETR about that. They'd be interested in your input on how to make this more granular and these sub-sectors. You got Hugging Face in here, >> Which is NLP, yeah. >> Okay. So your take, are these companies going to get acquired? Are they going to go IPO? Are they going to merge? >> Well, most of them going to get acquired. My prediction would be most of them will get acquired because look, at the end of the day, hyperscalers need these capabilities, right? So they're going to either create their own, AWS is very good at doing that. They have done a lot of those things. But the other ones, like for particularly Azure, they're going to look at it and saying that, "You know what, it's going to take time for me to build this. Why don't I just go and buy you?" Right? Or or even the smaller players like Oracle or IBM Cloud, this will exist. They might even take a look at them, right? So at the end of the day, a lot of these companies are going to get acquired or merged with others. >> Yeah. All right, let's wrap with some final thoughts. I'm going to make some comments Andy, and then ask you to dig in here. Look, despite the challenge of leveraging AI, you know, Ken, if you could bring up the next chart. We're not repeating, we're not predicting the AI winter of the 1990s. Machine intelligence. It's a superpower that's going to permeate every aspect of the technology industry. AI and data strategies have to be connected. Leveraging first party data is going to increase AI competitiveness and shorten time to value. Andy, I'd love your thoughts on that. I know you've got some thoughts on governance and AI ethics. You know, we talked about ChatGBT, Deepfakes, help us unpack all these trends. >> So there's so much information packed up there, right? The AI and data strategy, that's very, very, very important. If you don't have a proper data, people don't realize that AI is, your AI is the morals that you built on, it's predominantly based on the data what you have. It's not, AI cannot predict something that's going to happen without knowing what it is. It need to be trained, it need to understand what is it you're talking about. So 99% of the time you got to have a good data for you to train. So this where I mentioned to you, the problem is a lot of these companies can't afford to collect the real world data because it takes too long, it's too expensive. So a lot of these companies are trying to do the synthetic data way. It has its own set of issues because you can't use all... >> What's that synthetic data? Explain that. >> Synthetic data is basically not a real world data, but it's a created or simulated data equal and based on real data. It looks, feels, smells, taste like a real data, but it's not exactly real data, right? This is particularly useful in the financial and healthcare industry for world. So you don't have to, at the end of the day, if you have real data about your and my medical history data, if you redact it, you can still reverse this. It's fairly easy, right? >> Yeah, yeah. >> So by creating a synthetic data, there is no correlation between the real data and the synthetic data. >> So that's part of AI ethics and privacy and, okay. >> So the synthetic data, the issue with that is that when you're trying to commingle that with that, you can't create models based on just on synthetic data because synthetic data, as I said is artificial data. So basically you're creating artificial models, so you got to blend in properly that that blend is the problem. And you know how much of real data, how much of synthetic data you could use. You got to use judgment between efficiency cost and the time duration stuff. So that's one-- >> And risk >> And the risk involved with that. And the secondary issues which we talked about is that when you're creating, okay, you take a business use case, okay, you think about investing things, you build the whole thing out and you're trying to put it out into the market. Most companies that I talk to don't have a proper governance in place. They don't have ethics standards in place. They don't worry about the biases in data, they just go on trying to solve a business case >> It's wild west. >> 'Cause that's what they start. It's a wild west! And then at the end of the day when they are close to some legal litigation action or something or something else happens and that's when the Oh Shit! moments happens, right? And then they come in and say, "You know what, how do I fix this?" The governance, security and all of those things, ethics bias, data bias, de-biasing, none of them can be an afterthought. It got to start with the, from the get-go. So you got to start at the beginning saying that, "You know what, I'm going to do all of those AI programs, but before we get into this, we got to set some framework for doing all these things properly." Right? And then the-- >> Yeah. So let's go back to the key points. I want to bring up the cloud again. Because you got to get cloud right. Getting that right matters in AI to the points that you were making earlier. You can't just be out on an island and hyperscalers, they're going to obviously continue to do well. They get more and more data's going into the cloud and they have the native tools. To your point, in the case of AWS, Microsoft's obviously ubiquitous. Google's got great capabilities here. They've got integrated ecosystems partners that are going to continue to strengthen through the decade. What are your thoughts here? >> So a couple of things. One is the last mile ML or last mile AI that nobody's talking about. So that need to be attended to. There are lot of players in the market that coming up, when I talk about last mile, I'm talking about after you're done with the experimentation of the model, how fast and quickly and efficiently can you get it to production? So that's production being-- >> Compressing that time is going to put dollars in your pocket. >> Exactly. Right. >> So once, >> If you got it right. >> If you get it right, of course. So there are, there are a couple of issues with that. Once you figure out that model is working, that's perfect. People don't realize, the moment you decide that moment when the decision is made, it's like a new car. After you purchase the value decreases on a minute basis. Same thing with the models. Once the model is created, you need to be in production right away because it starts losing it value on a seconds minute basis. So issue number one, how fast can I get it over there? So your deployment, you are inferencing efficiently at the edge locations, your optimization, your security, all of this is at issue. But you know what is more important than that in the last mile? You keep the model up, you continue to work on, again, going back to the car analogy, at one point you got to figure out your car is costing more than to operate. So you got to get a new car, right? And that's the same thing with the models as well. If your model has reached a stage, it is actually a potential risk for your operation. To give you an idea, if Uber has a model, the first time when you get a car from going from point A to B cost you $60. If the model decayed the next time I might give you a $40 rate, I would take it definitely. But it's lost for the company. The business risk associated with operating on a bad model, you should realize it immediately, pull the model out, retrain it, redeploy it. That's is key. >> And that's got to be huge in security model recency and security to the extent that you can get real time is big. I mean you, you see Palo Alto, CrowdStrike, a lot of other security companies are injecting AI. Again, they won't show up in the ETR ML/AI taxonomy per se as a pure play. But ServiceNow is another company that you have have mentioned to me, offline. AI is just getting embedded everywhere. >> Yep. >> And then I'm glad you brought up, kind of real-time inferencing 'cause a lot of the modeling, if we can go back to the last point that we're going to make, a lot of the AI today is modeling done in the cloud. The last point we wanted to make here, I'd love to get your thoughts on this, is real-time AI inferencing for instance at the edge is going to become increasingly important for us. It's going to usher in new economics, new types of silicon, particularly arm-based. We've covered that a lot on "Breaking Analysis", new tooling, new companies and that could disrupt the sort of cloud model if new economics emerge. 'Cause cloud obviously very centralized, they're trying to decentralize it. But over the course of this decade we could see some real disruption there. Andy, give us your final thoughts on that. >> Yes and no. I mean at the end of the day, cloud is kind of centralized now, but a lot of this companies including, AWS is kind of trying to decentralize that by putting their own sub-centers and edge locations. >> Local zones, outposts. >> Yeah, exactly. Particularly the outpost concept. And if it can even become like a micro center and stuff, it won't go to the localized level of, I go to a single IOT level. But again, the cloud extends itself to that level. So if there is an opportunity need for it, the hyperscalers will figure out a way to fit that model. So I wouldn't too much worry about that, about deployment and where to have it and what to do with that. But you know, figure out the right business use case, get the right data, get the ethics and governance place and make sure they get it to production and make sure you pull the model out when it's not operating well. >> Excellent advice. Andy, I got to thank you for coming into the studio today, helping us with this "Breaking Analysis" segment. Outstanding collaboration and insights and input in today's episode. Hope we can do more. >> Thank you. Thanks for having me. I appreciate it. >> You're very welcome. All right. I want to thank Alex Marson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight helped get the word out on social media and our newsletters. And Rob Hoof is our editor-in-chief over at Silicon Angle. He does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcast. Wherever you listen, all you got to do is search "Breaking Analysis" podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and silicon angle.com or you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com to get in touch, or DM me at dvellante or comment on our LinkedIn posts. Please check out ETR.AI for the best survey data and the enterprise tech business, Constellation Research. Andy publishes there some awesome information on AI and data. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching everybody and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis". (gentle closing tune plays)

>>Hey, welcome back everyone. Day three of eight of us Reinvent 2022. I'm John Farmer with Dave Volante, co-host the q Dave. 10 years for us, the leader in high tech coverage is our slogan. Now 10 years of reinvent day. We've been to every single one except with the original, which we would've come to if Amazon actually marketed the event, but they didn't. It's more of a customer event. This is day three. Is the machine learning ai keynote sws up there. A lot of announcements. We're gonna break this down. We got, we got Andy Thra here, vice President, prince Constellation Research. Andy, great to see you've been on the cube before one of our analysts bringing the, bringing the, the analysis, commentary to the keynote. This is your wheelhouse. Ai. What do you think about Swami up there? I mean, he's awesome. We love him. Big fan Oh yeah. Of of the Cuban we're fans of him, but he got 13 announcements. >>A lot. A lot, >>A lot. >>So, well some of them are, first of all, thanks for having me here and I'm glad to have both of you on the same show attacking me. I'm just kidding. But some of the announcement really sort of like a game changer announcements and some of them are like, meh, you know, just to plug in the holes what they have and a lot of golf claps. Yeah. Meeting today. And you could have also noticed that by, when he was making the announcements, you know, the, the, the clapping volume difference, you could say, which is better, right? But some of the announcements are, are really, really good. You know, particularly we talked about, one of that was Microsoft took that out of, you know, having the open AI in there, doing the large language models. And then they were going after that, you know, having the transformer available to them. And Amazon was a little bit weak in the area, so they couldn't, they don't have a large language model. So, you know, they, they are taking a different route saying that, you know what, I'll help you train the large language model by yourself, customized models. So I can provide the necessary instance. I can provide the instant volume, memory, the whole thing. Yeah. So you can train the model by yourself without depending on them kind >>Of thing. So Dave and Andy, I wanna get your thoughts cuz first of all, we've been following Amazon's deep bench on the, on the infrastructure pass. They've been doing a lot of machine learning and ai, a lot of data. It just seems that the sentiment is that there's other competitors doing a good job too. Like Google, Dave. And I've heard folks in the hallway, even here, ex Amazonians saying, Hey, they're train their models on Google than they bring up the SageMaker cuz it's better interface. So you got, Google's making a play for being that data cloud. Microsoft's obviously putting in a, a great kind of package to kind of make it turnkey. How do they really stand versus the competition guys? >>Good question. So they, you know, each have their own uniqueness and the we variation that take it to the field, right? So for example, if you were to look at it, Microsoft is known for as industry or later things that they are been going after, you know, industry verticals and whatnot. So that's one of the things I looked here, you know, they, they had this omic announcement, particularly towards that healthcare genomics space. That's a huge space for hpz related AIML applications. And they have put a lot of things in together in here in the SageMaker and in the, in their models saying that, you know, how do you, how do you use this transmit to do things like that? Like for example, drug discovery, for genomics analysis, for cancer treatment, the whole, right? That's a few volumes of data do. So they're going in that healthcare area. Google has taken a different route. I mean they want to make everything simple. All I have to do is I gotta call an api, give what I need and then get it done. But Amazon wants to go at a much deeper level saying that, you know what? I wanna provide everything you need. You can customize the whole thing for what you need. >>So to me, the big picture here is, and and Swami references, Hey, we are a data company. We started, he talked about books and how that informed them as to, you know, what books to place front and center. Here's the, here's the big picture. In my view, companies need to put data at the core of their business and they haven't, they've generally put humans at the core of their business and data. And now machine learning are at the, at the outside and the periphery. Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Facebook have put data at their core. So the question is how do incumbent companies, and you mentioned some Toyota Capital One, Bristol Myers Squibb, I don't know, are those data companies, you know, we'll see, but the challenge is most companies don't have the resources as you well know, Andy, to actually implement what Google and Facebook and others have. >>So how are they gonna do that? Well, they're gonna buy it, right? So are they gonna build it with tools that's kind of like you said the Amazon approach or are they gonna buy it from Microsoft and Google, I pulled some ETR data to say, okay, who are the top companies that are showing up in terms of spending? Who's spending with whom? AWS number one, Microsoft number two, Google number three, data bricks. Number four, just in terms of, you know, presence. And then it falls down DataRobot, Anaconda data icu, Oracle popped up actually cuz they're embedding a lot of AI into their products and, and of course IBM and then a lot of smaller companies. But do companies generally customers have the resources to do what it takes to implement AI into applications and into workflows? >>So a couple of things on that. One is when it comes to, I mean it's, it's no surprise that the, the top three or the hyperscalers, because they all want to bring their business to them to run the specific workloads on the next biggest workload. As you was saying, his keynote are two things. One is the A AIML workloads and the other one is the, the heavy unstructured workloads that he was talking about. 80%, 90% of the data that's coming off is unstructured. So how do you analyze that? Such as the geospatial data. He was talking about the volumes of data you need to analyze the, the neural deep neural net drug you ought to use, only hyperscale can do it, right? So that's no wonder all of them on top for the data, one of the things they announced, which not many people paid attention, there was a zero eight L that that they talked about. >>What that does is a little bit of a game changing moment in a sense that you don't have to, for example, if you were to train the data, data, if the data is distributed everywhere, if you have to bring them all together to integrate it, to do that, it's a lot of work to doing the dl. So by taking Amazon, Aurora, and then Rich combine them as zero or no ETL and then have Apaches Apaches Spark applications run on top of analytical applications, ML workloads. That's huge. So you don't have to move around the data, use the data where it is, >>I, I think you said it, they're basically filling holes, right? Yeah. They created this, you know, suite of tools, let's call it. You might say it's a mess. It's not a mess because it's, they're really powerful but they're not well integrated and now they're starting to take the seams as I say. >>Well yeah, it's a great point. And I would double down and say, look it, I think that boring is good. You know, we had that phase in Kubernetes hype cycle where it got boring and that was kind of like, boring is good. Boring means we're getting better, we're invisible. That's infrastructure that's in the weeds, that's in between the toes details. It's the stuff that, you know, people we have to get done. So, you know, you look at their 40 new data sources with data Wrangler 50, new app flow connectors, Redshift Auto Cog, this is boring. Good important shit Dave. The governance, you gotta get it and the governance is gonna be key. So, so to me, this may not jump off the page. Adam's keynote also felt a little bit of, we gotta get these gaps done in a good way. So I think that's a very positive sign. >>Now going back to the bigger picture, I think the real question is can there be another independent cloud data cloud? And that's the, to me, what I try to get at my story and you're breaking analysis kind of hit a home run on this, is there's interesting opportunity for an independent data cloud. Meaning something that isn't aws, that isn't, Google isn't one of the big three that could sit in. And so let me give you an example. I had a conversation last night with a bunch of ex Amazonian engineering teams that left the conversation was interesting, Dave. They were like talking, well data bricks and Snowflake are basically batch, okay, not transactional. And you look at Aerospike, I can see their booth here. Transactional data bases are hot right now. Streaming data is different. Confluence different than data bricks. Is data bricks good at hosting? >>No, Amazon's better. So you start to see these kinds of questions come up where, you know, data bricks is great, but maybe not good for this, that and the other thing. So you start to see the formation of swim lanes or visibility into where people might sit in the ecosystem, but what came out was transactional. Yep. And batch the relationship there and streaming real time and versus you know, the transactional data. So you're starting to see these new things emerge. Andy, what do you, what's your take on this? You're following this closely. This seems to be the alpha nerd conversation and it all points to who's gonna have the best data cloud, say data, super clouds, I call it. What's your take? >>Yes, data cloud is important as well. But also the computational that goes on top of it too, right? Because when, when the data is like unstructured data, it's that much of a huge data, it's going to be hard to do that with a low model, you know, compute power. But going back to your data point, the training of the AIML models required the batch data, right? That's when you need all the, the historical data to train your models. And then after that, when you do inference of it, that's where you need the streaming real time data that's available to you too. You can make an inference. One of the things, what, what they also announced, which is somewhat interesting, is you saw that they have like 700 different instances geared towards every single workload. And there are some of them very specifically run on the Amazon's new chip. The, the inference in two and theran tr one chips that basically not only has a specific instances but also is run on a high powered chip. And then if you have that data to support that, both the training as well as towards the inference, the efficiency, again, those numbers have to be proven. They claim that it could be anywhere between 40 to 60% faster. >>Well, so a couple things. You're definitely right. I mean Snowflake started out as a data warehouse that was simpler and it's not architected, you know, in and it's first wave to do real time inference, which is not now how, how could they, the other second point is