>>Okay, welcome back everyone. This is the cubes coverage here in San Francisco, California, a Davis summit, 2022, the beginning of the event season, as it comes back, little smaller footprint, a lot of hybrid events going on, but this is actually a physical event to his summit in new York's coming in the summer. We'll be there too with the cube on the set. We're getting back in the Groove's psych to be back. We were at reinvent, uh, as well, and we'll see more and more cube, but you're can see a lot of virtual cube outta hybrid cube. We wanna get all those conversations, try to get more interviews, more flow going. But right now I'm excited to have Corey Quinn here on the back on the cube chief cloud economists with duct bill, a group, he's the founder, uh, and chief content person always got great angles, fun comedy, authoritative Corey. Great to see you. Thank >>You. Thanks. Coming on. Sure is a lot of words to describe is shit posting, which is how I describe what I tend to do. Most days, >>Shit posting is an art form now. And if you look at mark, Andrew's been doing a lot of shit posting lately. All a billionaires are shit posting, but they don't know how to do it. Like they're not >>Doing it right. There's something opportunity there. It's like, here's how to be even more obnoxious and incisive. It's honestly the most terrifying scenario for anyone is if I have that kind of budget to throw at my endeavors, it's like, I get excited with a nonsense I can do with a $20 gift card for an AWS credit compared to, oh well, if I could buy a midsize island to in doing this from, oh, then we're having fun. >>This shit posting trend. Interesting. I was watching a thread go on about, saw someone didn't get a job because of their shit posting and the employer didn't get it. And then someone on this side, I'll hire the guy cuz I get that's highly intelligent shit posting. So for the audience that doesn't know what shit posting is, what is shit posting? >>It's more or less talking about the world of enterprise technology, which even that sentence is hard to finish without falling asleep and toppling out of my chair in front of everyone on the livestream, but it's doing it in such a way that brings it to life that says the quiet part. A lot of the audience is thinking, but generally doesn't say either because they're polite or not a jackass or more prosaically are worried about getting fired for better or worse. I don't have have that particular constraint, >>Which is why people love you. So let's talk about what you, what you think is, uh, worthy and not worthy in the industry right now, obviously, uh, coupons coming up in Spain, which they're having a physical event, you see the growth of cloud native Amazon's evolving Adams, especially new CEO. Andy's move on to be the chief of all Amazon. Just so I, the cover of was it time magazine, um, he's under a lot of stress. Amazon's changed. Invoice has changed. What's working. What's not, what's rising, what's falling. What's hot. What's not, >>It's easy to sit here and criticize almost anything. These folks do. They're they're effectively in a fishbowl, but I have trouble imagining the logistics. It takes to wind up handling the catering for a relat a downscale event like this one this year, let alone running a 1.7 million employee company having to balance all the competing challenges and pressures and the rest. I, I just can't fathom what it would be like to look at all of AWS. And it's, it's sprawling immense that dominates our entire industry and say, okay, this is a good start, but I, I wanna focus on something with a broader remit. What is that? How do you even get into that position? And you can't win once you're there. All you can do is hold onto the tiger and hope you don't get mold. Well, >>There's a lot of force for good conversations. Seeing a lot of that going on, Amazon's trying to port eight of us is trying to portray themselves as you know, the Pathfinder, you know, you're the pioneer, um, force for good. And I get that. I think that's a good angle as cloud goes mainstream. It's still the question of, we had a guy on just earlier, who was a skydiving instructor and we were joking about the early days of cloud. Like that was like skydiving, build a parachute open, you know, and now it's saying kind of thing, as you move to edge, things are like reliable in some areas, but still new, new fringe, new areas. That's crazy. Well, >>Since the last time we've spoken, uh, Steve Schmidt is now the CISO for all of Amazon and his backfill replacement. The AWS CISO is CJ. Moses who as a hobby race as a semi-pro race car driver to my understanding, which either, I don't know what direction to take that in either. This is what he does to relax or ultimately, or ultimately it's. Huh? That, that certainly says something about risk assessment. I'm not entirely sure what, but okay. Either way, sounds like more exciting, like better >>Have a replacement ready <laugh> in case something gonna was wrong on the track, >>Highly available >>CSOs. I gotta say one of the things I do like in the recent trend is that the tech companies are getting into the formula one, which I was never a fan of until I watched that Netflix series. But when you look at the formula one, it's pretty cool. Cause it's got some tech angles, I get the whole data instrumentation thing, but the most coolest thing about formula one is they have these new rigs out. Yeah. Where you can actually race in e-sports with, there are people in pure simulation of the race car. You gotta get the latest and video graphics card, but it's basically a tricked out PC with amazing monitors and you have all the equipment of F1 and you're basically simulating racing. >>Oh, it's great too. And I can see the appeal of these tech companies getting into it because these things are basically rocket chips. When those cars go like they're sitting there, we cans instrument every last part of what is going on inside that vehicle. And then AWS crops up. And we can bill on every one of those dimensions too. And it's like slow down their hasty pudding one step at a time. But I do see the appeal. >>So I gotta ask you about, uh, what's going on in your world. I know you have a lot of great success. We've been following you in the queue for many, many years. Got a great newsletter, check out Corey Quinn's newsletter, uh, screaming in the cloud program. Uh, you're on the cutting edge and you've got a great balance between really being snarky and, and, and really being delivering content. That's exciting, uh, for people, uh, with a little bit of an edge, um, how's that going? Uh, what's the blowback, any blowback lately? Has there been uptick? What was, what are some of the things you're hearing from your audience, more Corey or Corey, and then of course the, the PR team's calling you >>The weird thing about having an audience beyond a certain size is far and away as a landslide. The most common response I get is silence where it's huh? I'm emailing an awful lot of people at last week in AWS every week and okay. They must not have heard me it. That is not actually true. People just generally don't respond to email because who responds to email newsletters, that sounds like something, a lunatic might do same story with response to live streams and podcasts. It's like, I'm gonna call into that am radio show and give them a piece of my mind. People generally don't do that. >>We should do that. Actually. I think sure would call in. Oh, I, >>I think >>I guarantee we had that right now. People would call in and say, Cory, what do you think about X? >>Yeah. It not, everyone understands the full context of what I do. And in fact, increasingly few people do and that's fine. I, I keep forgetting that sometimes people do not see what I'm doing in the same light that I do. And that's fine. Blowback has been largely minimal. Honestly, I am surprised anything about how little I have gotten over the last five years of doing this, but it would be easier to dismiss me if I weren't generally. Right. When, okay, so you launch this new service and it seems pretty crappy to me cuz when I try and build something, it falls over and begs for help. And people might not like hearing that, but it's what customers are finding too. Yeah. I really am the voice of the customer. >>You know, I always joke with Dave ante about how John Fort's always at, uh, um, reinvent getting the interview with jazzy now, Andy we're there, you're there. And so we have these rituals at the events. It's all cool. Um, one of the rituals I like about your, um, your content is you like to get on the naming product names. Um, and, and, and, and, and kind of Google from that. Now why I like is because I used to work at ETT Packard where they used to name things as like engineers, HP 1 0 5, or we can't call, we >>Have a new monitor. How are we gonna name it? Throw the wireless keyboard down the stairs again. And there you go. Yeah. >>It's and the old joke at HP was if they, if they invented SU uh, sushi, they'd say, yeah, we can't call sushi. It's cold, dead fish. That's what it is. And so the joke was cold. Dead fish is a better name than sushi. So, you know, fun. So what's the, what are the, how's the Amazon doing in there? Have they changed their naming, uh, strategy, uh, on some of their, their >>Producting. So they're going in different directions. When they named Amazon Aurora, they decided to explore a new theme of Disney princesses as they go down those paths. And some things are more descriptive. Some people are clearly getting bonused on a number of words. They can shove into it. Like the better a service is the longer it's name. Like AWS systems manager, session manager is a great one. I love the service ridiculous name. They have a systems manager, parameter store, which is great. They have secrets manager, which does the same thing. It's two words less, but that one costs my in a way that systems manage through parameter store does not. It's fun. >>What's your, what's your favorite combination of acronyms >>Combination >>Of you got E Ks. You got EMR, you got EC two, you got S3 SQS. Well, RedShift's not an acronym. You >>Gots is one of my personal favorites because it's either elastic block store or elastic bean stock, depending into highly on the context of the conversation. They still >>Up Beanstalk or is that still around? >>Oh, they never turn anything off. They like the Antigo, Google turns things off while they're still building it. Whereas Amazon is like, well, we built this thing in 2005 and everyone hates it, but while we certainly can't change it, now it has three customers on it. John three <laugh>. Okay. Simple DV still haunts our dreams. >>I, I actually got an email on, I saw one of my, uh, servers, all these C twos were being deprecated and I got an email. I'm like, couldn't figure out. Why can you just like roll it over? Why, why are you telling me just like, give me something else. Right. Okay. So let me talk about, uh, the other things I want to ask you is that like, okay, so as Amazon gets better, so areas where do they need more work in your opinion? Because obviously they're all interested in new stuff and they tend to like put it out there for their end to end customers. But then they've got ecosystem partners who actually have the same product. Yes. And, and this has been well documented. So it's, it's not controversial. It's just that Amazon's got a database, Snowflake's got a database service. So, you know, Redshift, snowflake 80 is out there. So you got this co-op petition. Yes. How's that going? And what are you hearing about the reaction to any of that stuff? >>Depends on who you ask. They love to basically trot out a bunch of their partners who will say nice things about them. And it very much has heirs of, let's be honest, a hostage video, but okay. Cuz these companies do partner with Amazon and they cannot afford to rock the boat too far. I'm not partnered with anyone. I can say what I want. And they're basically restricted to taking away my birthday at worse so I can live with that. >>All right. So I gotta ask about multi-cloud cause obviously the other cloud shows are coming up. Amazon hated that word. Multi-cloud um, a lot of people are saying, you know, it's not a real good marketing word. Like multi-cloud sounds like, you know, root canal. Mm-hmm <affirmative> right. So is there a better description for multi-cloud >>Multiple single, which >>Davey loves that term. Yeah. >>You know, you're building in multiple single points of failure, do it for the right reasons or don't do it as a default. I believe not doing it is probably the right answer. However, and if I were, if I were Amazon, I wouldn't want to talk about multi-cloud either as industry leader, let's talk about other clouds, bad direction to go in from a market cap perspective. It doesn't end well for you, but regardless of what they want to talk about, or don't want to talk about what they say, what they don't say, I tune all of it out. And I look at what customers are doing and multi-cloud exists in a variety of forms. Some brilliant, some brain dead. It depends a lot on context. But my general response is when someone gets on stage from a company and tells me to do a thing that directly benefits their company. I am skeptical at best. Yeah. When customers get on stage and say, this is what we're doing because it solves problems. That's when I shut up and listen. >>Yeah. Cool. Awesome. Corey, I gotta ask you a question cause I know you we've been, you know, fellow journeymen in the, and the cloud journey, going to all the events and then the pandemic hit. Of course, we're now in the third year, who knows what it's gonna gonna end? Certainly events are gonna look different. They're gonna be either changing footprint with the virtual piece, new group formations. Community's gonna emerge. You've got a pretty big community growing and it's growing like crazy. What's the weirdest or coolest thing, or just big changes you've seen with the pandemic, uh, from your perspective. Cause you've been in the you're in the middle of the whitewater rafting. Seeing the event you circle offline, you saw the online piece, come in, you're commentating, you're calling balls and strikes in the industry. You got a great team developing over there. Duck bill group. What's the big aha moment that you saw with the pandemic. Weird, funny, serious, real in the industry and with customers what's >>Accessibility. Reinvent is a great example. When in the before times it's open to anyone who wants to attend, who can pony up two grand and a week in Las Vegas and get to Las Vegas and wherever they happen to be by moving virtually suddenly it, it embraces the reality that talent is evenly. Distributed. Opportunity is not. And that means that suddenly these things are accessible to a wide swath of audience and potential customer base and the rest that hadn't been invited to the table previously, it's imperative that we not lose that. It's nice to go out and talk to people and have people come up and try and smell my hair from time to time, I smell delightful. Let me assure you. But it was, but it's also nice to be. >>I have some product for you if you want, you know? Oh, >>Oh excellent. I look forward to it. What is it? Pudding? Why not? <laugh> >>What else have you seen? So when accessibility for talent, yes. Which by the way is totally home run. What weird things have happened that you've seen? Um, that's >>Uh, it's, it's weird, but it's good that an awful lot of people giving presentations have learned to tight their message and get to the damn point because most people are not gonna get up from a front row seat in a conference hall, midway through your Aing talk and go somewhere else. But they will change a browser tab and you won't get them back. You've gotta be on point. You've gotta be compelling if it's going to be a virtual discussion. Yeah. >>And also turn off your iMessage too. >>Oh yes. It's always fun in the, in the meetings when you're talking to someone and colleague is messaging them about, should we tell 'em about this? And I'm sitting there reading it and it's >>This guy is really weird. Like, >>Yes I am and I bring it into the conversation and then everyone's uncomfortable. It goes, wow. Why >>Not? I love when my wife yells at me over I message. When I'm on a business call, like, do you wanna take that about no, I'm good. >>No, no. It's better off. I don't the only encourager. It's fine. >>Kids texting you. That's fun. Again. That's another weird thing. And, and then group behavior is weird. Now people are looking at, um, communities differently. Yes. Very much so, because if you're fatigued on content, people are looking for the personal aspect. You're starting to see much more of like yeah. Another virtual event. They gotta get better. One and two who's there. >>Yeah. >>The person >>That's a big part of it too is the human stories are what are being more and more interesting. Don't get up here and tell me about your product and how brilliant you are and how you built it. That's great. If I'm you, or if I wanna work with you or I want to compete with you, or I wanna put on my engineering hat and build it myself. Cause why would I buy anything? That's more than $8. But instead, tell me about the problem. Tell me me about the painful spot that you specialize in. Yeah. Tell me a story there. >>I, I think >>That gets a glimpse in a hook and makes >>More, more, I think you nailed it. Scaling storytelling. Yes. And access to better people because they don't have to be there in person. I just did a thing. I never, we never would've done the queue. We did. Uh, Amazon stepped up in sponsors. Thank you, Amazon for sponsoring international women's day, we did 30 interviews, APAC. We did five regions and I interviewed this, these women in Asia, Pacific eight, PJ, they call for in this world. And they're amazing. I never would've done those interviews cuz I never, would've seen 'em at an event. I never would've been in Japan or Singapore, uh, to access them. And now they're in the index. They're in the network. They're collaborating on LinkedIn. So a threads are developing around connections that I've never seen before. Yes. Around the content. >>Absolutely >>Content value plus network >>Effecting. And that is the next big revelation of this industry is going to realize you have different companies. And in Amazon's case, different service teams, all competing with each other, but you have the container group and you have the database group and you have the message cuing group. But customers don't really want to build things from spare parts. They want a solution to a problem. I want to build an app that does Twitter for pets or whatever it is I'm trying to do. I don't wanna basically have to pick and choose and fill my shopping cart with all these different things. I want something that's gonna basically give me what I'm trying to get as close to turnkey as possible. Moving up the stack. That is the future. And just how it gets here is gonna be >>Well we're here with Corey Quinn, the master of the master of content here in the a ecosystem. Of course we we've been following up from the beginning. It's great guy. Check out his blog, his site, his newsletter screaming podcast. Corey, final question for you. Uh, what do you hear doing what's on your agenda this week in San Francisco and give a plug for the duck build group. What are you guys doing? I know you're hiring some people what's on the table for the company. What's your focus this week and put a plug in for the group. >>I'm here as a customer and basically getting outta my cage cuz I do live here. It's nice to actually get out and talk to folks who are doing interesting things at the duck build group. We solve one problem. We fixed the horrifying AWS bill, both from engineering and architecture, advising as well as negotiating AWS contracts because it turns out those things are big and complicated. And of course my side media projects last week in aws.com, we are it's more or less a content operation where I indulge my continual and love affair with the sound of my own voice. >><laugh> and you're good. It's good content it's on, on point fun, Starky and relevant. So thanks for coming on the cube and sharing with us. Appreciate it. No, >>Thank you. Fun. >>Okay. This cube covers here in San Francisco, California, the cube is back going to events. These are the summits, Amazon web services summits that happen all over the world. We'll be in New York and obviously we're here in San Francisco this week. I'm John fur. Keep, keep it right here. We'll be back with more coverage after this short break.