snowflake's two or three years ahead when it comes to governance, data sharing. I mean, Amazon's doing what always does. It's copying, you know, it's customer driven. Cuz they probably walk into an account and they say, Hey look, what's Snowflake's doing for us? This stuff's kicking ass. And they go, oh, that's a good idea, let's do that too. You saw that with separating compute from storage, which is their tiering. You saw it today with extending data, sharing Redshift, data sharing. So how does Snowflake and data bricks approach this? They deal with ecosystem. They bring in ecosystem partners, they bring in open source tooling and that's how they compete. I think there's unquestionably an opportunity for a data cloud. >>Yeah, I think, I think the super cloud conversation and then, you know, sky Cloud with Berkeley Paper and other folks talking about this kind of pre, multi-cloud era. I mean that's what I would call us right now. We are, we're kind of in the pre era of multi-cloud, which by the way is not even yet defined. I think people use that term, Dave, to say, you know, some sort of magical thing that's happening. Yeah. People have multiple clouds. They got, they, they end up by default, not by design as Dell likes to say. Right? And they gotta deal with it. So it's more of they're inheriting multiple cloud environments. It's not necessarily what they want in the situation. So to me that is a big, big issue. >>Yeah, I mean, again, going back to your snowflake and data breaks announcements, they're a data company. So they, that's how they made their mark in the market saying that, you know, I do all those things, therefore you have, I had to have your data because it's a seamless data. And, and Amazon is catching up with that with a lot of that announcements they made, how far it's gonna get traction, you know, to change when I to say, >>Yeah, I mean to me, to me there's no doubt about Dave. I think, I think what Swamee is doing, if Amazon can get corner the market on out of the box ML and AI capabilities so that people can make it easier, that's gonna be the end of the day tell sign can they fill in the gaps. Again, boring is good competition. I don't know mean, mean I'm not following the competition. Andy, this is a real question mark for me. I don't know where they stand. Are they more comprehensive? Are they more deeper? Are they have deeper services? I mean, obviously shows to all the, the different, you know, capabilities. Where, where, where does Amazon stand? What's the process? >>So what, particularly when it comes to the models. So they're going at, at a different angle that, you know, I will help you create the models we talked about the zero and the whole data. We'll get the data sources in, we'll create the model. We'll move the, the whole model. We are talking about the ML ops teams here, right? And they have the whole functionality that, that they built ind over the year. So essentially they want to become the platform that I, when you come in, I'm the only platform you would use from the model training to deployment to inference, to model versioning to management, the old s and that's angle they're trying to take. So it's, it's a one source platform. >>What about this idea of technical debt? Adrian Carro was on yesterday. John, I know you talked to him as well. He said, look, Amazon's Legos, you wanna buy a toy for Christmas, you can go out and buy a toy or do you wanna build a, to, if you buy a toy in a couple years, you could break and what are you gonna do? You're gonna throw it out. But if you, if you, if part of your Lego needs to be extended, you extend it. So, you know, George Gilbert was saying, well, there's a lot of technical debt. Adrian was countering that. Does Amazon have technical debt or is that Lego blocks analogy the right one? >>Well, I talked to him about the debt and one of the things we talked about was what do you optimize for E two APIs or Kubernetes APIs? It depends on what team you're on. If you're on the runtime gene, you're gonna optimize for Kubernetes, but E two is the resources you want to use. So I think the idea of the 15 years of technical debt, I, I don't believe that. I think the APIs are still hardened. The issue that he brings up that I think is relevant is it's an end situation, not an or. You can have the bag of Legos, which is the primitives and build a durable application platform, monitor it, customize it, work with it, build it. It's harder, but the outcome is durability and sustainability. Building a toy, having a toy with those Legos glued together for you, you can get the play with, but it'll break over time. Then you gotta replace it. So there's gonna be a toy business and there's gonna be a Legos business. Make your own. >>So who, who are the toys in ai? >>Well, out of >>The box and who's outta Legos? >>The, so you asking about what what toys Amazon building >>Or, yeah, I mean Amazon clearly is Lego blocks. >>If people gonna have out the box, >>What about Google? What about Microsoft? Are they basically more, more building toys, more solutions? >>So Google is more of, you know, building solutions angle like, you know, I give you an API kind of thing. But, but if it comes to vertical industry solutions, Microsoft is, is is ahead, right? Because they have, they have had years of indu industry experience. I mean there are other smaller cloud are trying to do that too. IBM being an example, but you know, the, now they are starting to go after the specific industry use cases. They think that through, for example, you know the medical one we talked about, right? So they want to build the, the health lake, security health lake that they're trying to build, which will HIPPA and it'll provide all the, the European regulations, the whole line yard, and it'll help you, you know, personalize things as you need as well. For example, you know, if you go for a certain treatment, it could analyze you based on your genome profile saying that, you know, the treatment for this particular person has to be individualized this way, but doing that requires a anomalous power, right? So if you do applications like that, you could bring in a lot of the, whether healthcare, finance or what have you, and then easy for them to use. >>What's the biggest mistake customers make when it comes to machine intelligence, ai, machine learning, >>So many things, right? I could start out with even the, the model. Basically when you build a model, you, you should be able to figure out how long that model is effective. Because as good as creating a model and, and going to the business and doing things the right way, there are people that they leave the model much longer than it's needed. It's hurting your business more than it is, you know, it could be things like that. Or you are, you are not building a responsibly or later things. You are, you are having a bias and you model and are so many issues. I, I don't know if I can pinpoint one, but there are many, many issues. Responsible ai, ethical ai. All >>Right, well, we'll leave it there. You're watching the cube, the leader in high tech coverage here at J three at reinvent. I'm Jeff, Dave Ante. Andy joining us here for the critical analysis and breaking down the commentary. We'll be right back with more coverage after this short break.

>> From The Cube Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data driven insights from The Cube at ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> The reverse momentum in tech stocks caused by rising interest rates, less attractive discounted cash flow models, and more tepid forward guidance, can be easily measured by public market valuations. And while there's lots of discussion about the impact on private companies and cash runway and 409A valuations, measuring the performance of non-public companies isn't as easy. IPOs have dried up and public statements by private companies, of course, they accentuate the good and they kind of hide the bad. Real data, unless you're an insider, is hard to find. Hello and welcome to this week's "Wikibon Cube Insights" powered by ETR. In this "Breaking Analysis", we unlock some of the secrets that non-public, emerging tech companies may or may not be sharing. And we do this by introducing you to a capability from ETR that we've not exposed you to over the past couple of years, it's called the Emerging Technologies Survey, and it is packed with sentiment data and performance data based on surveys of more than a thousand CIOs and IT buyers covering more than 400 companies. And we've invited back our colleague, Erik Bradley of ETR to help explain the survey and the data that we're going to cover today. Erik, this survey is something that I've not personally spent much time on, but I'm blown away at the data. It's really unique and detailed. First of all, welcome. Good to see you again. >> Great to see you too, Dave, and I'm really happy to be talking about the ETS or the Emerging Technology Survey. Even our own clients of constituents probably don't spend as much time in here as they should. >> Yeah, because there's so much in the mainstream, but let's pull up a slide to bring out the survey composition. Tell us about the study. How often do you run it? What's the background and the methodology? >> Yeah, you were just spot on the way you were talking about the private tech companies out there. So what we did is we decided to take all the vendors that we track that are not yet public and move 'em over to the ETS. And there isn't a lot of information out there. If you're not in Silicon (indistinct), you're not going to get this stuff. So PitchBook and Tech Crunch are two out there that gives some data on these guys. But what we really wanted to do was go out to our community. We have 6,000, ITDMs in our community. We wanted to ask them, "Are you aware of these companies? And if so, are you allocating any resources to them? Are you planning to evaluate them," and really just kind of figure out what we can do. So this particular survey, as you can see, 1000 plus responses, over 450 vendors that we track. And essentially what we're trying to do here is talk about your evaluation and awareness of these companies and also your utilization. And also if you're not utilizing 'em, then we can also figure out your sales conversion or churn. So this is interesting, not only for the ITDMs themselves to figure out what their peers are evaluating and what they should put in POCs against the big guys when contracts come up. But it's also really interesting for the tech vendors themselves to see how they're performing. >> And you can see 2/3 of the respondents are director level of above. You got 28% is C-suite. There is of course a North America bias, 70, 75% is North America. But these smaller companies, you know, that's when they start doing business. So, okay. We're going to do a couple of things here today. First, we're going to give you the big picture across the sectors that ETR covers within the ETS survey. And then we're going to look at the high and low sentiment for the larger private companies. And then we're going to do the same for the smaller private companies, the ones that don't have as much mindshare. And then I'm going to put those two groups together and we're going to look at two dimensions, actually three dimensions, which companies are being evaluated the most. Second, companies are getting the most usage and adoption of their offerings. And then third, which companies are seeing the highest churn rates, which of course is a silent killer of companies. And then finally, we're going to look at the sentiment and mindshare for two key areas that we like to cover often here on "Breaking Analysis", security and data. And data comprises database, including data warehousing, and then big data analytics is the second part of data. And then machine learning and AI is the third section within data that we're going to look at. Now, one other thing before we get into it, ETR very often will include open source offerings in the mix, even though they're not companies like TensorFlow or Kubernetes, for example. And we'll call that out during this discussion. The reason this is done is for context, because everyone is using open source. It is the heart of innovation and many business models are super glued to an open source offering, like take MariaDB, for example. There's the foundation and then there's with the open source code and then there, of course, the company that sells services around the offering. Okay, so let's first look at the highest and lowest sentiment among these private firms, the ones that have the highest mindshare. So they're naturally going to be somewhat larger. And we do this on two dimensions, sentiment on the vertical axis and mindshare on the horizontal axis and note the open source tool, see Kubernetes, Postgres, Kafka, TensorFlow, Jenkins, Grafana, et cetera. So Erik, please explain what we're looking at here, how it's derived and what the data tells us. >> Certainly, so there is a lot here, so we're going to break it down first of all by explaining just what mindshare and net sentiment is. You explain the axis. We have so many evaluation metrics, but we need to aggregate them into one so that way we can rank against each other. Net sentiment is really the aggregation of all the positive and subtracting out the negative. So the net sentiment is a very quick way of looking at where these companies stand versus their peers in their sectors and sub sectors. Mindshare is basically the awareness of them, which is good for very early stage companies. And you'll see some names on here that are obviously been around for a very long time. And they're clearly be the bigger on the axis on the outside. Kubernetes, for instance, as you mentioned, is open source. This de facto standard for all container orchestration, and it should be that far up into the right, because that's what everyone's using. In fact, the open source leaders are so prevalent in the emerging technology survey that we break them out later in our analysis, 'cause it's really not fair to include them and compare them to the actual companies that are providing the support and the security around that open source technology. But no survey, no analysis, no research would be complete without including these open source tech. So what we're looking at here, if I can just get away from the open source names, we see other things like Databricks and OneTrust . They're repeating as top net sentiment performers here. And then also the design vendors. People don't spend a lot of time on 'em, but Miro and Figma. This is their third survey in a row where they're just dominating that sentiment overall. And Adobe should probably take note of that because they're really coming after them. But Databricks, we all know probably would've been a public company by now if the market hadn't turned, but you can see just how dominant they are in a survey of nothing but private companies. And we'll see that again when we talk about the database later. >> And I'll just add, so you see automation anywhere on there, the big UiPath competitor company that was not able to get to the public markets. They've been trying. Snyk, Peter McKay's company, they've raised a bunch of money, big security player. They're doing some really interesting things in developer security, helping developers secure the data flow, H2O.ai, Dataiku AI company. We saw them at the Snowflake Summit. Redis Labs, Netskope and security. So a lot of names that we know that ultimately we think are probably going to be hitting the public market. Okay, here's the same view for private companies with less mindshare, Erik. Take us through this one. >> On the previous slide too real quickly, I wanted to pull that security scorecard and we'll get back into it. But this is a newcomer, that I couldn't believe how strong their data was, but we'll bring that up in a second. Now, when we go to the ones of lower mindshare, it's interesting to talk about open source, right? Kubernetes was all the way on the top right. Everyone uses containers. Here we see Istio up there. Not everyone is using service mesh as much. And that's why Istio is in the smaller breakout. But still when you talk about net sentiment, it's about the leader, it's the highest one there is. So really interesting to point out. Then we see other names like Collibra in the data side really performing well. And again, as always security, very well represented here. We have Aqua, Wiz, Armis, which is a standout in this survey this time around. They do IoT security. I hadn't even heard of them until I started digging into the data here. And I couldn't believe how well they were doing. And then of course you have AnyScale, which is doing a second best in this and the best name in the survey Hugging Face, which is a machine learning AI tool. Also doing really well on a net sentiment, but they're not as far along on that access of mindshare just yet. So these are again, emerging companies that might not be as well represented in the enterprise as they will be in a couple of years. >> Hugging Face sounds like something you do with your two year old. Like you said, you see high performers, AnyScale do machine learning and you mentioned them. They came out of Berkeley. Collibra Governance, InfluxData is on there. InfluxDB's a time series database. And yeah, of course, Alex, if you bring that back up, you get a big group of red dots, right? That's the bad zone, I guess, which Sisense does vis, Yellowbrick Data is a NPP database. How should we interpret the red dots, Erik? I mean, is it necessarily a bad thing? Could it be misinterpreted? What's your take on that? >> Sure, well, let me just explain the definition of it first from a data science perspective, right? We're a data company first. So the gray dots that you're seeing that aren't named, that's the mean that's the average. So in order for you to be on this chart, you have to be at least one standard deviation above or below that average. So that gray is where we're saying, "Hey, this is where the lump of average comes in. This is where everyone normally stands." So you either have to be an outperformer or an underperformer to even show up in this analysis. So by definition, yes, the red dots are bad. You're at least one standard deviation below the average of your peers. It's not where you want to be. And if you're on the lower left, not only are you not performing well from a utilization or an actual usage rate, but people don't even know who you are. So that's a problem, obviously. And the VCs and the PEs out there that are backing these companies, they're the ones who mostly are interested in this data. >> Yeah. Oh, that's great explanation. Thank you for that. No, nice benchmarking there and yeah, you don't want to be in the red. All right, let's get into the next segment here. Here going to look at evaluation rates, adoption and the all important churn. First new evaluations. Let's bring up that slide. And Erik, take us through this. >> So essentially I just want to explain what evaluation means is that people will cite that they either plan to evaluate the company or they're currently evaluating. So that means we're aware of 'em and we are choosing to do a POC of them. And then we'll see later how that turns into utilization, which is what a company wants to see, awareness, evaluation, and then actually utilizing them. That's sort of the life cycle for these emerging companies. So what we're seeing here, again, with very high evaluation rates. H2O, we mentioned. SecurityScorecard jumped up again. Chargebee, Snyk, Salt Security, Armis. A lot of security names are up here, Aqua, Netskope, which God has been around forever. I still can't believe it's in an Emerging Technology Survey But so many of these names fall in data and security again, which is why we decided to pick those out Dave. And on the lower side, Vena, Acton, those unfortunately took the dubious award of the lowest evaluations in our survey, but I prefer to focus on the positive. So SecurityScorecard, again, real standout in this one, they're in a security assessment space, basically. They'll come in and assess for you how your security hygiene is. And it's an area of a real interest right now amongst our ITDM community. >> Yeah, I mean, I think those, and then Arctic Wolf is up there too. They're doing managed services. You had mentioned Netskope. Yeah, okay. All right, let's look at now adoption. These are the companies whose offerings are being used the most and are above that standard deviation in the green. Take us through this, Erik. >> Sure, yet again, what we're looking at is, okay, we went from awareness, we went to evaluation. Now it's about utilization, which means a survey respondent's going to state "Yes, we evaluated and we plan to utilize it" or "It's already in our enterprise and we're actually allocating further resources to it." Not surprising, again, a lot of open source, the reason why, it's free. So it's really easy to grow your utilization on something that's free. But as you and I both know, as Red Hat proved, there's a lot of money to be made once the open source is adopted, right? You need the governance, you need the security, you need the support wrapped around it. So here we're seeing Kubernetes, Postgres, Apache Kafka, Jenkins, Grafana. These are all open source based names. But if we're looking at names that are non open source, we're going to see Databricks, Automation Anywhere, Rubrik all have the highest mindshare. So these are the names, not surprisingly, all names that probably should have been public by now. Everyone's expecting an IPO imminently. These are the names that have the highest mindshare. If we talk about the highest utilization rates, again, Miro and Figma pop up, and I know they're not household names, but they are just dominant in this survey. These are