>>from the Cube Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, connecting with thought leaders around the globe. These are cloud native insights. Hi, I'm stew Minimum and the host of Cloud Native Insights. And the threat that we've been pulling on with Cloud Native is that we needed to be able to take advantage of the innovation and agility that cloud in the ecosystem around it can bring, not just the location. It's It's not just the journey, but how do I take advantage of something today and keep being able to move for Happy to welcome back to the program one of our regulars and someone that I've had lots of discussion about? Cloud Cloud. Native Serverless So Cory Quinn, the Keith Cloud economists at the Duck Bill Group. Corey, always good to see you. Thanks for joining us. >>It is great to see me. And I always love having the opportunity to share my terrible opinions with people who then find themselves tarred by the mere association. And there's certainly no exception to use, too. Thanks for having me back. Although I question your judgment. >>Yeah, you know, what was that? Pandora's box. I open when I was like Hey, Corey, let's try you on video so much. And if people go out, they can look at your feet and you've spent lots of money on equipment. You have a nice looking set up. I guess you missed that one window of opportunity to get your hair cut in San Francisco during the pandemic. But be doesn't may Corey, why don't you give our audience just the update You went from a solo or mentor of the cloud? First you have a partner and a few other people, and you're now you've got economists. >>Yes, it comes down to separating out. What I'm doing with my nonsense from other people's other people's careers might very well be impacted by it considered tweet of mine. When you start having other clouds, economists and realize, okay, this is no longer just me we're talking about here. It forces a few changes. I was told one day that I would not be the chief economist. I smile drug put on a backlog item to order a new business cards because it's not like we're going to a lot of events these days, and from my perspective, things continue mostly a base. The back. To pretend people now means that there's things that my company does that I'm no longer directly involved with, which is a relief, that absolutely, ever. But it's been an interesting right. It's always strange. Is the number one thing that people who start businesses say is that if they knew what they were getting into, they'd never do it again. I'm starting to understand that. >>Yeah, well, Corey, as I mentioned you, and I have had lots of discussions about Cloud about multi Cloud server. Listen, like when you wrote an article talking about multi cloud is a worse practice. One of the things underneath is when I'm using cloud. I should really be able to leverage that cloud. One of the concerns that when you and I did a cube con and cloud native con is does multi cloud become a least common denominator? And a comment that I heard you say was if I'm just using cloud and the very basic services of it, you know, why don't I go to an AWS or an azure which have hundreds of services? Maybe I could just find something that is, you know, less expensive because I'm basically thinking of it as my server somewhere else. Which, of course, cloud is much more than so you do with a lot of very large companies that help them with their bills. What difference there differentiates the companies that get advantage from the cloud versus those that just kind of fit in another location, >>largely the stories that they tell themselves internally and how they wind up adapting to cloud. If the reason I got into my whole feel about why multi cloud is a worst practice is that of you best practices a sensible defaults, I view multi cloud as a ridiculous default. Sure, there are cases where it's important, and so I don't say I'm not suggesting for a second that those people who are deciding to go down that are necessarily making wrong decisions. But when you're building something from scratch with this idea toward taking a single workload and deploying it anywhere in almost every case, it's the wrong decision. Yes, there are going to be some workloads that are better suited. Other places. If we're talking about SAS, including that in the giant wrapper of cloud definition in terms of what was then, sure you would be nuts to wind of running on AWS and then decide you're also going to go with codecommit instead of git Hub. That's not something sensible people to use get up or got sick. But when I am suggesting, is that the idea of building absolutely every piece of infrastructure in a way that avoids any of the differentiated offerings that your primary cloud provider uses is just generally not a great occasionally you need to. But that's not the common case, and people are believing that it is >>well, and I'd like to dig a little deeper. Some of those differentiated services out there there are concerned, but some that said, You know, I think back to the past model. I want to build something. I can have it live ever anywhere. But those differentiated services are something that I should be able to get value out of it. So do you have any examples, or are there certain services that you have his favorites that you've seen customers use? And they say, Wow, it's it's something that is effective. It's something that is affordable, and I can get great value out of this because I didn't have to build it. And all of these hyper scaler have lots of engineers built, building lots of cool things. And I want to take advantage of that innovation. >>Sure, that's most of them. If we're being perfectly honest, there are remarkably few services that have no valid use cases for no customer anywhere. A lot of these solve an awful lot of pain that customers have. Dynamodb is a good example of this Is that one a lot of folks can relate to. It's super fast, charges you for what you use, and that is generally yet or a provision Great. But you don't have to worry about instances. You have to worry about scaling up or scaling down in the traditional sense. And that's great. The problem is, is great. How do I migrate off of this on to something else? Well, that's a good question. And if that is something that you need to at least have a theoretical exodus for, maybe Dynamo DV is the wrong service for you to pick your data store personally. If I have to build for a migration in mind on no sequel basis, I'll pick mongo DB every time, not because it's any easier to move it, but because it's so good at losing data, that'll have remarkably little bit left. Migrate. >>Yeah, Corey, of course. One of the things that you help customers with quite a bit is on the financial side of it. And one of the challenges if I moved from my environment and I move to the public cloud, is how do I take advantage not only of the capability to the cloud but the finances of the cloud. I've talked to many customers that when you modernize your pull things apart, maybe you start leveraging serverless capabilities. And if I tune things properly, I can have a much more affordable solution versus that. I just took my stuff and just shoved it all in the cloud kind of a traditional lift and shift. I might not have good economics. When I get to the cloud. What do you see along those lines? >>I'd say you're absolutely right with that assessment. If you are looking at hitting break even on your cloud migration in anything less than five years, it's probably wrong. The reason to go to Cloud is not to save money. There are edge cases where it makes sense, Sure, but by and large you're going to wind up spending longer in the in between state that you would believe eventually you're going to give up and call it hybrid game over. And at some point, if you stall long enough, you'll find that the cloud talent starts reaching out of your company. At which point that Okay, great. Now we're stuck in this scenario because no one wants to come in and finish the job is harder than we thought we landed. But it becomes this story of not being able to forecast what the economics are going to look like in advanced, largely because people don't understand where their workloads start and stop what the failure modes look like and how that's going to manifest itself in a cloud provider environment. That's why lift and shift is popular. People hate, lift and ship. It's a terrible direction to go in. Yeah, so are all the directions you can go in as far as migrating, short of burning it to the ground for insurance money and starting over, you've gotta have a way to get from where you are, where you're going. Otherwise, migration to be super simple. People with five weeks of experience and a certification consult that problem. It's but how do you take what's existing migrated end without causing massive outages or cost of fronts? It's harder than it looks. >>Well, okay, I remember Corey a few years ago when I talk to customers that were using AWS. Ah, common complaint was we had to dedicate an engineer just to look at the finances of what's happening. One of the early episodes I did of Cloud Native Insights talked to a company that was embracing this term called Been Ops. We have the finance team and the engineering team, not just looking back at the last quarter, but planning understanding what the engineering impacts were going forward so that the developers, while they don't need tohave all the spreadsheets and everything else, they understand what they architect and what the impact will be on the finance side. What are you hearing from your customers out there? What guidance do you give from an organizational standpoint as to how they make sure that their bill doesn't get ridiculous? >>Well, the term fin ops is a bit of a red herring in there because people immediately equate it back to cloud ability before their app. Geo acquisitions where the fin ops foundation vendors are not allowed to join except us, and it became effectively a marketing exercise that was incredibly poorly executed in sort of poisoned the well. Now the finance foundations been handed off to the Cloud Native Beauty Foundation slash Lennox Foundation. Maybe that's going to be rehabilitated, but we'll have to find out. One argument I made for a while was that developers do not need to know what the economic model in the cloud is going to be. As a general rule, I would stand by that. Now someone at your company needs to be able to have those conversations of understanding the ins and outs of various costs models. At some point you hit a point of complexity we're bringing in. Experts solve specific problems because it makes sense. But every developer you have does not need to sit with 3 to 5 days course understanding the economics of the cloud. Most of what they need to know if it's on a business card, it's on an index card or something small that is carplay and consult business and other index ramos. But the point is, is great. Big things cost more than small things. You're not charged for what you use your charger for. What you forget to turn off and being able to predict your usage model in advance is important and save money. Data transfers Weird. There are a bunch of edge cases, little slice it and ribbons, but inbound data transfer is generally free. Outbound, generally Austin arm and a leg and architect accordingly. But by and large for most development product teams, it's built something and see if it works first. We can always come back later and optimize costs as you wind up maturing the product offering. >>Yeah, Cory, it's some of those sharp edges I've love learning about in your newsletter or some of your online activities there, such as you talked about those egress fees. I know you've got a nice diagram that helps explain if you do this, it costs a lot of money. If you do this, it's gonna cost you. It cost you a lot less money. Um, you know, even something like serverless is something that in general looks like. It should be relatively expensive, but if you do something wrong, it could all of a sudden cost you a lot of money. You feel that companies are having a better understanding so that they don't just one month say, Oh my God, the CFO called us up because it was a big mistake or, you know, where are we along that maturation of cloud being a little bit more predictable? >>Unfortunately, no. Where near I'd like us to be it. The story that I think gets missed is that when you're month over, month span is 20% higher. Finance has a bunch of questions, but if they were somehow 20% lower, they have those same questions. They're trying to build out predictive models that align. They're not saying you're spending too much money, although by the time the issues of the game, yeah, it's instead help us understand and predict what's happening now. Server less is a great story around that, because you can tie charges back to individual transactions and that's great. Except find me a company that's doing that where the resulting bill isn't hilariously inconsequential. A cloud guru Before they bought Lennox, I can't get on stage and talk about this. It serverless kind of every year, but how? They're spending $600 a month in Lambda, and they have now well, over 100 employees. Yeah, no one cares about that money. You can trace the flow of capital all you want, but it grounds up to No one cares at some point that changes. But there's usually going to be far bigger fish to front with their case, I would imagine, given, you know, stream video, they're probably gonna have some data transfer questions that come into play long before we talk about their compute. >>Yeah, um, what else? Cory, when you look at the innovation in the cloud, are there things that common patterns that you see that customers are missing? Some of the opportunities there? How does the customers that you talk to, you know, other than reading your newsletter, talking Teoh their systems integrator or partner? How are they doing it? Keeping up with just the massive amount of change that happens out >>there. Get customers. AWS employees follow the newsletter specifically to figure out what's going on. We've long since passed a Rubicon where I can talk incredibly convincingly about services that don't really exist. And Amazon employees won't call me out on the joke that I've worked in there because what the world could ever say that and then single. It's well beyond any one person's ability to keep it all in their head. So what? We're increasingly seeing even one provider, let alone the rest. Their events are outpacing them and no one is keeping up. And now there's the persistent, never growing worry that there's something that just came out that could absolutely change your business for the better. And you'll never know about it because you're too