applications that are meant for design software and, again, they're going after an Autodesk or a CAD or Adobe type of thing. It is just dominant how high the utilization rates are here, which again is something Adobe should be paying attention to. And then you'll see a little bit lower, but also interesting, we see Collibra again, we see Hugging Face again. And these are names that are obviously in the data governance, ML, AI side. So we're seeing a ton of data, a ton of security and Rubrik was interesting in this one, too, high utilization and high mindshare. We know how pervasive they are in the enterprise already. >> Erik, Alex, keep that up for a second, if you would. So yeah, you mentioned Rubrik. Cohesity's not on there. They're sort of the big one. We're going to talk about them in a moment. Puppet is interesting to me because you remember the early days of that sort of space, you had Puppet and Chef and then you had Ansible. Red Hat bought Ansible and then Ansible really took off. So it's interesting to see Puppet on there as well. Okay. So now let's look at the churn because this one is where you don't want to be. It's, of course, all red 'cause churn is bad. Take us through this, Erik. >> Yeah, definitely don't want to be here and I don't love to dwell on the negative. So we won't spend as much time. But to your point, there's one thing I want to point out that think it's important. So you see Rubrik in the same spot, but Rubrik has so many citations in our survey that it actually would make sense that they're both being high utilization and churn just because they're so well represented. They have such a high overall representation in our survey. And the reason I call that out is Cohesity. Cohesity has an extremely high churn rate here about 17% and unlike Rubrik, they were not on the utilization side. So Rubrik is seeing both, Cohesity is not. It's not being utilized, but it's seeing a high churn. So that's the way you can look at this data and say, "Hm." Same thing with Puppet. You noticed that it was on the other slide. It's also on this one. So basically what it means is a lot of people are giving Puppet a shot, but it's starting to churn, which means it's not as sticky as we would like. One that was surprising on here for me was Tanium. It's kind of jumbled in there. It's hard to see in the middle, but Tanium, I was very surprised to see as high of a churn because what I do hear from our end user community is that people that use it, like it. It really kind of spreads into not only vulnerability management, but also that endpoint detection and response side. So I was surprised by that one, mostly to see Tanium in here. Mural, again, was another one of those application design softwares that's seeing a very high churn as well. >> So you're saying if you're in both... Alex, bring that back up if you would. So if you're in both like MariaDB is for example, I think, yeah, they're in both. They're both green in the previous one and red here, that's not as bad. You mentioned Rubrik is going to be in both. Cohesity is a bit of a concern. Cohesity just brought on Sanjay Poonen. So this could be a go to market issue, right? I mean, 'cause Cohesity has got a great product and they got really happy customers. So they're just maybe having to figure out, okay, what's the right ideal customer profile and Sanjay Poonen, I guarantee, is going to have that company cranking. I mean they had been doing very well on the surveys and had fallen off of a bit. The other interesting things wondering the previous survey I saw Cvent, which is an event platform. My only reason I pay attention to that is 'cause we actually have an event platform. We don't sell it separately. We bundle it as part of our offerings. And you see Hopin on here. Hopin raised a billion dollars during the pandemic. And we were like, "Wow, that's going to blow up." And so you see Hopin on the churn and you didn't see 'em in the previous chart, but that's sort of interesting. Like you said, let's not kind of dwell on the negative, but you really don't. You know, churn is a real big concern. Okay, now we're going to drill down into two sectors, security and data. Where data comprises three areas, database and data warehousing, machine learning and AI and big data analytics. So first let's take a look at the security sector. Now this is interesting because not only is it a sector drill down, but also gives an indicator of how much money the firm has raised, which is the size of that bubble. And to tell us if a company is punching above its weight and efficiently using its venture capital. Erik, take us through this slide. Explain the dots, the size of the dots. Set this up please. >> Yeah. So again, the axis is still the same, net sentiment and mindshare, but what we've done this time is we've taken publicly available information on how much capital company is raised and that'll be the size of the circle you see around the name. And then whether it's green or red is basically saying relative to the amount of money they've raised, how are they doing in our data? So when you see a Netskope, which has been around forever, raised a lot of money, that's why you're going to see them more leading towards red, 'cause it's just been around forever and kind of would expect it. Versus a name like SecurityScorecard, which is only raised a little bit of money and it's actually performing just as well, if not better than a name, like a Netskope. OneTrust doing absolutely incredible right now. BeyondTrust. We've seen the issues with Okta, right. So those are two names that play in that space that obviously are probably getting some looks about what's going on right now. Wiz, we've all heard about right? So raised a ton of money. It's doing well on net sentiment, but the mindshare isn't as well as you'd want, which is why you're going to see a little bit of that red versus a name like Aqua, which is doing container and application security. And hasn't raised as much money, but is really neck and neck with a name like Wiz. So that is why on a relative basis, you'll see that more green. As we all know, information security is never going away. But as we'll get to later in the program, Dave, I'm not sure in this current market environment, if people are as willing to do POCs and switch away from their security provider, right. There's a little bit of tepidness out there, a little trepidation. So right now we're seeing overall a slight pause, a slight cooling in overall evaluations on the security side versus historical levels a year ago. >> Now let's stay on here for a second. So a couple things I want to point out. So it's interesting. Now Snyk has raised over, I think $800 million but you can see them, they're high on the vertical and the horizontal, but now compare that to Lacework. It's hard to see, but they're kind of buried in the middle there. That's the biggest dot in this whole thing. I think I'm interpreting this correctly. They've raised over a billion dollars. It's a Mike Speiser company. He was the founding investor in Snowflake. So people watch that very closely, but that's an example of where they're not punching above their weight. They recently had a layoff and they got to fine tune things, but I'm still confident they they're going to do well. 'Cause they're approaching security as a data problem, which is probably people having trouble getting their arms around that. And then again, I see Arctic Wolf. They're not red, they're not green, but they've raised fair amount of money, but it's showing up to the right and decent level there. And a couple of the other ones that you mentioned, Netskope. Yeah, they've raised a lot of money, but they're actually performing where you want. What you don't want is where Lacework is, right. They've got some work to do to really take advantage of the money that they raised last November and prior to that. >> Yeah, if you're seeing that more neutral color, like you're calling out with an Arctic Wolf, like that means relative to their peers, this is where they should be. It's when you're seeing that red on a Lacework where we all know, wow, you raised a ton of money and your mindshare isn't where it should be. Your net sentiment is not where it should be comparatively. And then you see these great standouts, like Salt Security and SecurityScorecard and Abnormal. You know they haven't raised that much money yet, but their net sentiment's higher and their mindshare's doing well. So those basically in a nutshell, if you're a PE or a VC and you see a small green circle, then you're doing well, then it means you made a good investment. >> Some of these guys, I don't know, but you see these small green circles. Those are the ones you want to start digging into and maybe help them catch a wave. Okay, let's get into the data discussion. And again, three areas, database slash data warehousing, big data analytics and ML AI. First, we're going to look at the database sector. So Alex, thank you for bringing that up. Alright, take us through this, Erik. Actually, let me just say Postgres SQL. I got to ask you about this. It shows some funding, but that actually could be a mix of EDB, the company that commercializes Postgres and Postgres the open source database, which is a transaction system and kind of an open source Oracle. You see MariaDB is a database, but open source database. But the companies they've raised over $200 million and they filed an S-4. So Erik looks like this might be a little bit of mashup of companies and open source products. Help us understand this. >> Yeah, it's tough when you start dealing with the open source side and I'll be honest with you, there is a little bit of a mashup here. There are certain names here that are a hundred percent for profit companies. And then there are others that are obviously open source based like Redis is open source, but Redis Labs is the one trying to monetize the support around it. So you're a hundred percent accurate on this slide. I think one of the things here that's important to note though, is just how important open source is to data. If you're going to be going to any of these areas, it's going to be open source based to begin with. And Neo4j is one I want to call out here. It's not one everyone's familiar with, but it's basically geographical charting database, which is a name that we're seeing on a net sentiment side actually really, really high. When you think about it's the third overall net sentiment for a niche database play. It's not as big on the mindshare 'cause it's use cases aren't as often, but third biggest play on net sentiment. I found really interesting on this slide. >> And again, so MariaDB, as I said, they filed an S-4 I think $50 million in revenue, that might even be ARR. So they're not huge, but they're getting there. And by the way, MariaDB, if you don't know, was the company that was formed the day that Oracle bought Sun in which they got MySQL and MariaDB has done a really good job of replacing a lot of MySQL instances. Oracle has responded with MySQL HeatWave, which was kind of the Oracle version of MySQL. So there's some interesting battles going on there. If you think about the LAMP stack, the M in the LAMP stack was MySQL. And so now it's all MariaDB replacing that MySQL for a large part. And then you see again, the red, you know, you got to have some concerns about there. Aerospike's been around for a long time. SingleStore changed their name a couple years ago, last year. Yellowbrick Data, Fire Bolt was kind of going after Snowflake for a while, but yeah, you want to get out of that red zone. So they got some work to do. >> And Dave, real quick for the people that aren't aware, I just want to let them know that we can cut this data with the public company data as well. So we can cross over this with that because some of these names are competing with the larger public company names as well. So we can go ahead and cross reference like a MariaDB with a Mongo, for instance, or of something of that nature. So it's not in this slide, but at another point we can certainly explain on a relative basis how these private names are doing compared to the other ones as well. >> All right, let's take a quick look at analytics. Alex, bring that up if you would. Go ahead, Erik. >> Yeah, I mean, essentially here, I can't see it on my screen, my apologies. I just kind of went to blank on that. So gimme one second to catch up. >> So I could set it up while you're doing that. You got Grafana up and to the right. I mean, this is huge right. >> Got it thank you. I lost my screen there for a second. Yep. Again, open source name Grafana, absolutely up and to the right. But as we know, Grafana Labs is actually picking up a lot of speed based on Grafana, of course. And I think we might actually hear some noise from them coming this year. The names that are actually a little bit more disappointing than I want to call out are names like ThoughtSpot. It's been around forever. Their mindshare of course is second best here but based on the amount of time they've been around and the amount of money they've raised, it's not actually outperforming the way it should be. We're seeing Moogsoft obviously make some waves. That's very high net sentiment for that company. It's, you know, what, third, fourth position overall in this entire area, Another name like Fivetran, Matillion is doing well. Fivetran, even though it's got a high net sentiment, again, it's raised so much money that we would've expected a little bit more at this point. I know you know this space extremely well, but basically what we're looking at here and to the bottom left, you're going to see some names with a lot of red, large circles that really just aren't performing that well. InfluxData, however, second highest net sentiment. And it's really pretty early on in this stage and the feedback we're getting on this name is the use cases are great, the efficacy's great. And I think it's one to watch out for. >> InfluxData, time series database. The other interesting things I just noticed here, you got Tamer on here, which is that little small green. Those are the ones we were saying before, look for those guys. They might be some of the interesting companies out there and then observe Jeremy Burton's company. They do observability on top of Snowflake, not green, but kind of in that gray. So that's kind of cool. Monte Carlo is another one, they're sort of slightly green. They are doing some really interesting things in data and data mesh. So yeah, okay. So I can spend all day on this stuff, Erik, phenomenal data. I got to get back and really dig in. Let's end with machine learning and AI. Now this chart it's similar in its dimensions, of course, except for the money raised. We're not showing that size of the bubble, but AI is so hot. We wanted to cover that here, Erik, explain this please. Why TensorFlow is highlighted and walk us through this chart. >> Yeah, it's funny yet again, right? Another open source name, TensorFlow being up there. And I just want to explain, we do break out machine learning, AI is its own sector. A lot of this of course really is intertwined with the data side, but it is on its own area. And one of the things I think that's most important here to break out is Databricks. We started to cover Databricks in machine learning, AI. That company has grown into much, much more than that. So I do want to state to you Dave, and also the audience out there that moving forward, we're going to be moving Databricks out of only the MA/AI into other sectors. So we can kind of value them against their peers a little bit better. But in this instance, you could just see how dominant they are in this area. And one thing that's not here, but I do want to point out is that we have the ability to break this down by industry vertical, organization size. And when I break this down into Fortune 500 and Fortune 1000, both Databricks and Tensorflow are even better than you see here. So it's quite interesting to see that the names that are succeeding are also succeeding with the largest organizations in the world. And as we know, large organizations means large budgets. So this is one area that I just thought was really interesting to point out that as we break it down, the data by vertical, these two names still are the outstanding players. >> I just also want to call it H2O.ai. They're getting a lot of buzz in the marketplace and I'm seeing them a lot more. Anaconda, another one. Dataiku consistently popping up. DataRobot is also interesting because all the kerfuffle that's going on there. The Cube guy, Cube alum, Chris Lynch stepped down as executive chairman. All this stuff came out about how the executives were taking money off the table and didn't allow the employees to participate in that money raising deal. So that's pissed a lot of people off. And so they're now going through some kind of uncomfortable things, which is unfortunate because DataRobot, I noticed, we haven't covered them that much in "Breaking Analysis", but I've noticed them oftentimes, Erik, in the surveys doing really well. So you would think that company has a lot of potential. But yeah, it's an important space that we're going to continue to watch. Let me ask you Erik, can you contextualize this from a time series standpoint? I mean, how is this changed over time? >> Yeah, again, not show here, but in the data. I'm sorry, go ahead. >> No, I'm sorry. What I meant, I should have interjected. In other words, you would think in a downturn that these emerging companies would be less interesting to buyers 'cause they're more risky. What have you seen? >> Yeah, and it was interesting before we went live, you and I were having this conversation about "Is the downturn stopping people from evaluating these private companies or not," right. In a larger sense, that's really what we're doing here. How are these private companies doing when it comes down to the actual practitioners? The people with the budget, the people with the decision making. And so what I did is, we have historical data as you know, I went back to the Emerging Technology Survey we did in November of 21, right at the crest right before the market started to really fall and everything kind of started to fall apart there. And what I noticed is on the security side, very much so, we're seeing less evaluations than we were in November 21. So I broke it down. On cloud security, net sentiment went from 21% to 16% from November '21. That's a pretty big drop. And again, that sentiment is our one aggregate metric for overall positivity, meaning utilization and actual evaluation of the name. Again in database, we saw it drop a little bit from 19% to 13%. However, in analytics we actually saw it stay steady. So it's pretty interesting that yes, cloud security and security in general is always going to be important. But right now we're seeing less overall net sentiment in that space. But within analytics, we're seeing steady with growing mindshare. And also to your point earlier in machine learning, AI, we're seeing steady net sentiment and mindshare has grown a whopping 25% to 30%. So despite the downturn, we're seeing more awareness of these companies in analytics and machine learning and a steady, actual utilization of them. I can't say the same in security and database. They're actually shrinking a little bit since the end of last year. >> You know it's interesting, we were on a round table, Erik does these round tables with CISOs and CIOs, and I remember one time you had asked the question, "How do you think about some of these emerging tech companies?" And one of the executives said, "I always include somebody in the bottom left of the Gartner Magic Quadrant in my RFPs. I think he said, "That's how I found," I don't know, it was Zscaler or something like that years before anybody ever knew of them "Because they're going to help me get to the next level." So it's interesting to see Erik in these sectors, how they're holding up in many cases. >> Yeah. It's a very important part for the actual IT practitioners themselves. There's always contracts coming up and you always have to worry about your next round of negotiations. And that's one of the roles these guys play. You have to do a POC when contracts come up, but it's also their job to stay on top of the new technology. You can't fall behind. Like everyone's a software company. Now everyone's a tech company, no matter what you're doing. So these guys have to stay in on top of it. And that's what this ETS can do. You can go in here and look and say, "All right, I'm going to evaluate their technology," and it could be twofold. It might be that you're ready to upgrade your technology and they're actually pushing the envelope or it simply might be I'm using them as a negotiation ploy. So when I go back to the big guy who I have full intentions of writing that contract to, at least I have some negotiation leverage. >> Erik, we got to leave it there. I could spend all day. I'm going to definitely dig into this on my own time. Thank you for introducing this, really appreciate your time today. >> I always enjoy it, Dave and I hope everyone out there has a great holiday weekend. Enjoy the rest of the summer. And, you know, I love to talk data. So anytime you want, just point the camera on me and I'll start talking data. >> You got it. I also want to thank the team at ETR, not only Erik, but Darren Bramen who's a data scientist, really helped prepare this data, the entire team over at ETR. I cannot tell you how much additional data there is. We are just scratching the surface in this "Breaking Analysis". So great job guys. I want to thank Alex Myerson. Who's on production and he manages the podcast. Ken Shifman as well, who's just coming back from VMware Explore. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE. Does some great editing for us. Thank you. All of you guys. Remember these episodes, they're all available as podcast, wherever you listen. All you got to do is just search "Breaking Analysis" podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or you can email me to get in touch david.vellante@siliconangle.com. You can DM me at dvellante or comment on my LinkedIn posts and please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for Erik Bradley and The Cube Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. Be well. And we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis". (upbeat music)

>>Okay, welcome back. Everyone's Cube's coverage here in Las Vegas for Amazon re Mars machine learning, automation, robotics, and space out. John fir host of the queue. Got a great set of guests here talking about AI, Jason Montgomery CTO and co-founder man and Ryans CEO, founder guys. Thanks for coming on. We're just chatting, lost my train of thought. Cuz we were chatting about something else, your history with DataRobot and, and your backgrounds entrepreneurs. Welcome to the queue. Thanks >>Tur. Thanks for having >>Us. So first, before we get into the conversation, tell me about the company. You guys have a history together, multiple startups, multiple exits. What are you guys working on? Obviously AI is hot here as part of the show. M is Mars machine learning, which we all know is the basis for AI. What's the story. >>Yeah, really. We're we're here for two of the letters and Mars. We're here for the machine learning and the automation part. So at the high level, man is a no code AI application development platform. And basically anybody could log in and start making AI applications. It could be anything from just texting it with the Twilio integration to tell you that you're doing great or that you need to exercise more to integrating with zenes to get support tickets classified. >>So Jason, we were talking too about before he came on camera about the cloud and how you can spin up resources. The data world is coming together and I, and I like to see two flash points. The, I call it the 2010 big data era that began and then failed Hadoop crashed and burned. Yeah. Then out of the, out of the woodwork came data robots and the data stacks and the snowflakes >>Data break snowflake. >>And now you have that world coming back at scale. So we're now seeing a huge era of, I need to stand up infrastructure and platform to do all this heavy lifting. I don't have time to do. Right. That sounds like what you guys are doing. Is that kind of the case? >>That's absolutely correct. Yeah. Typically you would have to hire a whole team. It would take you months to sort of get the infrastructure automation in place, the dev ops DevOps pipelines together. And to do the automation to spin up, spin down, scale up scale down requires a lot of special expertise with, you know, Kubernetes. Yeah. And a lot of the other data pipelines and a lot of the AWS technologies. So we automate a lot of that. So >>If, if DevOps did what they did, infrastructure has code. Yeah. Data has code. This is kind of like that. It's not data ops per se. Is there a category? How do you see this? Cuz it's you could say data ops, but that's also it's DevOps dev. It's a lot going on. Oh yeah. It's not just seeing AI ops, right? There's a lot more, what, what would you call this? >>It's a good question. I don't know if we've quite come up with the name. I know >>It's not data ops. It's not >>Like we call it AI process automation >>SSPA instead of RPA, >>What RPA promised to be. Yes, >>Exactly. But what's the challenge. The number one problem is it's I would say not, not so much all on ever on undifferent heavy lifting. It's a lot of heavy lifting that for sure. Yes. What's involved. What's the consequences of not going this way. If I want to do it myself, can you take me through the, the pros and cons of what the scale scope, the scale of without you guys? >>Yeah. Historically you needed to curate all your data, bring it together and have some sort of data lake or something like that. And then you had to do really a lot of feature engineering and a lot of other sort of data science on the back end and automate the whole thing and deploy it and get it out there. It's a, it's a pretty rigorous and, and challenging problem that, you know, we there's a lot of automation platforms for, but they typically focus on data scientists with these large language models we're using they're pre-trained. So you've sort of taken out that whole first step of all that data collection to start out and you can basically start prototyping almost instantly because they've already got like 6 billion parameters, 10 billion parameters in them. They understand the human language really well. And a lot of other problems. I dunno if you have anything you wanna add to that, Ryan, but >>Yeah, I think the other part is we deal with a lot of organizations that don't have big it teams. Yeah. And it would be impossible quite frankly, for them to ever do something like deploy text, track as an example. Yeah. They're just not gonna do it, but now they can come to us. They know the problem they want solved. They know that they have all these invoices as an example and they wanna run it through a text track. And now with us they can just drag and drop and say, yeah, we want tech extract. Then we wanted to go through this. This is what we >>Want. Expertise is a huge problem. And the fact that it's changing too, right? Yeah. Put that out there. You guys say, you know, cybersecurity challenges. We guys do have a background on that. So you know, all the cutting edge. So this just seems to be this it, I hate to say transformation. Cause I not the word I'm looking for, I'd say stuck in the mud kind of scenario where they can't, they have to get bigger, faster. Yeah. And the scale is bigger and they don't have the people to do it. So you're seeing the rise of managed service. You mentioned Kubernetes, right? I know this young 21 year old kid, he's got a great business. He runs a managed service. Yep. Just for Kubernetes. Why? Because no, one's there to stand up the clusters. >>Yeah. >>It's a big gap. >>So this, you have these sets of services coming in now, where, where do you guys fit into that conversation? If I'm the customer? My problem is what, what is my, what is my problem that I need you guys for? What does it look like to describe my problem? >>Typically you actually, you, you kind of know that your employees are spending a lot of time, a lot of hours. So I'll just give you a real example. We have a customer that they were spending 60 hours a week just reviewing these accounts, payable, invoices, 60 hours a week on that. And they knew there had to be a better way. So manual review manual, like when we got their data, they were showing us these invoices and they had to have their people circle the total on the invoice, highlight the customer name, the >>Person who quit the next day. Right? >>No like they, they, Hey, you know, they had four people doing this, I think. And the point is, is they come to us and we say, well, you know, AI can, can just basically using something like text track can just do this. And then we can enrich those outputs from text track with the AI. So that's where the transformers come in. And when we showed them that and got them up and running in about 30 minutes, they were mind blown. Yeah. And now this is a company that doesn't have a big it department. So the >>Kind, and they had the ability to quantify the problem >>They knew. And, and in this case it was actually a business user. It was not a technical >>In is our she consequence technical it's hours. She consequences that's wasted. Manual, labor wasted. >>Exactly. Yeah. And, and to their point, it was look, we have way more high, valuable tasks that our people could be doing yeah. Than doing this AP thing. It takes 60 hours. And I think that's really important to remember about AI. What're I don't think it's gonna automate away people's jobs. Yeah. What it's going to do is it's going to free us up to focus on what really matters and focus on the high value stuff. And that's what people should >>Be doing. I know it's a cliche. I'm gonna say it again. Cause I keep saying, cause I keep saying for people to listen, the bank teller argument always was the big thing. Oh yeah. They're gonna get killed by the ATM machine. No, they're opening up more branches. That's right. That's right. So it's like, come on. People let's get, get over that. So I, I definitely agree with that. Then the question, next question is what's your secret sauce? I'm the customer I'm gonna like that value proposition. You make something go away. It's a pain relief. Then there's the growth side. Okay. You can solve from problems. Now I want this, the, the vitamin you got aspirin. And I want the vitamin. What's the growth angle for you guys with your customers. What's the big learnings. Once they get the beach head with problem solving. >>I think it, it, it it's the big one is let's say that we start with the account payable thing because it's so our platform's so approachable. They go in and then they start tinkering with the initial, we'll call it a template. So they might say, Hey, you know what, actually, in this edge case, I'm gonna play with this. And not only do I want it to go to our accounting system, but if it's this edge case, I want it to email me. So they'll just drag and drop an email block into our canvas. And now they're making it >>Their own. There is the no code, low code's situation. They're essentially building a notification engine under the covers. They have no idea what they're doing. That's >>Right. They get the, they just know that, Hey, you know what? When, when like the amount's over $10,000, I want an email. They know that's what they want. They don't, they don't know that's the notification engine. Of >>Course that's value email. Exactly. I get what I wanted. All right. So tell me about the secret sauce. What's under the covers. What's the big, big, big scale, valuable, valuable, secret sauce. >>I would say part of it. And, and honestly, the reason that we're able to do this now is transformer architecture. When the transformer papers came out and then of course the attention is all you need paper, those kind of unlocked it and made this all possible. Beyond that. I think the other secret sauce we've been doing this a long time. >>So we kind of, we know we're in the paid points. We went to those band points. Cause we weren't data scientists or ML people. >>Yeah. >>Yeah. You, you walked the snow and no shoes on in the winter. That's right. These kids now got boots on. They're all happy. You've installed machines. You've loaded OSS on, on top of rack switches. Yeah. I mean, it's unbelievable how awesome it's right now to be a developer and now a business user's doing the low code. Yep. If you have the system architecture set up, so back to the data engineering side, you guys had the experience got you here. This is a big discussion right now. We're having in, in, on the cube and many conversations like the server market, you had that go away through Amazon and Google was one of the first, obviously the board, but the idea that servers could be everywhere. So the SRE role came out the site reliability engineer, right. Which was one guy or gal and zillions of servers. Now you're seeing the same kind of role with data engineering. And then there's not a lot of people that fit the requirement of being a data engineer. It's like, yeah, it's very unique. Cause you're dealing with a system architecture, not data science. So start to see the role of this, this, this new persona, because they're taking on all the manual challenges of doing that. You guys are kind of replaced that I think. Well, do you agree with it about the data engineer? First of all? >>I think, yeah. Well and it's different cuz there's the older data engineer and then there's sort of the newer cloud aware one who knows how to use all the cloud technologies. And so when you're trying, we've tried to hire some of those and it's like, okay, you're really familiar with old database technology, but can you orchestrate that in a serverless environment with a lot of AWS technology for instance. And it's, and that's hard though. They don't, they don't, there's not a lot of people who know that space, >>So there's no real curriculum out there. That's gonna teach you how to handle, you know, ETL. And also like I got I'm on stream data from this source. Right. I'm using sequel I'm I got put all together. >>Yeah. So it's yeah, it's a lot of just not >>Data science. It's >>Figure that out. So its a large language models too. We don't have to worry about some of the data there too. It's it's already, you know, codified in the model. And then as we collect data, as people use our platform, they can then curate data. They want to annotate or enrich the model with so that it works better as it goes. So we're kind of curating, collecting the data as it's used. So as it evolves, it just gets better. >>Well, you guys obviously have a lot of experience together and congratulations on the venture. Thank you. What's going on here at re Mars. Why are you here? What's the pitch. What's the story. Where's your, you got two letters. You got the, you got the M for the machine learning and AI and you got the, a for automation. What's the ecosystem here for you? What are you doing? >>Well, I mean, I think you, you kind of said it right. We're here because the machine learning and the automation part, >>But >>More, more widely than that. I mean we work very, very closely with Amazon on a number of front things like text track, transcribe Alexa, basically all these AWS services are just integrations within our system. So you might want to hook up your AI to an Alexa so that you could say, Hey Alexa, tell me updates about my LinkedIn feed. I don't know, whatever, whatever your hearts content >>Is. Well what about this cube transcription? >>Yeah, exactly. A hundred percent. >>Yeah. We could do that. You know, feed all this in there and then we could do summarization of everything >>Here, >>Q and a extraction >>And say, Hey, these guys are >>Technicals. Yeah, >>There you go. No, they mentioned Kubernetes. We didn't say serverless chef puppet. Those are words straight, you know, and no linguistics matters right into that's a service that no one's ever gonna build. >>Well, and actually on that point, really interesting. We work with some healthcare companies and when you're basically, when people call in and they call into the insurance, they have a question about their, what like is this gonna be covered? And what they want to key in on are things like I just went to my doctor and got a cancer diagnosis. So the, the, the relevant thing here is they just got this diagnosis. And why is that important? Well, because if you just got a diagnosis, they want to start a certain triage to make you successful with your treatments. Because obviously there's an >>Incentive to do time. That time series matters and, and data exactly. And machine learning reacts to it. But also it could be fed back old data. It used to be time series to store it. Yeah. But now you could reuse it to see how to make the machine learning better. Are you guys doing anything, anything around that, how to make that machine learning smarter, look doing look backs or maybe not the right word, but because you have data, I might as well look back at it's happened. >>So part of, part of our platform and part of what we do is as people use these applications, to your point, there's lots of data that's getting generated, but we capture all that. And that becomes now a labeled data set within our platform. And you can take that label data set and do something called fine tuning, which just makes the underlying model more and more yours. It's proprietary. The more you do it. And it's more accurate. Usually the more you do it. >>So yeah, we keep all that. I wanna ask your reaction on this is a good point. The competitive advantage in the intellectual property is gonna be the workflows. And so the data is the IP. If this refinement happens, that becomes intellectual property. Yeah. That's kind of not software. It's the data modeling. It's the data itself is worth something. Are you guys seeing that? >>Yeah. And actually how we position the company is man team is a control plane and you retain ownership of the data plane. So it is your intellectual property. Yeah. It's in your system, it's in your AWS environment. >>That's not what everyone else is doing. Everyone wants to be the control plane and the data plan. We >>Don't wanna own your data. We don't, it's a compliance and security nightmare. Yeah. >>Let's be, Real's the question. What do you optimize for? Great. And I think that's a fair, a fair bet. Given the fact that clients want to be more agile with their data anyway, and the more restrictions you put on them, why would that this only gets you in trouble? Yeah. I could see that being a and plus lock. In's gonna be a huge factor. Yeah. I think this is coming fast and no one's talking about it in the press, but everyone's like run to silos, be a silo and that's not how data works. No. So the question is how do you create siloing of data for say domain specific applications while maintaining a horizontally scalable data plan or control plan that seems to be kind of disconnected everyone to lock in their data. What do you guys think about that? This industry transition we're in now because it seems people are reverting back to fourth grade, right. And to, you know, back to silos. >>Yeah. I think, well, I think the companies probably want their silo of data, their IP. And so as they refine their models and, and we give them the ability to deploy it in their own stage maker and their own VPC, they, they retain and own it. They can actually get rid of us and they still have that model. Now they may have to build, you know, a lot of pipelines and other technology to support it. But well, >>Your lock in is usability. Exactly. And value. Yeah. Value proposition is the lock in bingo. That's not counterintuitive. Exactly. Yeah. You say, Hey, more value. How do I wanna get rid of it? Valuable. I'll pay for it. Right. As long as you have multiple value, step up. And that's what cloud does. I mean, think that's the thing about cloud. That's gonna make all this work. In my opinion, the value enablement is much higher. Yeah. So good business model. Anything else here at the show that you observed that you like, that you think people would be interested in? What's the most important story coming out of the, the holistic, if you zoom up and look at re Mars, what's, what's coming out of the vibe. >>You know, one thing that I think about a lot is we're, you know, we have Artis here, humanity hopefully soon gonna be going to Mars. And I think that's really, really exciting. And I also think when we go to Mars, we're probably not gonna send a bunch of software engineers up there. >>Right. So like robots will do break fix now. So, you know, we're good. It's gone. So services are gonna be easy. >>Yeah. But I, oh, >>I left that device back at earth. I just think that's not gonna be good. Just >>Replicated it in one. I think there's like an eight >>Minute, the first monopoly on next day delivery in space. >>They'll just have a spaceship that sends out drones to Barss. Yeah. But I think that when we start going back to the moon and we go to Mars, people are gonna think, Hey, I need this application now to solve this problem that I didn't anticipate having. And in science fiction, we kind of saw this with like how, right? Like you had this AI on this computer or this, on this spaceship that could do all this stuff. We need that. And I haven't seen that here yet. >>No, it's not >>Here yet. And >>It's right now I think getting the hardware right first. Yep. But we did a lot of reporting on this with the D O D and the tactile edge, you know, military applications. It's a fundamental, I won't say it's a tech, religious argument. Like, do you believe in agile realtime data or do you believe in democratizing multi-vendor, you know, capability? I think, I think the interesting needs to sort itself out because sometimes multi vendor multi-cloud might not work for an application that needs this database or this application at the edge. >>Right. >>You know, so if you're in space, the back haul, it matters. >>It really does. Yeah. >>Yeah. Not a good time to go back and get that highly available data. You mean highly, is it highly available or there's two terms highly available, which means real time and available. Yeah. Available means it's on a dis, right? >>Yeah. >>So that's a big challenge. Well guys, thanks for coming on. Plug for the company. What are you guys up to? How much funding do you have? How old are you staff hiring? What's some of the details. >>We're about 45 people right now. We are a globally distributed team. So we hire every like from every country, pretty much we are fully remote. So if you're looking for that, hit us up, definitely always look for engineers, looking for more data scientists. We're very, very well funded as well. And yeah. So >>You guys headquarters out, you guys headquartered. >>So a lot of us live in Columbus, Ohio that's technically HQ, but like I said, we we're in pretty much every continent except in Antarctica. So >>You're for all virtual. >>Yeah. A hundred percent virtual, a hundred percent. >>Got it. Well, congratulations and love to hear that Datadog story at another time >>Or DataBot >>Yeah. I mean data, DataBot sorry. Let's get, get all confused >>Data dog data company. >>Well, thanks for coming on and congratulations for your success and thanks for sharing. Yeah. >>Thanks for having us for having >>Pleasure to be here. It's a cube here at rebars. I'm John furier host. Thanks for watching more coming back after this short break.