busy trying to keep up with all the other number. Every release the cloud provider does is important to someone but none of its important everyone. >>Yeah, Corey, that's such a good point. When you've been using tools where you understand a certain way of doing things, how do you know that there's not a much better way of doing it? So, yeah, I guess the question is, you know, there's so much out there. How do people make sure that they're not getting left behind or, you know, keep their their their understanding of what might be able to be used >>the right answer. There, frankly, is to pick a direction and go in it. You can wind up in analysis paralysis issues very easily. And if you talk about what you've done on the Internet, the number one responsible to get immediately is someone suggesting an alternate approach you could have taken on day one. There is no one path forward for any six, and you can second guess yourself that the problem is that you have to pick a direction and go in it. Make sure it makes sense. Make sure the lines talk to people who know what's going on in the space and validate it out. But you're going to come up with a plan right head in that direction, I assure you, you are probably not the only person doing it unless you're using. Route 53 is a database. >>You know, it's an interesting thing. Corey used to be said that the best time to start a project was a year ago. But you can't turn back time, so you should start it now. I've been saying for the last few years the best time to start something would be a year from now, so you can take advantage of the latest things, but you can't wait a year, so you need to start now. So how how do you make sure you maintain flexibility but can keep moving projects moving forward? E think you touched on that with some of the analysis paralysis, Anything else as to just how do you make sure you're actually making the right bets and not going down? Some, you know, odd tangent that ends up being a debt. >>In my experience, the biggest problem people have with getting there is that they don't stop first to figure out alright a year from now. If this project has succeeded or failed, how will we know they wind up building these things and keeping them in place forever, despite the fact that cost more money to run than they bring in? In many cases, it's figure out what success looks like. Figure out what failure looks like. And if it isn't working, cut it. Otherwise, you're gonna wind up, went into this thing that you've got to support in perpetuity. One example of that one extreme is AWS. They famously never turn anything off. Google on the other spectrum turns things off as a core competence. Most folks wind up somewhere in the middle, but understand that right now between what? The day I start building this today and the time that this one's of working down the road. Well, great. There's a lot that needs to happen to make sure this is a viable business, and none of that is going to come down to, you know, build it on top of kubernetes. It's going to come down. Is its solving a problem for your customers? Are people they're people in to pay for the enhancement. Anytime you say yes to that project, you're saying no to a bunch of others. Opportunity Cost is a huge thing. >>Yeah, so it's such an important point, Cory. It's so fundamental when you look at what what cloud should enable is, I should be able to try more things. I should be able to fail fast on, and I shouldn't have to think about, you know, some cost nearly as much as I would in the past. We want to give you the final word as you look out in the cloud. Any you know, practices, guidelines, you can give practitioners out there as to make sure that they are taking advantage of the innovation that's available out there on being able to move their company just a little bit faster. >>Sure, by and large, for the practitioners out there, if you're rolling something out that you do not understand, that's usually a red flag. That's been my problem, to be blunt with kubernetes or an awful lot of the use cases that people effectively shove it into. What are you doing? What if the business problem you're trying to solve and you understand all of its different ways that it can fail in the ways that will help you succeed? In many cases, it is stupendous overkill for the scale of problem most people are throwing. It is not a multi cloud answer. It is not the way that everyone is going to be doing it or they'll make fun of you under resume. Remember, you just assume your own ego. In this sense, you need to deliver an outcome. You don't need to improve your own resume at the expense of your employer's business. One would hope, >>Well, Cory, always a pleasure catching up with you. Thanks so much for joining me on the cloud. Native insights. Thank you. Alright. Be sure to check out silicon angle dot com if you click on the cloud. There's a whole second for cloud Native insights on your host to minimum. And I look forward to hearing more from you and your cloud Native insights Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

>>from the Cube Studios in Palo Alto and Boston connecting with thought leaders all around the world. >>This is a cube conversation. I'm stew Minuteman, and this is the Cube's virtual coverage of AWS Summit online. Happy to welcome back to the program to help give us some insight into what's happening. Aws last week. And today, that is Cory Quinn is the cloud economist at the Duck Bill Group. Cory, I know it's >>thank you. Always a >>pleasure to see you >>now it is always a pleasure to see me. Thank you for once again exhibiting remarkably poor judgment and inviting me back onto your program. >>Yeah, you know, Korea, you've been on the program a few times now, including in some of the AWS goes Ah, 18 San Francisco AWS, New York City. You know, reinvent we see you. But this is the first time we've had you on online. So give us a little bit about you know what? That impact of the global pandemic has been meaning to you and more importantly, what you've been seeing from our dear friends at AWS. >>Sure, the fact that not traveling anymore and spending almost all of my time at home means that I'm a lot closer to the edge when it comes to the content I put out because I no longer have to worry about someone punching me in the face. But other than that, from a business perspective, things tend to be continuing on much as they have before with four different customer concerns. The more interesting question from my side has been what is the effect this is having on people Because we're working from home remotely? It's not really a fair test of how well you can do remote. I've been doing it like this for years, and there's a There's a sense of existential dread that's hanging over people's at more so than usual, more so than right before the AWS re invent. You know, when you're wondering if you're about to have your entire business put out of business by an AWS. Now, it's just that sort of dread that never goes away because they won't deliver the keynote If you'll pardon me if using a metal >>Yeah, it's been really interesting to watch, you know, for you, of course. I mean, Amazon is, you know, a big player in the industry before this Amazon one that gets talked about a lot in the news. You know Amazon overall, You know, when this first pitch they announced they were hiring 1000 then they went through that faster than anyone could believe. You know, you think about having to hire a driver remotely. You know, my joke was you know, Alexa the screen. Everybody and I are everyone. But then they hired another 75,000. And it's not just the warehouse and the whole food people, because I've seen a number of people that I know getting hired by AWS do. So you know, you talk. It's all about the people that you know, the number one in the endemic people. How's Amazon doing? What feedback are you getting for? How they're doing? >>Well, I don't have too many internal sources that confirm or deny things of strategic import because it turns out that I'm generally not for those things. Who knew something I'm picking up on across the industry has been that if you're building a hyper scale cloud provider, you're not looking to next border. The investments you make today are going to be realized 3 to 5 years No one is currently predicting a dramatic economic impact community felt for a decade, based on the current question. So, yeah, AWS is still investing in people, which is always going to be the limiting constraint there still launching regions we have to launch within a month, and we're still seeing a definite acceleration of anything of the pace of innovation as a W was like. Now my perspective, that's both reassuring that some things never change. And, of course, the usual level of depression where oh, good, there's still more services to learn what they do. Learn how the names work, find ways to poke holes in their various presentational aspects. And, of course, try and keep the content relatively fresh. There's only so many times you could make the same joke for people. >>Yeah, absolutely. And of course, you bring up a really good point. You know, Amazon that they have a long strategic plan there. If they're building new data centers, they're building the power in perfect for these things. It's not something that they're going to change on a dime. They plan these things out far in advance, and AWS does, of course, have a global scope. Um, you know, I really, you know, wonder. You know, from an operational standpoint, are there any pressures on them? You wrote an article you know, relatively recently talking about one of the other public cloud providers that is by our customers. And we even have performance issues. AWS seems to be running through this dealing with acid. You know, I've had phone systems that have problems. You know, everybody as when they're working from home engine internally. Even if you've got a gig bandwidth When the fire neighborhood has Children on, you know, the classrooms online for video. There's pressures there. So you know where your teams from what I've seen, you know, AWS operationally is running well and, you know, keeping things all up and running Is am I missing anything? >>No. I mean the database is fond of saying there's no compression algorithm for experience, as I'm fond of saying, that's why they charge per gigabyte. But what that means is that they've gone through a lot of these growing pains and largest instructional stories in 2010 to 2012 EBS outages, causing a cascading failures as everyone saturates links as they roll from region to region or availability zone availability zone. They understand what those workloads look like and what those years are, and they've put in credible amount of engineering into solving these problems. I think that anyone who looks at this and doesn't see this happening is unfortunate place because we don't have to its approach utility level of reliability. You don't wonder every time you turn the faucet on whether water is going to, and we're now at a point of seeing that with AWS Resource. Now they're still going to be recurring issues. And there have been basically since this thing watched a particular instance. Size and family in a particular availability zone of a particular region may be constrained for a period of weeks, and that is something that we've seen across the board. But that has less to do with the fact that they didn't see this stuff coming in that appropriately and more to do with the fact that there's a lot of different options and customer demand is never going to be an exact thing we are seeing some customers dramatically turn off city and others sporadically scrapping capacity up. It comes down to what is the nature of this endemic on >>there. Yeah, well, this absolutely does. But you know, some of those promises of the cloud test I should be able to spin things down some things I should be able to turn off. And if I have to know shut down by business, I should be able to do that. Um, I'm curious what you've heard on changing demand out there. Worry. Um, you know, on the one hand, you know customers there re buying, they're getting reserved. They're making for that. They can, you know, optimize every dollar. But when something like this comes up and they need a major change, you know, are they stuck with a lot of capacity that they didn't necessarily want? >>Sometimes it comes down to a lot of interesting variables For me, the more interesting expression of this is when companies see demand falling off a cliff. As users, we're no longer using what their what they built out. But their infrastructure spend doesn't change. That tells me that it's not a particularly elastic infrastructure. And in fact, when people are building the elasticity into their applications, they always interpret that is scaling up rather than scaling down because the failure mode of not scaling up fast enough is you're dropping customer requests on the floor. The failure mode of not scaling down fast enough just means you're spending money. So when you see user demand for environment cut by 80% but the infrastructure cost remains constant or the infrastructure usage defending. That's a more interesting problem. And you're not gonna have a lot of success asking any cloud provider for adjustment when? Well, okay, you're suddenly not seeing the demand, but you're still remains the same. What is this based upon? You need to actually demonstrate a shortfall. First of wow, you know, we normally spend a $1,000,000 a month. Well, now we're spending 200 grand a month. Yeah, about that. And once you could do that, there are paths forward. I have not yet heard stories about, frankly, any of the big Three cloud providers, absolutely hanging customers out to dry in the cloud I have heard whispers about, for example, with G suite, where they're not willing to. And this this feels like a very dark way to go. But I'm going for it. Where will we just laid off 1/3 of our staff and we get a break on the annual licensing for those seats on G suite. And the answer is no. That feels like it stings and is more than a little capricious. >>Yeah, No, absolutely. You know, one of the things that the underbelly of fast is, you know? Oh, it should be elastic like cloud. But often times you're locked one or your contract, and if all of a sudden you find yourself with that meeting half the demand and you call them up, you know, Are they going to give you that break? So you know, Price and Corey, you know better >>than most. So all right, let me spoil it for you. Every provider is going to give you a break on this because this is a temporary aberration. As far as the way the world works, we're not going to start seeing Global 10 X every year, I hope. And when this crisis passes, people are going to remember how their vendors treated. And if it's well, we held your feet to the fire and made you live up to that contract that sticks with me, and it doesn't take too many stories like that, or people pulling lawsuits out of Acer to demonstrate that a company beat the crap out of them to say, Huh? Maybe that's not where I want to thank my sizeable cloud. Invest. >>Yeah. So, Corey, how about you know, there are there certain areas where I heard, you know, certain that maybe were slow rolling cloud and all of a sudden realize that when they're working from home, they plug and adjust their servers that are saying, Oh, jeez, maybe I need to hop on this. Then there's other services. You think VPN usage must be through the roof workspaces. So when first announced, you know, many years ago was a bit of a slow roll had been a growth ah, area for Amazon for the last couple of years. Are you hearing anything specific to new services or increase growth in certain services like I'm in? >>There are two patterns we're seeing. Of all. One is the traditional company you just described, where they build out a VPN that assumes some people will occasionally be working from home at a 5% rate versus the entire workforce 40 hours a week that that model that model is training every. Whereas if you go back the last 10 years or so and look at a bunch of small businesses that have started up or startups that have launched where everything they're using is a SAS service or a cloud service, then there is no VPN. I don't have a VPN. For example, the fact that I have a wireless network here in my house and I'm at dislocation. There's this I p address isn't white listed anywhere. The only benefit that this network has over others is that there's a printer plugged in here, and that's it. The identity model of Ioffe indicate to these services by the credentials of a user name and password by enchanting something, and they send an email that I click the link that that winds up handling the Asian night and there is no bottleneck in the same direction. I feel like this is going to be the death now for a lot of VM centric for tonight. >>Alright, Corey, want one of the other things about aws is they don't stop. And what I mean is, you know, you talked about them always being online. But you know every week there's a new announcement. It keeps feeding your newsletter, feeding your feet. You know everything going on there. How is number one? You know the announcement? Brains from AWS going and anything specific. You know, John Furrier was, you know, interest in, you know, Amazon Apolo, something that was released relatively recently. >>The problem with a lot of these new services that get released relatively recently is that it requires time to vet out how it works, how it doesn't work, how it should have wound up being implemented to solve your particular use case or, in my case, how they could have named it better. But you're not able to come up with those things off the top of your head the first time you see it because it's irresponsible at scale to deploy anything in production. You don't understand. It's failure cases right now, with everyone scrambling, most companies are not making significant investments in new capabilities. They are desperately trying to get their workforces online and stay afloat and adjust very rapidly changing. And oh, they built a new data store or something of that. Nature is not going to be this sort of thing that gets people super excited in most shops, that time will change. But I do feel a bit of it right now for a lot of these product teams who've been working away on these things for months or years. And now suddenly they're releasing something into a time when people don't I care about it enough to invest the effort that, yeah, you bring up a really good >>point. Corey, you know, there's certain things. If I was working on a project that was going to help me be more agile and be more flexible, I needed that yesterday. But I still need that today. Um, some other projects, you know, might take years to roll out a eyes. Technology that has been growing bring over the last couple of years were I O T solutions are a little bit more nascent. So is what you're thinking. It's a little bit more Stick to your knitting and the solutions and the products that you're leveraging today. And some of the, you know, more visionary and futuristic ones might be a little bit of a pause button for the next couple months. >>Exactly if you're looking at exploring something that isn't going to pay dividends for 18 months. Right now, the biggest question everyone has is what is the long term repercussion of this going to be? What is the year? What we're gonna look like in three years? Because that's where a lot of these planning horizons are stretching to. And the answer is, Look, when I wind up doing a pre recorded video or podcast where I talk about this stuff and it's not going to release for four days, I'm worried about saying something that was going to be eclipsed by the new site. I worry on my podcast reporting, for example, that I'm going to wind up saying something about that dynamic, and by the time it airs in two months, it's Oh, look at this guy. He's talking about the pandemic. He doesn't even mention the meteor, and that's the place right now where people are operating from, it becomes much more challenging to be able to adequately and intelligently address the long term. When you don't know what it's going to look like, >>Yeah, absolutely. For our viewers, when you hear my segment on Cory's ask and you wonder why we could talk about that it's because we missed that one week window that we're in right now When we're talking about murder Hornet, Not when we recorded it. Not when we released the really good point court. You know, Corey, you know, data is one of the most important things. You've done a lot about data portability, you know, all the costs involved. Cloud Amazon's trying to help people, you know, with, you know, bringing data together. You know, I said in one of the interviews with Andy Jassy a couple years ago, while customers were really the flywheel for AWS for a number of years, I think it is data that is that next flywheel. So I'm curious your thoughts as our, you know, enterprises think about their data, and AWS is role >>there incorrectly. If you want me to be blunt, there's an awful lot of movement, especially as we look at AI and machine learning to gather all of the data. I've been on cost optimization projects where Wow, that's an awful lot of data sitting there. And that s three bucket. Do you need it all? And I'm assured that yes, all of the sales transaction logs from 2012 are absolutely going to be a treasure trove of data just as soon as they figure out what to do with it, and they're spending our piles of money on >>it. But >>it's worse than that because it's not just that you have this data that's costing you money. That's almost a by product. There's risk to an awful lot of forms of data with regulation that continues to expand. Data can become a toxic asset in many respects. But there's this belief of never throw anything away that's not really ideal. Part of the value of a same data management strategy is making sure that you can remove all of the stuff that you don't absolutely need right now, with AI and ML being where they are, there's this movement or keep everything because we don't know what that's going to be useful for. Down the road, it's a double edged sword, and enterprises are at this point not looking at this through a lens of this thing could hurt me so much as they are. This thing could possibly benefit that the business in the future. >>Alright, so Cory, I I've really noticed over the last few months you've spent a bit more. I'm talking publicly about some of the other clouds that aren't AWS, though. You know what we are covering? AWS Summit online. Give us what you're hearing from Microsoft, Google and others. You know any strategies that Aaron you any you know, customer movement? That is worth >>sure. I think that we're seeing customers move in the way that they've always been moving. People made a bit of a kerfuffle about a block post I put out with the extremely Clickbait idle of Zoom chose Oracle Cloud over AWS. Maybe you should, too, and there were a few. There are few conclusions people drew understandably from that particular headline, which was, for example, the idea that AWS have lost a workload that was being moved from AWS to Oracle. Not true. It was net new. They do already has existing relationships with both Azure and AWS by their own admission. But the argument what what I took that particular change to be in my case was an illustration of something that's been bugging me for a while. If you look at AWS data transfer pricing publicly posted stop, which again, no one of this scale is going to pay. It is over 10 times more expensive than Oracle. Wow. And what that tells me is that I'm now sitting here in a position where I can make you made a good faith recommendation to choose Oracle's for cost reasons, which sounds nuts. But that's the world in which we live. It's a storytelling problem, far more than it is a technical shortcoming. But that was interpreted to mean that Oracle's on the rise. AWS is in decline. Zoom is a very strong AWS customer and has made public commitments. They will remain so right now. This is what we're seeing across the board. You see Zoom doing super well. They're not building out a whole lot of net new, either. What they're doing is building is just it's desperately trying to stay up under brushing unprecedented demand. That's where the value is coming from right now, clouds elasticity and they're not doing. You know, we're going to go ahead and figure out if we can build a new continuous deploy process or something that it makes on call a little bit less brutal. That's not what anyone's focusing on it here. Wow, this boat is sinking. If we don't stay up, grab a bucket, start bailing. And that is what they're doing. The fact that they're working with every cloud provider, it shouldn't come as a surprise. >>Yeah, well, it's interesting. I'm thinking about Zoom, and one of the things that I've been watching them for the last couple of everybody has is, you know, the daily updates that are happening Related security. Um, you know, I think back, you know, 67 years ago, Amazon had This is our security model. We're not changing it for anyone now. You know Amazon as a much more flexible and nuanced. So there are >>still in violent principles that Amazon will not and cannot shift. So, to be clear, they have different ways of interfacing with security in different ways of handling data classification. But there are rules that you knew are not changing. It's not well surprised. Now, suddenly, every Amazonian who works there can look through your private data that none of that is >>happening. I >>just want to very clear on >>that. Yeah, No, you're absolutely right. It's more security, you know, getting more engine even than ever. And it was already coming into 2020 before everything changed. What was one of the hot topic? Great. You know, I'm curious. You know, we're looking at a virtual event for AWS. Have you been to some of these? You know, you're getting burnt out from all of the online content. I'm sure everybody's getting tired of you. So are you getting tired of everyone else? >>I don't accept that anyone ever get tired of me. I'm a treasure and of the light. But as far as online events go, I think that people are getting an awful lot profoundly wrong about that. For example, I think that people focus on, well, I need to get the best video and the best microphone, and that's the thing that people are going to focus on, rather than maybe I should come up with something that someone wants to listen. People are also assuming that the same type of delivery and content works super well in a stage for 45 minutes is not going to work when people can tab over to something else and stop paying attention. You've got to be more dynamic. You've got to be able to grab people's, and I think that people are missing the forest for the trees. Here, you're just trying to convert existing format into something that will work online in the immediate short term. Everyone is super sympathetic. It's not going to last. People are going to get very tired of the same tired formatting ropes, and there's only so much content people are going to consume. You've got to stand out and you've got to make it compelling and interesting. I've been spending a lot of time trying to find ways to make that >>work. Yeah, I had a great conversation with John Troyer, he said. You know, we can learn something about what? Some of the late those Ah, you know, I think there's a new opportunity for you to say There's a house band, you know. You have a small child at home, divert Amerine there's your house band. You know you can have a lot of fun with >>Oh, absolutely, especially during a tantrum that's going to go super. Well, I'm just gonna watch one of her meltdowns about some various innocuous topic, and then I'm going to wind up having toddler meltdown the Amazon s three remix, and I'm sure we could wind up tying it back to something that is hilarious in the world of cloud. But I'm trying to pull off a little bit longer before I start actively exploiting her for Internet points. I mean, I'm going to absolutely do it. I just wanted to get a little color. >>All right. Well, Corey, want to give you the final word on AWS? The online events happening, you know, give our audience that what they should be looking at when it comes to their AWS estate, >>cool as usual attention to what's coming out. It's always been to have a low level awareness of what's coming out on stage. I don't feel you need to jump in and adopt any of it immediately. Focus on the things that matter to your business. Just because something new and shiny has announced on stage does not need a fit for you doesn't mean it's not, but remain critical. I tend not to be one of the early adopters in production, things that have a potential to wind up housing challenges, and I'm not saying, Oh, stay on the exact old stuff from 2010 and nothing newer, but there is a bit of a happy medium. Don't think that just because they released something that a you need to try it or B, it's even for, you know, AWS service is for everyone but every AWS services for someone. >>Alright, Well, Cory Quinn, always a pleasure to catch up with you. Thanks so much for joining with you joining us. >>Thank you. It was over the suffering. The slings and arrows Appreciate >>it. All right. Thank you for watching everyone. Lots of coverage of the cube at the AWS Summit online. Check out the cube dot net for all the offering. And thank you for what? >>Yeah, yeah, yeah.