>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is braking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> A new era of data is upon us, and we're in a state of transition. You know, even our language reflects that. We rarely use the phrase big data anymore, rather we talk about digital transformation or digital business, or data-driven companies. Many have come to the realization that data is a not the new oil, because unlike oil, the same data can be used over and over for different purposes. We still use terms like data as an asset. However, that same narrative, when it's put forth by the vendor and practitioner communities, includes further discussions about democratizing and sharing data. Let me ask you this, when was the last time you wanted to share your financial assets with your coworkers or your partners or your customers? Hello everyone, and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we want to share our assessment of the state of the data business. We'll do so by looking at the data mesh concept and how a leading financial institution, JP Morgan Chase is practically applying these relatively new ideas to transform its data architecture. Let's start by looking at what is the data mesh. As we've previously reported many times, data mesh is a concept and set of principles that was introduced in 2018 by Zhamak Deghani who's director of technology at ThoughtWorks, it's a global consultancy and software development company. And she created this movement because her clients, who were some of the leading firms in the world had invested heavily in predominantly monolithic data architectures that had failed to deliver desired outcomes in ROI. So her work went deep into trying to understand that problem. And her main conclusion that came out of this effort was the world of data is distributed and shoving all the data into a single monolithic architecture is an approach that fundamentally limits agility and scale. Now a profound concept of data mesh is the idea that data architectures should be organized around business lines with domain context. That the highly technical and hyper specialized roles of a centralized cross functional team are a key blocker to achieving our data aspirations. This is the first of four high level principles of data mesh. So first again, that the business domain should own the data end-to-end, rather than have it go through a centralized big data technical team. Second, a self-service platform is fundamental to a successful architectural approach where data is discoverable and shareable across an organization and an ecosystem. Third, product thinking is central to the idea of data mesh. In other words, data products will power the next era of data success. And fourth data products must be built with governance and compliance that is automated and federated. Now there's lot more to this concept and there are tons of resources on the web to learn more, including an entire community that is formed around data mesh. But this should give you a basic idea. Now, the other point is that, in observing Zhamak Deghani's work, she is deliberately avoided discussions around specific tooling, which I think has frustrated some folks because we all like to have references that tie to products and tools and companies. So this has been a two-edged sword in that, on the one hand it's good, because data mesh is designed to be tool agnostic and technology agnostic. On the other hand, it's led some folks to take liberties with the term data mesh and claim mission accomplished when their solution, you know, maybe more marketing than reality. So let's look at JP Morgan Chase in their data mesh journey. Is why I got really excited when I saw this past week, a team from JPMC held a meet up to discuss what they called, data lake strategy via data mesh architecture. I saw that title, I thought, well, that's a weird title. And I wondered, are they just taking their legacy data lakes and claiming they're now transformed into a data mesh? But in listening to the presentation, which was over an hour long, the answer is a definitive no, not at all in my opinion. A gentleman named Scott Hollerman organized the session that comprised these three speakers here, James Reid, who's a divisional CIO at JPMC, Arup Nanda who is a technologist and architect and Serita Bakst who is an information architect, again, all from JPMC. This was the most detailed and practical discussion that I've seen to date about implementing a data mesh. And this is JP Morgan's their approach, and we know they're extremely savvy and technically sound. And they've invested, it has to be billions in the past decade on data architecture across their massive company. And rather than dwell on the downsides of their big data past, I was really pleased to see how they're evolving their approach and embracing new thinking around data mesh. So today, we're going to share some of the slides that they use and comment on how it dovetails into the concept of data mesh that Zhamak Deghani has been promoting, and at least as we understand it. And dig a bit into some of the tooling that is being used by JP Morgan, particularly around it's AWS cloud. So the first point is it's all about business value, JPMC, they're in the money business, and in that world, business value is everything. So Jr Reid, the CIO showed this slide and talked about their overall goals, which centered on a cloud first strategy to modernize the JPMC platform. I think it's simple and sensible, but there's three factors on which he focused, cut costs always short, you got to do that. Number two was about unlocking new opportunities, or accelerating time to value. But I was really happy to see number three, data reuse. That's a fundamental value ingredient in the slide that he's presenting here. And his commentary was all about aligning with the domains and maximizing data reuse, i.e. data is not like oil and making sure there's appropriate governance around that. Now don't get caught up in the term data lake, I think it's just how JP Morgan communicates internally. It's invested in the data lake concept, so they use water analogies. They use things like data puddles, for example, which are single project data marts or data ponds, which comprise multiple data puddles. And these can feed in to data lakes. And as we'll see, JPMC doesn't strive to have a single version of the truth from a data standpoint that resides in a monolithic data lake, rather it enables the business lines to create and own their own data lakes that comprise fit for purpose data products. And they do have a single truth of metadata. Okay, we'll get to that. But generally speaking, each of the domains will own end-to-end their own data and be responsible for those data products, we'll talk about that more. Now the genesis of this was sort of a cloud first platform, JPMC is leaning into public cloud, which is ironic since the early days, in the early days of cloud, all the financial institutions were like never. Anyway, JPMC is going hard after it, they're adopting agile methods and microservices architectures, and it sees cloud as a fundamental enabler, but it recognizes that on-prem data must be part of the data mesh equation. Here's a slide that starts to get into some of that generic tooling, and then we'll go deeper. And I want to make a couple of points here that tie back to Zhamak Deghani's original concept. The first is that unlike many data architectures, this puts data as products right in the fat middle of the chart. The data products live in the business domains and are at the heart of the architecture. The databases, the Hadoop clusters, the files and APIs on the left-hand side, they serve the data product builders. The specialized roles on the right hand side, the DBA's, the data engineers, the data scientists, the data analysts, we could have put in quality engineers, et cetera, they serve the data products. Because the data products are owned by the business, they inherently have the context that is the middle of this diagram. And you can see at the bottom of the slide, the key principles include domain thinking, an end-to-end ownership of the data products. They build it, they own it, they run it, they manage it. At the same time, the goal is to democratize data with a self-service as a platform. One of the biggest points of contention of data mesh is governance. And as Serita Bakst said on the Meetup, metadata is your friend, and she kind of made a joke, she said, "This sounds kind of geeky, but it's important to have a metadata catalog to understand where data resides and the data lineage in overall change management. So to me, this really past the data mesh stink test pretty well. Let's look at data as products. CIO Reid said the most difficult thing for JPMC was getting their heads around data product, and they spent a lot of time getting this concept to work. Here's the slide they use to describe their data products as it related to their specific industry. They set a common language and taxonomy is very important, and you can imagine how difficult that was. He said, for example, it took a lot of discussion and debate to define what a transaction was. But you can see at a high level, these three product groups around wholesale, credit risk, party, and trade and position data as products, and each of these can have sub products, like, party, we'll have to know your customer, KYC for example. So a key for JPMC was to start at a high level and iterate to get more granular over time. So lots of decisions had to be made around who owns the products and the sub-products. The product owners interestingly had to defend why that product should even exist, what boundaries should be in place and what data sets do and don't belong in the various products. And this was a collaborative discussion, I'm sure there was contention around that between the lines of business. And which sub products should be part of these circles? They didn't say this, but tying it back to data mesh, each of these products, whether in a data lake or a data hub or a data pond or data warehouse, data puddle, each of these is a node in the global data mesh that is discoverable and governed. And supporting this notion, Serita said that, "This should not be infrastructure-bound, logically, any of these data products, whether on-prem or in the cloud can connect via the data mesh." So again, I felt like this really stayed true to the data mesh concept. Well, let's look at some of the key technical considerations that JPM discussed in quite some detail. This chart here shows a diagram of how JP Morgan thinks about the problem, and some of the challenges they had to consider were how to write to various data stores, can you and how can you move data from one data store to another? How can data be transformed? Where's the data located? Can the data be trusted? How can it be easily accessed? Who has the right to access that data? These are all problems that technology can help solve. And to address these issues, Arup Nanda explained that the heart of this slide is the data in ingestor instead of ETL. All data producers and contributors, they send their data to the ingestor and the ingestor then registers the data so it's in the data catalog. It does a data quality check and it tracks the lineage. Then, data is sent to the router, which persists the data in the data store based on the best destination as informed by the registration. This is designed to be a flexible system. In other words, the data store for a data product is not fixed, it's determined at the point of inventory, and that allows changes to be easily made in one place. The router simply reads that optimal location and sends it to the appropriate data store. Nowadays you see the schema infer there is used when there is no clear schema on right. In this case, the data product is not allowed to be consumed until the schema is inferred, and then the data goes into a raw area, and the inferer determines the schema and then updates the inventory system so that the data can be routed to the proper location and properly tracked. So that's some of the detail of how the sausage factory works in this particular use case, it was very interesting and informative. Now let's take a look at the specific implementation on AWS and dig into some of the tooling. As described in some detail by Arup Nanda, this diagram shows the reference architecture used by this group within JP Morgan, and it shows all the various AWS services and components that support their data mesh approach. So start with the authorization block right there underneath Kinesis. The lake formation is the single point of entitlement and has a number of buckets including, you can see there the raw area that we just talked about, a trusted bucket, a refined bucket, et cetera. Depending on the data characteristics at the data catalog registration block where you see the glue catalog, that determines in which bucket the router puts the data. And you can see the many AWS services in use here, identity, the EMR, the elastic MapReduce cluster from the legacy Hadoop work done over the years, the Redshift Spectrum and Athena, JPMC uses Athena for single threaded workloads and Redshift Spectrum for nested types so they can be queried independent of each other. Now remember very importantly, in this use case, there is not a single lake formation, rather than multiple lines of business will be authorized to create their own lakes, and that creates a challenge. So how can that be done in a flexible and automated manner? And that's where the data mesh comes into play. So JPMC came up with this federated lake formation accounts idea, and each line of business can create as many data producer or consumer accounts as they desire and roll them up into their master line of business lake formation account. And they cross-connect these data products in a federated model. And these all roll up into a master glue catalog so that any authorized user can find out where a specific data element is located. So this is like a super set catalog that comprises multiple sources and syncs up across the data mesh. So again to me, this was a very well thought out and practical application of database. Yes, it includes some notion of centralized management, but much of that responsibility has been passed down to the lines of business. It does roll up to a master catalog, but that's a metadata management effort that seems compulsory to ensure federated and automated governance. As well at JPMC, the office of the chief data officer is responsible for ensuring governance and compliance throughout the federation. All right, so let's take a look at some of the suspects in this world of data mesh and bring in the ETR data. Now, of course, ETR doesn't have a data mesh category, there's no such thing as that data mesh vendor, you build a data mesh, you don't buy it. So, what we did is we use the ETR dataset to select and filter on some of the culprits that we thought might contribute to the data mesh to see how they're performing. This chart depicts a popular view that we often like to share. It's a two dimensional graphic with net score or spending momentum on the vertical axis and market share or pervasiveness in the data set on the horizontal axis. And we filtered the data on sectors such as analytics, data warehouse, and the adjacencies to things that might fit into data mesh. And we think that these pretty well reflect participation that data mesh is certainly not all compassing. And it's a subset obviously, of all the vendors who could play in the space. Let's make a few observations. Now as is often the case, Azure and AWS, they're almost literally off the charts with very high spending velocity and large presence in the market. Oracle you can see also stands out because much of the world's data lives inside of Oracle databases. It doesn't have the spending momentum or growth, but the company remains prominent. And you can see Google Cloud doesn't have nearly the presence in the dataset, but it's momentum is highly elevated. Remember that red dotted line there, that 40% line, anything over that indicates elevated spending momentum. Let's go to Snowflake. Snowflake is consistently shown to be the gold standard in net score in the ETR dataset. It continues to maintain highly elevated spending velocity in the data. And in many ways, Snowflake with its data marketplace and its data cloud vision and data sharing approach, fit nicely into the data mesh concept. Now, a caution, Snowflake has used the term data mesh in it's marketing, but in our view, it lacks clarity, and we feel like they're still trying to figure out how to communicate what that really is. But is really, we think a lot of potential there to that vision. Databricks is also interesting because the firm has momentum and we expect further elevated levels in the vertical axis in upcoming surveys, especially as it readies for its IPO. The firm has a strong product and managed service, and is really one to watch. Now we included a number of other database companies for obvious reasons like Redis and Mongo, MariaDB, Couchbase and Terradata. SAP as well is in there, but that's not all database, but SAP is prominent so we included them. As is IBM more of a database, traditional database player also with the big presence. Cloudera includes Hortonworks and HPE Ezmeral comprises the MapR business that HPE acquired. So these guys got the big data movement started, between Cloudera, Hortonworks which is born out of Yahoo, which was the early big data, sorry early Hadoop innovator, kind of MapR when it's kind of owned course, and now that's all kind of come together in various forms. And of course, we've got Talend and Informatica are there, they are two data integration companies that are worth noting. We also included some of the AI and ML specialists and data science players in the mix like DataRobot who just did a monster $250 million round. Dataiku, H2O.ai and ThoughtSpot, which is all about democratizing data and injecting AI, and I think fits well into the data mesh concept. And you know we put VMware Cloud in there for reference because it really is the predominant on-prem infrastructure platform. All right, let's wrap with some final thoughts here, first, thanks a lot to the JP Morgan team for sharing this data. I really want to encourage practitioners and technologists, go to watch the YouTube of that meetup, we'll include it in the link of this session. And thank you to Zhamak Deghani and the entire data mesh community for the outstanding work that you're doing, challenging the established conventions of monolithic data architectures. The JPM presentation, it gives you real credibility, it takes Data Mesh well beyond concept, it demonstrates how it can be and is being done. And you know, this is not a perfect world, you're going to start somewhere and there's going to be some failures, the key is to recognize that shoving everything into a monolithic data architecture won't support massive scale and agility that you're after. It's maybe fine for smaller use cases in smaller firms, but if you're building a global platform in a data business, it's time to rethink data architecture. Now much of this is enabled by the cloud, but cloud first doesn't mean cloud only, doesn't mean you'll leave your on-prem data behind, on the contrary, you have to include non-public cloud data in your Data Mesh vision just as JPMC has done. You've got to get some quick wins, that's crucial so you can gain credibility within the organization and grow. And one of the key takeaways from the JP Morgan team is, there is a place for dogma, like organizing around data products and domains and getting that right. On the other hand, you have to remain flexible because technologies is going to come, technology is going to go, so you got to be flexible in that regard. And look, if you're going to embrace the metaphor of water like puddles and ponds and lakes, we suggest maybe a little tongue in cheek, but still we believe in this, that you expand your scope to include data ocean, something John Furry and I have talked about and laughed about extensively in theCUBE. Data oceans, it's huge. It's the new data lake, go transcend data lake, think oceans. And think about this, just as we're evolving our language, we should be evolving our metrics. Much the last the decade of big data was around just getting the stuff to work, getting it up and running, standing up infrastructure and managing massive, how much data you got? Massive amounts of data. And there were many KPIs built around, again, standing up that infrastructure, ingesting data, a lot of technical KPIs. This decade is not just about enabling better insights, it's a more than that. Data mesh points us to a new era of data value, and that requires the new metrics around monetizing data products, like how long does it take to go from data product conception to monetization? And how does that compare to what it is today? And what is the time to quality if the business owns the data, and the business has the context? the quality that comes out of them, out of the shoot should be at a basic level, pretty good, and at a higher mark than out of a big data team with no business context. Automation, AI, and very importantly, organizational restructuring of our data teams will heavily contribute to success in the coming years. So we encourage you, learn, lean in and create your data future. Okay, that's it for now, remember these episodes, they're all available as podcasts wherever you listen, all you got to do is search, breaking analysis podcast, and please subscribe. Check out ETR's website at etr.plus for all the data and all the survey information. We publish a full report every week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. And you can get in touch with us, email me david.vellante@siliconangle.com, you can DM me @dvellante, or you can comment on my LinkedIn posts. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE insights powered by ETR. Have a great week everybody, stay safe, be well, and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Moore's Law is dead, right? Think again. Massive improvements in processing power combined with data and AI will completely change the way we think about designing hardware, writing software and applying technology to businesses. Every industry will be disrupted. You hear that all the time. Well, it's absolutely true and we're going to explain why and what it all means. Hello everyone, and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we're going to unveil some new data that suggests we're entering a new era of innovation that will be powered by cheap processing capabilities that AI will exploit. We'll also tell you where the new bottlenecks will emerge and what this means for system architectures and industry transformations in the coming decade. Moore's Law is dead, you say? We must have heard that hundreds, if not, thousands of times in the past decade. EE Times has written about it, MIT Technology Review, CNET, and even industry associations that have lived by Moore's Law. But our friend Patrick Moorhead got it right when he said, "Moore's Law, by the strictest definition of doubling chip densities every two years, isn't happening anymore." And you know what, that's true. He's absolutely correct. And he couched that statement by saying by the strict definition. And he did that for a reason, because he's smart enough to know that the chip industry are masters at doing work arounds. Here's proof that the death of Moore's Law by its strictest definition is largely irrelevant. My colleague, David Foyer and I were hard at work this week and here's the result. The fact is that the historical outcome of Moore's Law is actually accelerating and in quite dramatically. This graphic digs into the progression of Apple's SoC, system on chip developments from the A9 and culminating with the A14, 15 nanometer bionic system on a chip. The vertical axis shows operations per second and the horizontal axis shows time for three processor types. The CPU which we measure here in terahertz, that's the blue line which you can't even hardly see, the GPU which is the orange that's measured in trillions of floating point operations per second and then the NPU, the neural processing unit and that's measured in trillions of operations per second which is that exploding gray area. Now, historically, we always rushed out to buy the latest and greatest PC, because the newer models had faster cycles or more gigahertz. Moore's Law would double that performance every 24 months. Now that equates to about 40% annually. CPU performance is now moderated. That growth is now down to roughly 30% annual improvements. So technically speaking, Moore's Law as we know it was dead. But combined, if you look at the improvements in Apple's SoC since 2015, they've been on a pace that's higher than 118% annually. And it's even higher than that, because the actual figure for these three processor types we're not even counting the impact of DSPs and accelerator components of Apple system on a chip. It would push this even higher. Apple's A14 which is shown in the right hand side here is quite amazing. It's got a 64 bit architecture, it's got many, many cores. It's got a number of alternative processor types. But the important thing is what you can do with all this processing power. In an iPhone, the types of AI that we show here that continue to evolve, facial recognition, speech, natural language processing, rendering videos, helping the hearing impaired and eventually bringing augmented reality to the palm of your hand. It's quite incredible. So what does this mean for other parts of the IT stack? Well, we recently reported Satya Nadella's epic quote that "We've now reached peak centralization." So this graphic paints a picture that was quite telling. We just shared the processing powers exploding. The costs consequently are dropping like a rock. Apple's A14 cost the company approximately 50 bucks per chip. Arm at its v9 announcement said that it will have chips that can go into refrigerators. These chips are going to optimize energy usage and save 10% annually on your power consumption. They said, this chip will cost a buck, a dollar to shave 10% of your refrigerator electricity bill. It's just astounding. But look at where the expensive bottlenecks are, it's networks and it's storage. So what does this mean? Well, it means the processing is going to get pushed to the edge, i.e., wherever the data is born. Storage and networking are going to become increasingly distributed and decentralized. Now with custom silicon and all that processing power placed throughout the system, an AI is going to be embedded into software, into hardware and it's going to optimize a workloads for latency, performance, bandwidth, and security. And remember, most of that data, 99% is going to stay at the edge. And we love to use Tesla as an example. The vast majority of data that a Tesla car creates is never going to go back to the cloud. Most of it doesn't even get persisted. I think Tesla saves like five minutes of data. But some data will connect occasionally back to the cloud to train AI models and we're going to come back to that. But this picture says if you're a hardware company, you'd better start thinking about how to take advantage of that blue line that's exploding, Cisco. Cisco is already designing its own chips. But Dell, HPE, who kind of does maybe used to do a lot of its own custom silicon, but Pure Storage, NetApp, I mean, the list goes on and on and on either you're going to get start designing custom silicon or you're going to get disrupted in our view. AWS, Google and Microsoft are all doing it for a reason as is IBM and to Sarbjeet Johal said recently this is not your grandfather's semiconductor business. And if you're a software engineer, you're going to be writing applications that take advantage of all the data being collected and bringing to bear this processing power that we're talking about to create new capabilities like we've never seen it before. So let's get into that a little bit and dig into AI. You can think of AI as the superset. Just as an aside, interestingly in his book, "Seeing Digital", author David Moschella says, there's nothing artificial about this. He uses the term machine intelligence, instead of artificial intelligence and says that there's nothing artificial about machine intelligence just like there's nothing artificial about the strength of a tractor. It's a nuance, but it's kind of interesting, nonetheless, words matter. We hear a lot about machine learning and deep learning and think of them as subsets of AI. Machine learning applies algorithms and code to data to get "smarter", make better models, for example, that can lead to augmented intelligence and help humans make better decisions. These models improve as they get more data and are iterated over time. Now deep learning is a more advanced type of machine learning. It uses more complex math. But the point that we want to make here is that today much of the activity in AI is around building and training models. And this is mostly happening in the cloud. But we think AI inference will bring the most exciting innovations in the coming years. Inference is the deployment of that model that we were just talking about, taking real time data from sensors, processing that data locally and then applying that training that has been developed in the cloud and making micro adjustments in real time. So let's take an example. Again, we love Tesla examples. Think about an algorithm that optimizes the performance and safety of a car on a turn, the model take data on friction, road condition, angles of the tires, the tire wear, the tire pressure, all this data, and it keeps testing and iterating, testing and iterating, testing iterating that model until it's ready to be deployed. And then the intelligence, all this intelligence goes into an inference engine which is a chip that goes into a car and gets data from sensors and makes these micro adjustments in real time on steering and braking and the like. Now, as you said before, Tesla persist the data for very short time, because there's so much of it. It just can't push it back to the cloud. But it can now ever selectively store certain data if it needs to, and then send back that data to the cloud to further train them all. Let's say for instance, an animal runs into the road during slick conditions, Tesla wants to grab that data, because they notice that there's a lot of accidents in New England in certain months. And maybe Tesla takes that snapshot and sends it back to the cloud and combines it with other data and maybe other parts of the country or other regions of New England and it perfects that model further to improve safety. This is just one example of thousands and thousands that are going to further develop in the coming decade. I want to talk about how we see this evolving over time. Inference is where we think the value is. That's where the rubber meets the road, so to speak, based on the previous example. Now this conceptual chart shows the percent of spend over time on modeling versus inference. And you can see some of the applications that get attention today and how these applications will mature over time as inference becomes more and more mainstream, the opportunities for AI inference at the edge and in IOT are enormous. And we think that over time, 95% of that spending is going to go to inference where it's probably only 5% today. Now today's modeling workloads are pretty prevalent and things like fraud, adtech, weather, pricing, recommendation engines, and those kinds of things, and now those will keep getting better and better and better over time. Now in the middle here, we show the industries which are all going to be transformed by these trends. Now, one of the point that Moschella had made in his book, he kind of explains why historically vertically industries are pretty stovepiped, they have their own stack, sales and marketing and engineering and supply chains, et cetera, and experts within those industries tend to stay within those industries and they're largely insulated from disruption from other industries, maybe unless they were part of a supply chain. But today, you see all kinds of cross industry activity. Amazon entering grocery, entering media. Apple in finance and potentially getting into EV. Tesla, eyeing insurance. There are many, many, many examples of tech giants who are crossing traditional industry boundaries. And the reason is because of data. They have the data. And they're applying machine intelligence to that data and improving. Auto manufacturers, for example, over time they're going to have better data than insurance companies. DeFi, decentralized finance platforms going to use the blockchain and they're continuing to improve. Blockchain today is not great performance, it's very overhead intensive all that encryption. But as they take advantage of this new processing power and better software and AI, it could very well disrupt traditional payment systems. And again, so many examples here. But what I want to do now is dig into enterprise AI a bit. And just a quick reminder, we showed this last week in our Armv9 post. This is data from ETR. The vertical axis is net score. That's a measure of spending momentum. The horizontal axis is market share or pervasiveness in the dataset. The red line at 40% is like a subjective anchor that we use. Anything above 40% we think is really good. Machine learning and AI is the number one area of spending velocity and has been for awhile. RPA is right there. Very frankly, it's an adjacency to AI and you could even argue. So it's cloud where all the ML action is taking place today. But that will change, we think, as we just described, because data's going to get pushed to the edge. And this chart will show you some of the vendors in that space. These are the companies that CIOs and IT buyers associate with their AI and machine learning spend. So it's the same XY graph, spending velocity by market share on the horizontal axis. Microsoft, AWS, Google, of course, the big cloud guys they dominate AI and machine learning. Facebook's not on here. Facebook's got great AI as well, but it's not enterprise tech spending. These cloud companies they have the tooling, they have the data, they have the scale and as we said, lots of modeling is going on today, but this is going to increasingly be pushed into remote AI inference engines that will have massive processing capabilities collectively. So we're moving away from that peak centralization as Satya Nadella described. You see Databricks on here. They're seen as an AI leader. SparkCognition, they're off the charts, literally, in the upper left. They have extremely high net score albeit with a small sample. They apply machine learning to massive data sets. DataRobot does automated AI. They're super high in the y-axis. Dataiku, they help create machine learning based apps. C3.ai, you're hearing a lot more about them. Tom Siebel's involved in that company. It's an enterprise AI firm, hear a lot of ads now doing AI and responsible way really kind of enterprise AI that's sort of always been IBM. IBM Watson's calling card. There's SAP with Leonardo. Salesforce with Einstein. Again, IBM Watson is right there just at the 40% line. You see Oracle is there as well. They're embedding automated and tele or machine intelligence with their self-driving database they call it that sort of machine intelligence in the database. You see Adobe there. So a lot of typical enterprise company names. And the point is that these software companies they're all embedding AI into their offerings. So if you're an incumbent company and you're trying not to get disrupted, the good news is you can buy AI from these software companies. You don't have to build it. You don't have to be an expert at AI. The hard part is going to be how and where to apply AI. And the simplest answer there is follow the data. There's so much more to the story, but we just have to leave it there for now and I want to summarize. We have been pounding the table that the post x86 era is here. It's a function of volume. Arm volumes are a way for volumes are 10X those of x86. Pat Gelsinger understands this. That's why he made that big announcement. He's trying to transform the company. The importance of volume in terms of lowering the cost of semiconductors it can't be understated. And today, we've quantified something that we haven't really seen much of and really haven't seen before. And that's that the actual performance improvements that we're seeing in processing today are far outstripping anything we've seen before, forget Moore's Law being dead that's irrelevant. The original finding is being blown away this decade and who knows with quantum computing what the future holds. This is a fundamental enabler of AI applications. And this is most often the case the innovation is coming from the consumer use cases first. Apple continues to lead the way. And Apple's integrated hardware and software model we think increasingly is going to move into the enterprise mindset. Clearly the cloud vendors are moving in this direction, building their own custom silicon and doing really that deep integration. You see this with Oracle who kind of really a good example of the iPhone for the enterprise, if you will. It just makes sense that optimizing hardware and software together is going to gain momentum, because there's so much opportunity for customization in chips as we discussed last week with Arm's announcement, especially with the diversity of edge use cases. And it's the direction that Pat Gelsinger is taking Intel trying to provide more flexibility. One aside, Pat Gelsinger he may face massive challenges that we laid out a couple of posts ago with our Intel breaking analysis, but he is right on in our view that semiconductor demand is increasing. There's no end in sight. We don't think we're going to see these ebbs and flows as we've seen in the past that these boom and bust cycles for semiconductor. We just think that prices are coming down. The market's elastic and the market is absolutely exploding with huge demand for fab capacity. Now, if you're an enterprise, you should not stress about and trying to invent AI, rather you should put your focus on understanding what data gives you competitive advantage and how to apply machine intelligence and AI to win. You're going to be buying, not building AI and you're going to be applying it. Now data as John Furrier has said in the past is becoming the new development kit. He said that 10 years ago and he seems right. Finally, if you're an enterprise hardware player, you're going to be designing your own chips and writing more software to exploit AI. You'll be embedding custom silicon in AI throughout your product portfolio and storage and networking and you'll be increasingly bringing compute to the data. And that data will mostly stay where it's created. Again, systems and storage and networking stacks they're all being completely re-imagined. If you're a software developer, you now have processing capabilities in the palm of your hand that are incredible. And you're going to rewriting new applications to take advantage of this and use AI to change the world, literally. You'll have to figure out how to get access to the most relevant data. You have to figure out how to secure your platforms and innovate. And if you're a services company, your opportunity is to help customers that are trying not to get disrupted are many. You have the deep industry expertise and horizontal technology chops to help customers survive and thrive. Privacy? AI for good? Yeah well, that's a whole another topic. I think for now, we have to get a better understanding of how far AI can go before we determine how far it should go. Look, protecting our personal data and privacy should definitely be something that we're concerned about and we should protect. But generally, I'd rather not stifle innovation at this point. I'd be interested in what you think about that. Okay. That's it for today. Thanks to David Foyer, who helped me with this segment again and did a lot of the charts and the data behind this. He's done some great work there. Remember these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen, just search breaking it analysis podcast and please subscribe to the series. We'd appreciate that. Check out ETR's website at ETR.plus. We also publish a full report with more detail every week on Wikibon.com and siliconangle.com, so check that out. You can get in touch with me. I'm dave.vellante@siliconangle.com. You can DM me on Twitter @dvellante or comment on our LinkedIn posts. I always appreciate that. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Stay safe, be well. And we'll see you next time. (bright music)

>> From our studios in the heart of Silicon Valley, Palo Alto, California. This is a CUBE Conversation. >> Hi everyone, welcome to this CUBE Conversation here in Palo Alto, I'm John Furrier. Host of theCUBE here in theCUBE studios. I'm joined with Ronen Schwartz. Senior Vice President and General Manager of Data Integration and Cloud Integration at Informatica, CUBE alumni, been on multiple times, here to do a preview round. Informatica World coming up as well as just catch up. Ronen, great to see you. >> Really happy to see you, you guys have a beautiful place here in Palo Alto. >> I know you live right around the corner so I'm expecting to see you come on multiple times and come in and share your commentary, but I want to get your thoughts, it's been a couple of months since we last chatted, interesting turn of events. If you go back just, you know, September of last year, and then you had Amazon Reinvent. They announced Outpost, multi-cloud starts hitting the scene, first it was hybrid. First it was all public cloud. But now the realization from customers is that this is now a fully blown up cloud world. It's cloud operations, it's just public cloud for unlimited cloud natives activity, on premise for existing workloads, and a complete re-architecture of the enterprise. >> Yes, and I think from Reinvent to Google Next just a week before, I agree with you. It's a world of hybrid and a world of multi-cloud. I think a lot of exciting announcements and a lot of changes, I think from my perspective what I see is that the Informatica customers are truly adopting cloud and hybrid and as data is growing, as data is changing the cloud is the place that they actually address this opportunity in the best way. >> So I know we've talked in the past. Your title is Data Integration, Cloud Integration. Obviously integration is the key point. You're starting to see APIs going to a whole other level, with Google they had acquired Apogee, which is an API marketplace, but with microservices and service meshes and Kubernetes momentum you're starting to see the advent of more programmability. This is a big trend, how is that impacting your world? Because at the end of the day you need the data. >> Yes, it actually means that you can do more things with the data in an easier way and also it means that you can actually share it with more users within the enterprise. I think that especially the whole ability to use containers, and Kubernetes is a great example of how you can do it, it's actually giving you unparalleled scale, as well as simplicity from the obstruction perspective. And it allows more and more developers to build more value from the data that they have. So data is actually in the core. Data is the foundation, and really a lot of this new technology allows you to build up from the data more valuable capabilities. I'm really happy that you're mentioning Apogee because one of the things that Google and Informatica notice together is the need for API to actually leverage data in a better way, and we strike a very strategic partnership that has gone into the market in the last few months allowing every user of Informatica Ipaas to basically publish APIs in a native experience from the Informatica Ipass directly to Apogee and vice versa, everything that you build in Informatica Cloud is basically automatically an API inside Apogee, so users get more value from data faster. >> So can you give an example, 'cause I think this is one of the things we saw at Google as a tell sign or the canary in the cole mine whatever trend parameter is that end to end CICD pipe lining, seamless execution in any environment seems to be the trend. What you're kind of getting at is this kind of cross integration, can you give an example of that Informatica Cloud to Apogee example of benefit to the customer or use case and why that's important. >> Yes, definitely, so if I'm a retailer or a manufacturer, I'm actually looking into automate processes. There is nothing better than deleting the Ipaas from Informatica to actually automate process anything from order to