>> Announcer: From Boston, Massachusetts it's The Cube. Covering AWS re:Inforce 2019. Brought to you by Amazon Web Services and it's ecosystem partners. >> Hey, welcome back everyone. This is The Cube's live coverage of AWS re:Inforce in Boston, Massachusetts. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vallante. This is re:Inforce. This is the inaugural conference for AWS on the security and Cloud security market. A new category being formed from an events standpoint around Cloud security. Our next guest is Cube alumni guest analyst Corey Quinn, and Cloud Economist with the Duckbill Group. Good to see you again. Great to have you on. Love to have you come back, because you're out in the hallways. You're out getting all the data and bringing it back and reporting. But this event, unlike the other ones, you had great commentary and analysis on. You were mentioned onstage during the Keynote from Stephen Smith. Congratulations. >> Thank you. I'm still not quite sure who is getting fired over that one, but somehow it happened, and I didn't know it was coming. It was incredibly flattering to have that happen, but it was first "Huh, awesome, he knows who I am." Followed quickly by "Oh dear, he knows who I am." And it, at this point, I'm not quite sure what to make of that. We'll see. >> It's good news, it's good business. All press is good press as they say, but let's get down to it. Obviously, it's a security conference. This is the inaugural event. We always love to go to inaugural events because, in case there's no second event, we were there - >> Corey: Oh yes >> for one event. So, that's always the case. >> Corey: Been there since the beginning is often great bragging rights. And if there isn't a second one, well, you don't need to bring it up ever again. So, they've already announced there's another one coming to Houston next year. So that'll be entertaining. >> So a lot of people were saying to us re:Inforce security event, some skepticism, some bullish on the sector. obviously, Cloud is hot. But the commentary was, oh, no one's really going to be there. It's going to be more of an educational event. So, yeah, it's more of an educational event for sure. That they're talking about stuff that they can't have time to do and reinvent. But there's a lot of investment going on there. There are players here from the companies. McAfee, you name the big name companies here, they're sending real people. A lot of biz dev folks trying to understand how to build up the sector. A lot of technical technologists here, as well. Digging in to some of the deep conversations. Do you agree? What's your thoughts of the event? >> I'm surprised, I was expecting this to be a whole bunch of people trying to sell things to other people, who were trying to sell them things in return, and it's not. There are, there are people who are using the Cloud for interesting things walking around. And that's fantastic. One thing that's always struck me as being sort of strange, and why I guess I feel sort of spiritually aligned here if nothing else. Is cost and security are always going to be trailing functions. No company is excited to invest in those things, until immediately after they really should have been investing in those things and weren't. So with time to market, velocity are always going to be something much valuable and important to any company strategically. But, we're seeing people start to get ahead of the curve in some ways. And that's, it's refreshing and frankly surprising. >> What is the top story in your mind? Top three stories coming out of re:Inforce. From industry standpoint, or from a product standpoint, that you think need to be told or amplified, or not being told, be told? >> Well there's been the stuff that we've seen on the stage and that's terrific. And, I think that you've probably rehashed those a fair bit with other guests. For me, what I'm seeing, the story that resonates as I walk around the Expo Hall here. Is we're seeing a bunch of companies that have deep roots in data centered environments. And now they're trying to come up with stories that resonate with Cloud. And if they don't, this is a transformational moment. They're going to effectively, likely find themselves in decline. But, they're not differentiating themselves from one another particularly well. There are a few very key things that we're seeing people operate within. Such as, with the new port mirroring stuff coming out of NVPC Traffics. You're right. You have a bunch of companies that are able to consume those, or flow logs. If you want to go back in time a little bit, and spit out analysis on this. But you're not seeing a lot of differentiation around this. Or, Hey we'll take all your security events and spit out the useful things. Okay, that is valuable, and you need to be able to do that. How many vendors do you need in one company doing the exact same thing? >> You know, we had a lot of sites CSO's on here and practitioners. And one of the comments on that point is Yeah, he's like, "Look I don't need more alerts." "I need things fixed." "Don't just tell me what's going on, fix it." So the automation story is also a pretty big one. The VCP traffic mirror, I think, is going to be just great for analytics. Great for just for getting that data out. But what does it actually impact In the automation piece? And the, okay there's an alert. Pay attention to it or ignore it. Or fix it. Seems to be kind of the next level conversation. Your thoughts around that piece. >> I think that as we take a look at the space and we see companies continuing to look at things like auto remediation. Automation's terrific, until the first time it does something you didn't want it to do and takes something down. At which point no one trusts it ever again. And that becomes something hard to tend to. I also think we're starting to see a bit of a new chapter as alliance with this from AWS and it's relationship with partners. I mean historically you would look at re:Invent, and you're sitting in the Expo Hall and watching the keynote. And it feels like it's AWS Red Wedding. Where, you're trying to see who's about to get killed by a feature that just comes out. And now were seeing that they've largely left aspects of the security space alone. They've had VPC flow logs for a long time, but sorting through those yourself was always like straining raw sewage with your teeth. You had to find a partner solution or build something yourself out of open source tooling from spit and duct tape. There's never been a great tool there. And it almost feels like they're leaving that area, for example, alone. And leaving that as an area rife for partners. Now how do you partner with something like AWS? That's a hard question to answer. >> So one of the other things we've heard from practitioners is they don't want incrementalism. They're kind of sick of that. They want step functions, that do as John said, remediate. >> Corey: Yeah. So, like you say, you called it the Red Wedding at the main stage. What does a partner have to do to stay viable in this ecosystem? >> Historically, the answer to that has always been to continue innovating ahead of the bow wave of AWS's own innovation. The problem is you see that slide that they put on in every event, that everyone who doesn't work at AWS sees. That shows the geometric increase in number of feature and service releases. And we all feel this sinking sensation of not even the partner side. But, they're releasing so much that I know some of that is going to fix things for my company, but I'll never hear it. Because it's drowned in the sheer volume of what they're releasing. AWS is rapidly increasing their pace of innovation to the point where companies that are not able to at least match that are going to be in for a bad time. As they find themselves outpaced by the vendor they're partnering with. >> And you heard Liberty Mutual say their number one challenge was actually the pace of Cloud. Being able to absorb all these new features >> Yes. >> And so, you mentioned the partner ecosystem. I mean, so it's not just the partners. It's the customers as well. That bow is coming faster than they can move. >> Absolutely. I can sit here now and talk very convincingly about services that don't exist. And not get called out on them by an AWS employee who happens to be sitting here. Because no one person can have all of this in their head anymore. It's outpaced most people's ability to wrap their heads around that and contextualize it. So people specialize, people focus. And, I think, to some extent that might be an aspect of why we're seeing re:Inforce as its own conference. >> So we talked a lot of CSO's this trip. >> Yeah. >> John: A lot of one on ones. We had some interviews. Some private meetings. I'm going to read you a list of key areas that they brought up as concern. I want to get you're reaction to. >> Sure. >> You pick the ones out you think are very relevant. >> Sure. >> Speedily, very fast. Vendor lock in. Spend. >> Not concerned. Yep. Security Native. >> Yeah. >> Service provider supplier relationship. Metrics, cloud securities, different integration, identity, automation, work force talent, coding security, and the human equation. There were all kind of key areas that seemed to glob and be categorically formed. Your thoughts to those. Which ones do you think jump out as criticalities on the market? >> Sure. I think right now people talking about lock in are basically wasting their time and spinning their wheels. If you, for example, you go with two cloud providers because you don't want to be locked into one. Well now there's a rife partner ecosystem. Because translating things like IAM into another provider's environment is completely foreign. You have to build an entire new security model on top of things in order to do that effectively. That's great. In security we're seeing less of an aversion to lock in than we are in other aspects of the business. And I think that is probably the right answer. Again, I'm not partisan in this battle. If someone wants to go with a different Cloud provider than AWS, great! Awesome! Make them pick the one that makes sense for your business. I don't think that it necessarily matters. But pick one. And go all in on that. >> Well this came up to in a couple of ways. One was, the general consensus was, who doesn't like multi Cloud? If you can seamlessly move stuff between Clouds. Without having to do the modification on all this code that has to be developed. >> Who wouldn't love that? But the reality is, doesn't exist. >> Corey : Well. To your point, this came up again, is that workplace, workforce talent is on CSO said "I'm with AWS." "I have a little bit of Google. I could probably go Azure." "Maybe I bought a company with dealing some stuff over there." "But for the most part all of my talent is peaked on AWS." "Why would I want to have three separate security teams peaking on different things? When I want everyone on our stack." They're building their own stacks. Then outsourcing or using suppliers where it supports it. >> Sure. >> But the focus of building their own stacks. Their own security. Coding up was critical. And having a split competency on code bases just to make it multi, was a non starter. >> And I think multi Cloud has been a symptom. I mean, it's more than a strategy. I think it's in a large part a somewhat desperate attempt by a number of vendors who don't have their own Cloud. To say Hey, you need to have a multi Cloud strategy. But, multi Cloud has been really an outcome of multiple projects. As you say, MNA. Horses for courses. Lines of business. So my question is, I think you just answered it. Multi Cloud is more complex, less secure, and probably more costly. But is it a viable strategy for things other than lock in? >> To a point. There are stories about durability. There's business reasons. If you have a customer who does not want their data living one one particular Cloud provider. Those are strategic reasons to get away from it. And to be clear, I would love the exact same thing that you just mentioned. Where I could take what I've built and run that seamlessly on other providers. But I don't just want that to be a pile of VM's and maybe some disc. I want those to be the higher level services that take care of massive amounts of my business for me. And I want to flow those seamlessly between providers. And there's just no story around that for anything reasonable or modern. >> And history would say there won't really ever be. Without some kind of open source movement to - >> Oh yes. A more honest reading of some of the other cloud providers that are talking about multi cloud extensively translates that through a slight filter. To, we believe you should look into Multi Cloud. Because if you're going all in on a single provider there is no way in the world it's going to be us. And that's sort of a challenge. If you take a look at a number of companies out here. If someone goes all in on one provider they will not have much, if anything, to sell them of differentiated value. And that becomes the larger fixture challenge for an awful lot of companies. And I empathize with that, I really do. >> Amazon started to do a lot of channel development. Obviously their emphasis on helping people make some cash. Obviously their vendors are, ecosystems a fray. Always a fray. So sheer responsibility at one level is, well we only have one security model. We do stuff and you do stuff. So obviously it's inherently shared. So I think that's really not a surprise for me. The issue is how to get successful monetization in the ecosystem. Clearly defining lines of, rules of engagement, around where the white spaces are. And where the differentiation can occur. Your thoughts on how that plays out. >> Yeah. And that's a great question. Because I don't think you're ever going to get someone from Amazon sitting in a room. And saying Okay, if you build a tool that does this, we're never, ever, ever going to build a thing that does that. They just launched a service at re:Invent that talks to satellites in orbit. If they're going to build that, I don't, there's nothing that I will say they're never going to get involved with. Their product strategy, from the outside, feels like it's a post it note that says Yes on it. And how do you wind up successfully building and scaling a business around that? I don't have a clue. >> Eddie Jafse's on the record here in The Cube and privately with me on my reporting. Saying never say never. >> Never say never. >> We'll never say never. So that is actually an explicit >> Take him at his word on that one. >> Right. And I'm an independent consultant. Where my first language is sarcasm. So, I basically make fun of AWS in the newsletter and podcast. And that seems to go reasonably well. But, I'm never going to say that they're not going to move into self deprecation as a business model. Look at some of their service names. They're clearly starting to make inroads in that space. So, I have to keep innovating ahead of that bow wave. And for now, okay. I can't fathom trying to build a business model with a 300 person company and being able to continue to innovate at that pace. And avoid the rapid shifts as AWS explores on new offers. >> And I what I like about why, well, we were always kind of goofing on AWS. But we're fanboys as well, as you know. But what I love about AWS is that they give the opportunity for their partners. They give them plenty of head's up. It's pretty much the rules of engagement is never say never. But if they're not differentiating, that's their job. >> Corey: Yeah. >> Their job is to be better. Now one thing Amazon does say is Hey we might have a competing service, but we're always going to favor the customer. So, the partner. If a customer wants an Amazon Cloud trail. They want Cloud trail for a great example. There's been requests for that. So why wouldn't they do it? But they also recognize it's bus - people in the ecosystem that do similar things. >> Corey: Yeah. >> And they are not going to actively try to put them out of business, per se. >> Oh yeah! One company that's done fantastically well partnering with everyone is PagerDuty. And even if AWS were to announce a service that wakes you up in the middle of the night when something breaks. It's great. Awesome. How about you update your status page in a timely fashion first? Then talk about me depending on the infrastructure that you run to tell me when the infrastructure that you run is now degraded? The idea of being able to take some function like that and outsource worked well enough for them to go public. >> So where are the safe points in the ecosystem? So obviously a partner that has a strong on-prem presence that Amazon wants to get access to. >> That's a short term, or maybe even a mid term strategy. Okay. Professional services. If you're Accenture, and Ernie Young, and Deloitte, PWC, you're probably okay. Because that's not a business that Amazon really wants to be in. Now they might want to, they might want to automate as much to that as possible. But the world's going to do that anyway. But, what's your take where it's safe? >> I would also add cost optimization to that. Not from a basis of technical capability. And I think that their current tooling is disappointing. I'd argue that cost explorer and the rest of their billing situation is the asterisk next to customer obsession if we're being perfectly honest. But there's always going to be some value in an external party coming in from that space. And what form that takes is going to change. But, it is not very defensible internally to say our Cloud spend is optimized, because the vendor we're writing those large checks to tells us it is. There's always going to be a need for some third-party validation. And whether that can come through software? >> How big is that business? >> It's a great question. Right now, we're seeing that people are spending over 30 billion dollars a year on AWS and climbing. One thing we can say with a certainty in almost every case is that people's Cloud bills are not getting smaller month over month. >> Yep. >> So, it's a growing market. It's one that people feel incredibly acutely. And when you get a few drinks into people and they start complaining about various aspects of Cloud, one of the first most common points that comes up is the bill. Not that it's too high, but that it is inscrutable. >> And so, just to do a back of napkin tam, how much optimization potential is there? Is it a ten percent factor? More? >> It depends on the level of effort you're willing to invest. I mean, there's a story for almost environments where you can save 70% on your Cloud bill. All you have to do is spend 18 months of rewriting everything to use serverless primitives. Six of those months you'll be hard down across the board. And then, wait where did everyone go? Because no one's going to do that. >> Dave: You might be out of business. So it's always a question of effort spent doing optimization, versus improving features, speeding time to market and delivering something that will generate for more revenue. The theoretical upside of cost optimization is 100% of your Cloud bill. Launching the right service or product can bring in multiples of that in revenue. >> I think my theory on differentiation, Dave, is that I think Amazon is basically saying in so many words, not directly. But it's my interpretation. Hold on to the rocket ship of AWS as long as you can. And if you can get stable, hold on. If you fall off that's just your fault, right? So, what that means is, to me, move up the stack. So Amazon is clearly going to continue to grow and create scale. So the benefits to the companies create a value proposition that can extract rents out of the marketplace from value that they create on the Amazon growth. Which means, they got to lock step with Amazon on growth. And cost leap, pivot up to where there's space. And Amazon is just a steam roller that will come in. The rocket ship that's going so fast. Whatever metaphor. And so people who just say We made a deal with Amazon, we're in. And then kind of sit idle. Will probably end up getting spun off. I mean, cause it's like they fall off and Amazon will be like All right so we did that. You differentiate enough, you didn't innovate enough. But, they're going to give everyone the opportunity to take a place with the growth. So the strategy, management wise, is just constantly push the envelope. >> So that's implicit in the Amazon posture. What's explicit in Amazon's posture is build applications on our platform. And you should be okay. You know? For a while. >> Yeah. And again, I think that a lot of engineers get stuck in a trap of building something and spending all their time making their code quality as best as possible. But, that's not going to lead to a business outcome one way or another. We see stories of companies hitting success with a tire fire of an infrastructure all the time. Twitter used to display massive downtime until they were large enough to justify the time and expense of a massive rewrite. And now Twitter is effectively up all the time. Whether that's good or not is a separate argument. But, they're there. So there's always going to be time to fix things. >> Well the Twitter example is a great example. Because they built it on rails. >> Yes. >> And they put it on Amazon Cloud. It was just kind of a hack, and then all of the sudden Boom, people loved it. And then, that's to me, the benefit of Cloud. One you get the scape velocity, the investment to start Twitter was fairly low, given what the success was. And then they had to rewrite, because the scale was bursting up. That's called prototyping. >> Oh yeah. >> That's what enterprises have to do. This is the theme of, agile. Get started as a theme, just dig in. Do a hack up font. But don't get confuse that with scale. That's where the rubber meets the road. >> Right and the, Oh Cloud isn't for us because we're an exception case. There are very few companies for whom that statement is true in the modern era. And, do an honest analysis first, before deciding we're going to build our own data centers because we can do it for cheaper. If you're Dropbox, putting storage in, great. Otherwise you're going to end up in this story where Oh, well, we have 20 instances now, so we can do this cheaper in Iraq somewhere. I will bet you a house you're wrong. But okay. >> Yeah. People are telling me that. Okay final question for you. As you've wandered around and been in the sessions, been in the analyst thing. What are some slice of life commentary stories you've bumped into that you found either funny, clever, insulting, or humorous? What's