cash or inventory validation or even next best recommendation coming from some AI in the backend. Once you have created this process exposing this process as an API is actually allowing multiple other services. Multiple other capabilities to very easily leverage that, right, so this is basically what we're doing, so what an individual in the retailer is doing is they're actually defining this process of order to cash, and then they're publishing it as an API in one click, at that stage anybody anywhere can very very easily consume that API and basically use this process again and again. >> And that means what? Faster execution of application development? >> It means faster execution of application development. It also means consistency and basically scale so now you don't need to redevelop that. It's available as an API, you can reuse it again and again, so you do it in a consistent way, when you need to update you need to change, you need to modernize this process you modernize it once and use it again and again. >> Sorry to drill down on kind of the unique use case here, but this points to the integration challenges out there and the opportunities. Mentioned Google Next, Google Cloud. You've got a relationship with Amazon. This is part of your strategy for ecosystem. This is critical, integration is becoming Amit Walia was saying that you can compose. Have that foundation for the data and you compose your applications, but if you got to have a lot of composition, you need to have integration points, that's going to be either APIs or some sort of glue layer. This is huge, this is like the entire thesis of cloud architecture. >> Right, and the reality that our customers are facing is basically irrelative from multi-cloud, they will use a best of breed cloud for CRM, a best of breed cloud for ERP as well as a best of breed cloud for their data warehouse, their databases as well as their analytics, AI, et cetera. In that world, the only thing that is kind of common across this cloud is the data. And if you're actually able to allow the data to reside in the best place but you keep the metadata managed centrally by software like the one at Informatica is giving you are getting the best of breed of all of these offerings without actually paying a fine for that. >> So you guys are in a lot of magic quadrants out there in terms of categories of leadership and focus on data from day one. As you talk about your ecosystem, can you explain what that means because you're also an ecosystem partner of cloud players but you also have your own ecosystem. Talk about the ecosystem, how is it laid out? What's the update, what are some of the momentum points, can you share just an overview of how that's all happening? >> Yes, definitely, so when we're looking into our partnership with Microsoft Azure, with AWS, with JCP, we're not talking about just Informatica supporting the technologies that they build, we're talking about Informatica supporting the technologies that they're building as well as their ecosystem of partners. We're talking about an end-to-end solution that supports the entire ecosystem. What that actually translates to is Informatica building services that are giving best of breed experience for users within this cloud environment and really giving you the full power of data management integration, data quality. Master data management, data security. Data catalog across all of this cloud. In a way you're right, we can look at it in the same way as like we have an ecosystem and in that ecosystem we're seeing a lot of strategic partners that are very very large, definitely all of these cloud scales are key partners for us and for our customers, but we're also seeing a huge amount of smaller, innovative vendors that are joining this ecosystem, and Informatica World in May 20th is a great place to come and actually see these vendors. We're actually showing for the first time our AI and cloud ecosystem in one place and these vendors are coming and they're showing how are they leveraging Informatica technology to basically bring new value in AI, in machine learning, in analytics to their customers. If you ask me, like, what is Informatica doing to help them, we're basically making the data available in the best way for their offering, and that kind of allowed them to focus on their innovation rather than how do they work in the different places. >> Rowen, you got ahead of me on the Informatica World question, but you just brought it out, you're doing an innovation. Let's talk about Informatica World. Because again, this data, there's a lot of sessions, so you do the normal thing. We've covered multiple years there. Integration's the key point, what are, why should someone come to Informatica World if they're a customer or a prospect? Now, you mentioned the AI zone. What's the core theme that you're going to be seeing there from your group and from the company? >> Informatica World this year is an amazing place for people to come and see the latest that happens within the cloud and hybrid journey, a great place to actually see next generation analytics and all the innovation there, it is a great place to see customer 360 and master data management and how can that change your organization as well as an amazing place to see data security and data privacy and a lot of other innovations around data. But I would actually say that it's great to see everything that Informatica can share with you. It is a better place to see what our customers and our partners are sharing. And especially from a partnership perspective Informatica World 2019, you're actually going to see leaders from Google, you're going to see leaders from Microsoft, you're going to see leaders from AWS, the people that are leading the best data warehouses in the world the best analytics in the world as well as innovators like DataRobot and Databricks that are changing the world and are actually advancing technology very very fast. >> And the AI zone, there's a cloud and AI zone. I've seen them, I know it's here from the prep. What does that mean, what's someone, AI's going to be hot, I think that's a big theme. Getting clarity around, as Amit kind of shared with us on a previous interview. AI's hot because automation kind of left the blocking and tackling. But the value of creation is going to come from using the data, where's the, and it's not integrated, you can't get the data in. If it's not integrated, you can't leverage machine learning, so having access to data makes machine learning get great. The machine learning gets great, AI is great. So tell us what's going on with it. Give a little sneak preview. >> It's actually amazing what we can do leveraging the iron machine learning today, right? I wake up in the morning and I say Alexa, good morning, and I actually get back what's the weather and what's happening. I'm getting into my car, Google is telling me how fast will I get to the office or the first meeting. I left to come here and I knew exactly what's the best route to take. A lot of that is actually leveraging AI and machine learning, I think it's not a secret that the better your data is the better the machine can learn from the data. And if your data is not good, then learning can actually be really really bad. You know, sometimes I can use, like with my kids. If their learning books are bad, there's no way that they can actually get to the right answer. The same as data, data is so critical. What we're seeing is basically data engineers, data operation becoming a super strategic function to make AI and machine learning even possible. Your ability to collect enough data to make sure that the data is ready and clean for AI and machine learning is critical. And then once the AI and machine learning eventually contributed the automation, the decision making, the recommendation, you have to put it back in to the data pipes so that you are actually able to leverage them to do the right thing. >> You know, you, I think you nailed this one. We've talked about this before but I think more important than ever, data cleansing or data cleaning was always an afterthought in the old data warehouse world where well, we're not getting the answers we wanted so you kind of have to fail to figure out that the data sucks so you had to get the data to be better, now it's much more acute in the sense that people realize that you need quality data so there's now new capabilities to make sure there's a process for doing that on the front end, not on the back end. Talk about that dynamic, because this is something that is critical in the architecture, and how you think about data pipe-lining, data management, the things that you guys do, this is an important trend. Take a minute to explain that. >> Yes, I totally agree with you and I think that the rise of the importance of data quality, and it actually is coming also as part of the pattern of data governance and we want to make sure that the processes exist to make sure that the data that we make available for our AI research, for analytics, for our executives and data workers that this data is really the right data is critical. To actually support that, what we are seeing is people defining data governance process. What are the steps that the data needs to go before it is actually available for the next step? And what is nice today is that this is not people that the data needs to go through. These are processes, automation, that can actually drive data quality, it goes from things that are very very basic. Let's remove duplicate data, but also into the fact that you actually identify anomalies in the data and you ask the right questions so that that data doesn't go in. >> Is this the kind of topics that people will hear at Informatica World? >> Definitely, they will hear about how they can actually help the organization get the data right so that machine learning automation, and hyper growth is actually possible. >> You're excited about this market, aren't you? >> Super excited, I mean I think each and every one of us, we're going to see a lot of innovation coming out and I consider myself lucky that data is actually in the center of all of this innovation and that we're actually able to help the customers and our partners be successful with that. >> Yeah, you and I were talking before you came on camera, I wish I was 23 again right now, this is a great time to be in tech, everything's coming together. You got unlimited compute, machine learning's rocking and rolling, everyone's all kinds of diverse areas to play on, it's kind of intoxicating to be in this environment, isn't it? >> I totally agree, and I will add one additional thing to the reasons, agility. Like the fact that it all is available at your fingertip, and you can actually achieve so much with very little patience is really really amazing. >> This compose ability really as the new developer modernization renaissance. It's happening. >> Yes, yes, and as we usually say it all starts from the data. >> Okay, Ronen Schwartz, we're talking Informatica World but getting an update on what's going on because data integration, cloud integration, this is the number one activity people are spending their time on. You get it right, there's huge benefits. Ronen, thanks for coming in and sharing your insights, appreciate it. >> Hey, my pleasure. >> Okay, this is theCUBE, here for CUBE Conversation here in Palo Alto, California at theCUBE headquarters, I'm John Furrier Thanks for watching. (jazz music)

>> Hi, I'm Peter Burris, and welcome once again to Action Item. (funky electronic music) Every week, Wikibon gathers together the research team to discuss seminal issues that are facing the IT industry. And this week is no different. In the next couple of weeks, somewhere near 100,000 people are gonna be heading to Las Vegas for the Amazon, or AWS re:Invent show from all over the world. And this week, what we wanna do is we wanna provide a preview of what we think folks are gonna be talking about. And I'm joined here in our lovely Palo Alto studio, theCUBE studio, by Rob Hof, who is the editor-in-chief of SiliconANGLE. David Floyer, who's in analyst at Wikibon. George Gilbert, who's an analyst Wikibon. And John Furrier, who's a CUBE host and co-CEO. On the phone we have Neil Raden, an analyst at Wikibon, and also Dave Vellante, who's co-CEO with John Furrier, an analyst at Wikibon as well. So guys, let's jump right into it. David Floyer, I wanna hit you first. AWS has done a masterful job of making the whole concept of infrastructure as a service real. Nobody should downplay how hard that was and how amazing their success has been. But they're moving beyond infrastructure as a service. What do we expect for how far up Amazon is likely to go up the stack this year at re:Invent? >> Well, I can say what I'm hoping for. I agree with your premise that they have to go beyond IAS. The overall market for cloud is much bigger than just IAS, with SaaS and other clouds as well, both on-premise and off-premise. So I would start with what enterprise CIOs are wanting, and they are wanting to see a multi-cloud strategy, both on-premise and multiple clouds. SaaS clouds, other clouds. So I'm looking for AWS to provide additional services to make that easier. in particular, services, I thought of private clouds for enterprises. I'm looking for distributed capabilities, particularly in the storage area so they can link different clouds together. I want to see edge data management capabilities. I'd love to see that because the edge itself, especially the low-latency stuff, the real-time stuff, that needs specialist services, and I'd like to see them integrate that much better than just Snowball. I want to see more details about AI I'd love to see what they're doing in that. There's tremendous potential for AI in operational and to improve security, to improve availability, recovery. That is an area where I think they could be a leader of the IT industry. >> So let me stop you there, and George I wanna turn to you. So AWS in AI how do we anticipate that's gonna play out at re:Invent this year? >> I can see three things in decreasing order of likelihood. The first one is, they have to do a better job of tooling, both for, sort of, developers who want to dabble in, well get their arms around AI, but who aren't real data scientists. And then also hardcore tools for data scientists that have been well served by, recently, Microsoft and IBM, among others. So this is this Iron Man Initiative that we've heard about. For the hardcore tools, something from Domino Data Labs that looks like they're gonna partner with them. It's like a data-science workbench, so for the collaborative data preparation, modeling, deployment. That whole life cycle. And then for the developer-ready tooling, I expect to see they'll be working with a company called DataRobot, which has a really nifty tool where you put in a whole bunch of training data, and it trains, could be a couple dozen models that it thinks that might fit, and it'll show you the best fits. It'll show you the features in the models that are most impactful. In other words, it provides a lot of transparency. >> So it's kind of like models for models. >> Yes, and it provides transparency. Now that's the highest likelihood. And we have names on who we think the likely suspects are. The next step down, I would put applying machine learning to application performance management and IT operations. >> So that's the whole AI for ITOM that David Floyer just mentioned. >> Yeah. >> Now, presumably, this is gonna have to extend beyond just AI for Amazon or AWS-related ITOM. Our expectation's that we're gonna see a greater distribution of, or Amazon take more of a leadership in establishing a framework that cuts across multi-cloud. Have I got that right, David Floyer? >> Absolutely. A massive opportunity for them to provide the basics on their own platform. That's obviously the starting point. They'll have the best instrumentation for all of the components they have there. But they will need to integrate that in with their own databases, with other people's databases. The more that they can link all the units together and get real instrumentation from an application point of view of the whole of the infrastructure, the more value AI can contribute. >> John Foyer, the whole concept of the last few years of AWS is that all roads eventually end up at AWS. However, there's been a real challenge associated with getting this migration momentum to really start to mature. Now we saw some interesting moves that they made with VMware over the last couple of years, and it's been quite successful. And some would argue it might even have given another round of life to VMware. Are there some things we expect to see AWS do this time that are gonna reenergize the ecosystem to start bringing more customers higher up the stack to AWS? >> Yeah, but I think I look at it, quickly, as VMware was a groundbreaking even for both companies, VMware and AWS. We talked about that at that research event we had with them. The issue that is happening is that AWS has had a run in the marketplace. They've been the leader in cloud. Every year, it's been a slew of announcements. This year's no different. They're gonna have more and more announcements. In fact, they had to release some announcements early, before the show, because they have, again, more and more announcements. So they have the under-the-hood stuff going on that David Floyer and George were pointing out. So the classic build strategy is to continue to be competitive by having more services layered on top of each other, upgrading those services. That's a competitive strategy frame that's under the hood. On the business side, you're seeing more competition this year than ever before. Amazon now is highly contested, certainly in the marketplace with competitors. Okay, you're seeing FUD, the uncertainty and doubt from other people, how they're bundling. But it's clear. The cloud visibility is clear to customers. The numbers are coming in, multiple years of financial performance. But now the ecosystem plays, really, the interesting one. I think the VMware move is gonna be a tell sign for other companies that haven't won that top-three position. >> Example? >> I will say SAP. >> Oh really? You think SAP is gonna have a major play this year where we might see some more stuff about AWS and SAP? >> I'm hearing rumblings that SAP is gonna be expanding their relationship. I don't have the facts yet on the ground, but from what I'm sensing, this is consistent with what they've been doing. We've seen them at Google cloud platform. We talked to them specifically about how they're dealing with cloud. And their strategy is clear. They wanna be on Azure, Google, and Amazon. They wanna provide that database functionality and their client base in from HANA, and roll that in. So it's clear that SAP wants to be multi-cloud. >> Well we've seen Oracle over the past couple of years, or our research has suggested, I would say, that there's been kind of two broad strategies. The application-oriented strategy that goes down to IAAS aggressively. That'd be Oracle and Microsoft. And then the IAAS strategy that's trying to move up through an ecosystem play, which is more AWS. David Floyer and I have been writing a lot of that research. So it sounds like AWS is really gonna start doubling down in an ecosystem and making strategic bets on software providers who can bring those large enterprise install bases with them. >> Yeah, and the thing that you pointed out is migration. That's a huge issue. Now you can get technical, and say, what does that mean? But Andy Jassy has been clear, and the whole Amazon Web Services Team has been clear from day one. They're customer centric. They listen to the customers. So if they're doing more migration this year, and we'll see, I think they will be, I think that's a good tell sign and good prediction. That means the customers want to use Amazon more. And VMware was the same way. Their customers were saying, hey, we're ops guys, we want to have a cloud strategy. And it was such a great move for VMware. I think that's gonna lift the fog, if you will, pun intended, between what cloud computing is and other alternatives. And I think companies are gonna be clear that I can party with Amazon Web Services and still run my business in a way that's gonna help customers. I think that's the number one thing that I'm looking for is, what is the customers looking for in multi-cloud? Or if it's server-less or other things. >> Well, or yeah I agree. Lemme run this by you guys. It sounds as though multi-cloud increasingly is going to be associated with an application set. So, for example, it's very difficult to migrate a database manager from one place to another, as a snowflake. The cost to the customer is extremely high. The cost to the migration team is extremely high, lotta risk. But if you can get an application provider to step up and start migrating elements of the database interface, then you dramatically reduce the overall cost of what that migration might look like. Have I got that right, David Floyer? >> Yeah, absolutely. And I think that's what AWS, what I'm expecting them to focus on is more integration with more SaaS vendors, making it a better place-- >> Paul: Or just software vendors. >> Or software vendors. Well, SaaS vendors in particular, but software vendors in particular-- >> Well SAP's not a SaaS player, right? Well, they are a little bit, but most of their installations are still SAP on Oracle and moving them over, then my ass is gonna require a significant amount of SAP help. >> And one of the things I would love to see them have is a proper tier-one database as a service. That's something that's hugely missing at the moment, and using HANA, for example, on SAP, it's a tier-one database in a particular area, but that would be a good move and help a lot of enterprises to move stuff into AWS. >> Is that gonna be sufficient, though, given how dominant Oracle is in that-- >> No, they need something general purpose which can compete with Oracle or come to some agreement with Oracle. Who knows what's gonna happen in the future? >> Yeah, I don't know. >> Yeah we're all kinda ignoring here. It will be interesting to see. But at the end of the day, look, Oracle has an incentive also to render more of what it has, as a service at some level. And it's gonna be very difficult to say, we're gonna render this as a service to a customer, but Amazon can't play. Or AWS can't play. That's gonna be a real challenge for them. >> The Oracle thing is interesting and I bring this up because Oracle has been struggling as a company with cloud native messaging. In other words, they're putting out, they have a lot of open source, we know what they have for tooling. But they own IT. I mean if you dug up Oracle, they got the database as David pointed out, tier one. But they know the IT guys, they've been doing business in IT for years as a legacy vendor. Now they're transforming, and they are trying hard to be the cloud native path, and they're not making it. They're not getting the credit, and I don't know if that's a cultural issue with Oracle. But Amazon has that positioning from a developer cloud DNA. Now winning real enterprise deals. So the question that I'm looking for is, can Amazon continue to knock down these enterprise deals in lieu of these incumbent or legacy players in IT. So if IT continues to transform more towards cloud native, docker containers, or containers in Kubernetes, these kinds of micro services, I would give the advantage to Amazon over Oracle even though that Oracle has the database because ultimately the developers are driving the behavior. >> Oh again I don't think any of us would disagree with that. >> Yeah so the trouble though is the cost of migrating the applications and the data. That is huge. The systems of record are there for a reason. So there are two fundamental strategies for Oracle. If they can get their developers to add the AI, add the systems of intelligence. Make them systems of intelligence, then they can win in that strategy. Or the alternative is that they move it to AWS and do that movement in AWS. That's a much more risky strategy. >> Right but I think our kind of concluding point here is that ultimately if AWS can get big application players to participate and assist and invest in and move customers along with some of these big application migrations, it's good for AWS. And to your point John, it's probably good for the customers too. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah I don't think it's mutually exclusive as David makes a point about migrating for Oracle. I don't see a lot of migration coming off of Oracle. I look at overall database growth is the issue. Right so Oracle will have that position, but it's kind of like when we argued about the internet growth back in 1997. Just internet users growing was so great that rising tide flows. So I believe that the database growth is going to happen so fast that Amazon is not necessarily targeting Oracle's market share, they're going after the overall database market, which might be a smaller tier two kind of configuration or new architectures that are developing. So I think it's interesting dynamic and Oracle certainly could play there and lock in the database, but-- >> Here's what I would say, I would say that they're going after the new workload world, and a lot of that new workload is gonna involve database as it always has. Not like there's anything that the notion that we have solved or that database is 90% penetrated for the applications that are gonna be dominant matter in 2025 is ridiculous. There's a lot of new database that's gonna be sold. I think you're absolutely right. Rob Hof what's the general scuttlebutt that you're hearing. You know you as editor of SiliconANGLE, editor-in-chief of SiliconANGLE. What is the journalist world buzzing about for re:Invent this year? >> Well I guess you know my questions is because of the challenges that we're facing like we just talked about with migrating, the difficulty in migrating some of these applications. We also see very fast growing rivals like Google. Still small, but growing fast. And then there's China. That's a big one where is there a natural limit there that they're gonna have? So you put these things together, and I guess we see Amazon Web Services still growing at 42% a year or whatever it's great. But is it gonna start to go down because of all these challenges? >> 'Cause some of the constraints may start to assert themselves. >> Rob: Exactly, exactly. >> So-- >> Rob: That's what I'm looking at. >> Kind of the journalism world is kinda saying, are there some speed bumps up ahead for AWS? >> Exactly, and we saw one just a couple, well just this week with China for example. They sold off $300 million worth of data centers, equipment and such to their partner in China Beijing Sinnet. And they say this is a way to comply with Chinese law. Now we're going to start expanding, but expanding while you're selling off $300 million worth of equipment, you know, it begs a question. So I'm curious how they're going to get past that. >> That does raise an interesting question, and I think I might go back to some of the AI on ITOM, AI on IT operations management. Is that do you need control of the physical assets in China to nonetheless sell great service. >> Rob: And that's a big question. >> For accessing assets in China. >> Rob: Right. >> And my guess is that if they're successful with AI for ITOM and some of these other initiatives we're talking about. It in fact may be very possible for them to offer a great service in China, but not actually own the physical assets. And that's, it's an interesting question for some of the Chinese law issues. Dave Vellante, anything you want to jump in on, and add to the conversation? For example, if we look at some of the ecosystem and some of the new technologies, and some of the new investments being made around new technologies. What are some of your thoughts about some of the new stuff that we might hear about at AWS this year? >> Dave: Well so, a couple things. Just a comment on some of the things you guys were saying about Oracle and migration. To me it comes down to three things, growth, which is clearly there, you've talked about 40% plus growth. Momentum, you know the flywheel effect that Amazon has been talking about for years. And something that really hasn't been discussed as much which is economics, and this is something that we've talked about a lot and Amazon is bringing a software like marginal economics model to infrastructure services. And as it potentially slows down its growth, it needs to find new areas, and it will expand its tan by gobbling up parts of the ecosystem. So, you know there's so much white space, but partners got to be careful about where they're adding value because ultimately Amazon is gonna target those much in the same way, in my view anyway that Microsoft and Intel have in the past. And so I think you've got to tread very carefully there, and watch where Amazon is going. And they're going into the big areas of AI, trying to do more stuff with the Edge. And anywhere there's automation they are going to grab that piece of value in the value chain. >> So one of the things that we've been, we've talked about two main things. We've talked about a lot of investments, lot of expectations about AI and how AI is gonna show up in a variety of different ways at re:Invent. And we've talked about how they're likely to make some of these migration initiatives even that much more tangible than they have been. So by putting some real operational clarity as to how they intend to bring enterprises into AWS. We haven't talked about IoT. Dave just mentioned it. What's happening with the Edge, how is the Edge going to work? Now historically what we've seen is we've seen a lot of promises that the Edge was all going to end up in the cloud from a data standpoint, and that's where everything was gonna be processed. We started seeing the first indications that that's not necessarily how AWS is gonna move last year with Snowball and server-less computing, and some of those initiatives. We have anticipated a real honest to goodness true private cloud, AWS stack with a partnership. Hasn't happened yet. David Floyer what are we looking for this year? Are we gonna see that this year or are we gonna see more kind of circumnavigating the issue and doing the best that they can? >> Yeah, well my prediction last year was that they would come out with some sort of data service that you could install on your on-premise machine as a starting point for this communication across a multi cloud environment. I'm still expecting that, whether it happens this year or early next year. I think they have to. The pressure from enterprises, and they are a customer driven organization. The pressure from enterprises is going to mandate that they have some sort of solution on-premise. It's a requirement in many countries, especially in Europe. They're gonna have to do that I think without doubt. So they can do it in multiple ways, they can do it as they've done with the US government by putting in particular data centers, whole data centers within the US government. Or they can do it with small services, or they can have a, take the Microsoft approach of having an AWS service on site as well. I think with pressure from Microsoft, the pressure from Europe in particular is going to make this an essential requirement of their whole strategy. >> I remember a number of years going back a couple decades when Dell made big moves because to win the business of a very large manufacturer that had 50,000 work stations. Mainly engineers were turning over every year. To get that business Dell literally put a distribution point right next to that manufacturer. And we expect to see something similar here I would presume when we start talking about this. >> Yeah I mean I would make a comment on the IoT. First of all I agree with what David said, and I like his prediction, but I'm kind of taking a contrarian view on this, and I'm watching a few things at Amazon. Amazon always takes an approach of getting into new markets either with a big idea, and small teams to figure it out or building blocks, and they listen to the customer. So IoT is interesting because IoT's hard, it's important, it's really a fundamental important infrastructure, architecture that's not going away. I mean it has to be nailed down, it's obvious. Just like blockchain kinda is obvious when you talk about decentralization. So it'll be interesting to see what Amazon does on those two fronts. But what's interesting to note is Amazon always becomes their first customer. In their retail business, AWS was powering retail. With Whole Foods, and the stuff they're doing on the physical side, it'll be very interesting to see what their IoT strategy is from a technology standpoint with what they're doing internally. We get food delivered to our house from Amazon Fresh, and they got Whole Foods and all the retail. So it'll be interesting to see that. >> They're buying a lot of real estate. And I thought about this as well John. They're buying a lot of real estate, and how much processing can they put in there. And the only limit is that I don't think Whole Foods would qualify as particularly secure locations (laughing) when we start talking about this. But I think you're absolutely right. >> That only brings the question, how will they roll out IoT. Because he's like okay roll out an appliance that's more of an infrastructure thing. Is that their first move. So the question that I'm looking for is just kind of read the tea leaves and saying, what is really their doing. So they have the tech, and it's gonna be interesting to see, I mean it's more of a high level kind of business conversation, but IoT is a really big challenging area. I mean we're hearing that all over the place from CIOs like what's the architecture, what's the playbook? And it's different per company. So it's challenging. >> Although one of the reasons why it looks different per company is because it is so uncertain as to how it's gonna play out. There's not a lot of knowledge to fuse. My guess is that in 10 years we're gonna look back and see that there was a lot more commonality and patterns of work that were in IoT that many people expected. So I'll tell you one of the things that I saw last year that particularly impressed me at AWS re:Invent. Was the scale at which the network was being built out. And it raised for me an interesting question. If in fact one of the chief challenges of IoT. There are multiple challenges that every company faces with IoT. One is latency, one is intellectual property control, one is legal ramification like GDPR. Which is one of the reasons why the whole Europe play is gonna be so interesting 'cause GDPR is gonna have a major impact on a global basis, it's not just Europe. Bandwidth however is an area that is not necessarily given, it's partly a function of cost. So what happens if AWS blankets the world with network, and customers to get access to at least some degree of Edge no longer have to worry about a telco. What happens to the telco business at least from a data communication standpoint? Anybody wanna jump in on that one? >> Well yeah I mean I've actually talked to a couple folks like Ericson, and I think AT&T. And they're actually talking about taking their central offices and even the base stations, and sort of outfitting them as mini data centers. >> As pops. >> Yeah. But I think we've been hearing now for about 12 months that, oh maybe Edge is going to take over before we actually even finish getting to the cloud. And I think that's about as sort of ill-considered as the notion that PCs were gonna put mainframes out of business. And the reason I use that as an analogy, at one point IBM was going to put all their mainframe based databases and communication protocol on the PC. That was called OS2 extended edition. And it failed spectacularly because-- >> Peter: For a lot of reasons. >> But the idea is you have a separation of concerns. Presentation on one side in that case, and data management communications on the other. Here in this, in what we're doing here, we're definitely gonna have the low latency inferencing on the Edge and then the question is what data goes back up into the cloud for training and retraining and even simulation. And we've already got, having talked to Microsoft's Azure CTO this week, you know they see it the same way. They see the compute intensive modeling work, and even simulation work done in the cloud, and the sort of automated decisioning on the Edge. >> Alright so I'm gonna make one point and then I want to hit the Action Item around here. The one point I wanna make is I have a feeling that over, and I don't know if it's gonna happen at re:Invent this year but I have a feeling that over the course of the next six to nine months, there's going to be a major initiative on the part of Amazon to start bringing down the cost of data communications, and use their power to start hitting the telcos on a global basis. And what's going to be very very interesting is whether Amazon starts selling services to its network independent of its other cloud services. Because that could have global implications for who wins and who loses. >> Well that's a good point, I just wanna add color on that. Just anecdotally from my perspective you asked a question and I went, haven't talked to anyone. But knowing the telco business, I think they're gonna have that VMware moment. Because they've been struggling with over the top for so long. The rapid pace of innovation going on, that I don't think Amazon is gonna go after the telcos, I think it's just an evolutionary steamroller effect. >> It's an inevitability. >> It's an inevitability that the steamroller's coming. >> So users, don't sign longterm data communications deals right now. >> Why wouldn't you do a deal with Amazon if you're a telco, you get relevance, you have stability, lock in your cash flows, cut your deal, and stay alive. >> You know it's an interesting thought. Alright so let's hit the Action Item around here. So really quickly, as a preface for this, the way we wanna do this is guys, is that John Furrier is gonna have a couple hour one on one with Andy Jassy sometime in the next few days. And so if you were to, well tell us a little about that first John. >> Well every re:Invent we've been doing re:Invent for multiple years, I think it's our sixth year, we do all the events, and we cover it as the media partner as you know. And I'm gonna have a one on one sit down every year prior to re:Invent to get his view, exclusive interview, for two hours. Talk about the future. We broke the first Amazon story years ago on the building blocks, and how they overcame, and now they're winning. So it's a time for me to sit down and get his insight and continue to tell the story, and document the growth of this amazing success story. And so I'm gonna ask him specific questions and I wanted, love to know what he's thinking. >> Alright guys so I want each of you to pretend that you are, so representing your community, what would your community, what's the one question your community would like answered by Andy Jassy. George let's start with you. >> So my question would be, are you gonna take IT operations management, machine learn enable it, and then as part of offering a hybrid cloud solution, do you extend that capability on-prem, and maybe to even other vendor clouds. >> Peter: That's a good one, David Floyer. >> I've got two if I may. >> The more the merrier. >> I'll say them very quickly. The first one, John, is you've, the you being AWS, developed a great international network, with fantastic performance. How is AWS going to avoid conflicts with the EU, China, Japan, and particularly about their resistance about using any US based nodes. And from in-country telecommunication vendors. So that's my first, and the second is, again on AI, what's going to be the focus of AWS in applying the value of AI. Where are you gonna focus first and to give value to your customers? >> Rob Hof do you wanna ask a question? >> Yeah I'd like to, one thing I didn't raise in terms of the challenges is, Amazon overall is expanding so fast into all kinds of areas. Whole Foods we saw this. I'd ask Jassy, how do you contend with reality that a lot of these companies that you're now bumping up against as an overall company. Now don't necessarily want to depend on AWS for their critical infrastructure because they're competitors. How do you deal with that? >> Great question, David Vellante. >> David: Yeah my question is would be, as an ecosystem partner, what advice would you give? 'Cause I'm really nervous that as you grow and you use the mantra of, well we do what customers want, that you are gonna eat into my innovation. So what advice would you give to your ecosystem partners about places that they can play, and a framework that they should think about where they should invest and add value without the fear of you consuming their value proposition. >> So it's kind of the ecosystem analog to the customer question that Rob asked. So the one that I would have for you John is, the promise is all about scale, and they've talked a lot about how software at scale has to turn into hardware. What will Amazon be in five years? Are they gonna be a hardware player on a global basis? Following his China question, are they gonna be a software management player on a global basis and are not gonna worry as much about who owns the underlying hardware? Because that opens up a lot of questions about maybe there is going to be a true private cloud option an AWS will just try to run on everything, and really be the multi cloud administrator across the board. The Cisco as opposed to the IBM in the internet transformation. Alright so let me summarize very quickly. Thank you very much all of you guys once again for joining us in our Action Item. So this week we talked about AWS re:Invent. We've done this for a couple of years now. theCUBE has gone up and done 30, 35, 40 interviews. We're really expanding our presence at AWS re:Invent this year. So our expectation is that Amazon has been a major player in the industry for quite some time. They have spearheaded the whole concept of infrastructure as a service in a way that, in many respects nobody ever expected. And they've done it so well and so successfully that they are having an enormous impact way beyond just infrastructure in the market place today. Our expectation is that this year at AWS re:Invent, we're gonna hear a lot about three things. Here's what we're looking for. First, is AWS as a provider of advanced artificial intelligence technologies that then get rendered in services for application developers, but also for infrastructure managers. AI for ITOM being for example a very practical way of envisioning how AI gets instantiated within the enterprise. The second one is AWS has had a significant migration as a service initiative underway for quite some time. But as we've argued in Wikibon research, that's very nice, but the reality is nobody wants to bond the database manager. They don't want to promise that the database manager's gonna come over. It's interesting to conceive of AWS starting to work with application players as a way of facilitating the process of bringing database interfaces over to AWS more successfully as an onboarding roadmap for enterprises that want to move some of their enterprise applications into the AWS domain. And we mentioned one in particular, SAP, that has an interesting potential here. The final one is we don't expect to see the kind of comprehensive Edge answers at this year's re:Invent. Instead our expectation is that we're gonna continue to see AWS provide services and capabilities through server-less, through other partnerships that allow AWS to be, or the cloud to be able to extend out to the Edge without necessarily putting out that comprehensive software stack as an appliance being moved through some technology suppliers. But certainly green grass, certainly server-less, lambda, and other technologies are gonna continue to be important. If we finalize overall what we think, one of the biggest plays is, we are especially intrigued by Amazon's continuing build out of what appears to be one of the world's fastest, most comprehensive networks, and their commitment to continue to do that. We think this is gonna have implications far beyond just how AWS addresses the Edge to overall how the industry ends up getting organized. So with that, once again thank you very much for enjoying Action Item, and participating, and we'll talk next week as we review some of the things that we heard at AWS. And we look forward to those further conversations with you. So from Peter Burris, the Wikibon team, SiliconANGLE, thank you very much and this has been Action Item. (funky electronic music)