out on the floor? What are some of the conversations? >> One of the best ones was a company I'm not going to name, but the story they told was fantastic. They have, they're primarily on Azure. But they also have a strong secondary presence with AWS, and that's fascinating to me. How does that work internally? It turns out their cloud of choice is Azure. And they have to mandate that with guardrails in place. Because if you give developers a choice they will all go and build on AWS instead. Which is fascinating. And there are business reasons behind why they're doing what they're doing. But that story was just very humorous. I can't confirm or deny whether it was true or not. Because it was someone with way too much to drink telling an awesome story. But the idea of having to forcibly drag your developers away from a thing in a favor of another thing? >> That's like being at a bad party. It's like Oh, the better party is over there. All my friends are over there. >> But they have a commitment to Microsoft software estate. So, that's likely why they're. >> They just deal with Microsoft. >> And I'm not saying this is necessarily the wrong approach. I just find it funny. >> Might be the right business decision, but when you ask the developers, we see that all the time, John. >> All the time. I mean I had a developer one time come to me and start, he like "Look, we thought it would be great to build on Azure. We were actually being paid. They were writing checks to incent us. And I had a revolt. Engineers were revolting. Because the reverse proxies as there was cobbled together services. And they weren't clean native services and primitives. So the engineers were revolting. So they, we had to turn down the cash from Microsoft and go back to Amazon." >> Azure is much better now, but they have to outrun that legacy shadow of at first, it wasn't great. And people try something once, "That was terrible!" Well would you like to try it again now? "Why would I do that? It was terrible!" And it takes time to overcome that knee-jerk reaction. >> Well, but to your point about the business decision. It might make business sense to do that with Microsoft. It's maybe a little bit more predictable than Amazon is as a partner. >> Oh the way to optimize your bill on another Cloud provider that isn't AWS these days is to call up your account rep and yell at them. They're willing to buy business in most cases. That's not specific to any one provider. That's most of them. It's challenging to optimize free, so we don't see the same level of expensive bill problems in most companies there as well. >> Well the good news is on Microsoft, and I was a really big critic of Azure going back a few years ago. Is that they absolutely have changed their philosophy going back, I'd say two, three years ago. In the past two years, particular 24 months, they really have been cranking. They've been pedaling as fast as they can. They're serious. There's commitment from the top. And then they tell us, so there's no doubt. They're doing it also with the Kubernetes. What they're seeing, as they're doing is phenomenal. So... >> Great developer jobs at Microsoft. >> They're in for the long game. They're not going to be a fad. No doubt about it. >> No. And we're not going to see for example the Verizon public Cloud the HP public Cloud. Both of which were turned off. The ones that we're seeing today are largely going to be to stay of the big three. Big four if we include Alibaba. And it's, I'm not worried about the long term viability of any of them. It's just finding their niche, finding their market. >> Yeah, finding their lanes. Cory. Great to have you on. Good to hear some of those stories. Thanks for the commentary. >> Thank you. >> As always great guest analyst Cube alumni, friend, analyst, Cory Quinn here in the Cube. Bringing all the top action from AWS re:Inforce. Their first inaugural security conference around Cloud security. And Cube's initiation of security coverage continues, after this break. (upbeat electronic music)

>> live from Washington D. C. It's the Cube covering aws public sector summit DC brought to you by Amazon Web services. >> Welcome back, everyone to the cubes Live >> coverage of a ws public sector summit here in Washington D. C. I'm your >> host Rebecca Night, along with my co host, John >> Furrier. We're here with Cory Quinn, Cloud Economist The Duck Billed group and a cube host at large. Welcome. Welcome to our show. A medium >> at best, most days. But we'll see what happens when ever expanding. Someday I'll be a 10 x engineer, but not today. >> Right? Right. Exactly. >> Next host. Exactly. >> There we go, >> Cloud. Stand up on the side. We need to mention that >> Yes, generally more cloud improv. But no one believes that. It's off the cuff. So we smile, we nod, we roll with Tio. Yeah, no one wants to hear me sing in any form. >> I promise. Strapping So, Cory, you have been here. You are on the ground having great conversations with people here. 18,000 people at this summit Give us give our viewers a low down on the vibe. The energy What? What do you hear? Very different >> feeling in the commercial summits you're seeing. People are focusing on different parts of the story, and one thing I find amusing is talking to people who work in the public sector. Show up in their first response is, Oh, I'm so behind and then you go to the commercial summit. You talk to people who are doing bleeding edge things, and their response is, Oh, I'm so behind and everyone thinks that they're falling behind the curve and I'm >> not sure how >> much of that is a part of people just watching a technology. Events outpace them versus the ever increasing feature velocity. If they show on slide year over year over year, consistent growth and people feel like they're being left in the dust, it's it's overwhelming. It's drinking from a fire hose. And I don't think that that gets any easier when you're talking to someone in public sector where things generally move in longer planning cycles because they definitional have to, and I'd argue should, >> but you should help them, make them feel better and say, Don't worry. The private sector feels the same way. Not just everyone >> has these problems. That's that's the poor little challenge of this is everyone believes that if you go to the one magic company, their environment is going to be wonderful. They're adopting everything. It doesn't exist. I've gone into all of the typical tech companies you would expect and talk to people. And everyone wants you for three or four drinks into them, gets very honest and starts crying. What would its higher fire their own environment is? It says a lot of conference. We're going around. Here's how we built this amazing thing as a proof of concept is what the part they don't say or for this one small, constrained application. People are trying to solve business problems, not build perfect architecture. And that's okay. >> Yeah, process. They're not. They're not businesses, their agencies. As you said, they're like, slow as molasses when it comes to moving speed. And you could even see Andy Jazzy during his fireside Shep. He's already studying, laying the groundwork. Well, >> once you're in the >> cloud, here's how you know the adoption level so you can see that it's land not landing expand like the enterprise, which is still slow. It's land, get the adoption and then expand, So the public sector clearly has a lot of red tape. I mean, no doubt about it. >> That means anyone who'd argue that point >> chairman's like 1985. It's like, you know, hot tub time machine, you know, nightmare. But Andy Jazz, he also says on differently to heavy lifting is what they want to automate away. That's the dream. That's the That's the goal. Absolute. It's hard. This is the real challenge. Is getting the public sector adopted getting the adoption, your thoughts when what you're hearing people are they jumping in? They put a toe in the water, kicking the tires. As Andy said, >> all of the above and more. I think it's a very broad spectrum and they mentioned there. I think they were 28,000 or 12,000 non profit organizations that they wind up working with as customers and they all tend to have different velocities across the board as they go down that path. I think that the idea that there's one speed or you can even draw a quick to line summary of all the public sector is a bit of a Basile explanation. I see customers are sometimes constrained by planning cycles. There's always the policies and political aspects of things where if you wind up trying to speed things up, you're talking to some people who will not have a job. If you remove the undifferentiated heavy lifting because that's been their entire career, we're going to help you cut waste out of your budget. Well, that's a hard sell to someone who is incentivized based upon the size of the budget that they control it. You wind up with misaligned incentives, and it's a strange environment. But the same thing that I'm seeing across the corporate space is also happening in public sector. We're seeing people who are relatively concerned about where they're going to hire people from what those people look like, how they're going to transform their own organizations. Digital transformations, attired term. >> And it's like you have rosy colored glasses on too much. You're gonna miss the big picture. You gotta have a little bit of skepticism. I think to me governments always had that problem where I'm just gonna give up. I'm telling different. I can't get the outcome I want, because why even try? Right? I think now, with cloud what I hear Jazzy and Amazon saying is. Hey, at least you get some clear visibility on the first position of value, so there's some hope there, right? So I think that's why I'm seeing this adoption focus, because it's like they're getting the customers. For instance, like I'm a university. I could be a professor, but my credit card down my university customer, I got a couple instances of PC to so ding and another one to the 28,000 >> exactly number of customers is always a strange >> skeptical there. But now, for the first time, you, Khun got should go to a team saying, Hey, you know all that B s about not get the job done, you can get it with clouds. So it's gettable. Now it's attainable. It's not just aspirations. >> Movers really will make the difference. In the end, with the university customer's question, the people who were in that swing >> the tide can that be a generational shift, a deb ops mindset in government? That's a big question. >> Well, they have some advantages. For example, we took a look at all the Gulf cloud announcements and the keynote yesterday, and that must have been a super easy keynote to put together because they're just using the traditional Kino slides and reinvent 2014 because it takes time to get things certified as they moved through the entire pipeline process. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that. But the services that are going into come cloud or things that are tried and tested in a lot of other environments. There's an entire community out there. There's an established body of knowledge. So a lot of the path that government is walking down has already been from a technical perspective paid for them. >> I want to riff on an idea on to make a proposal with you here in real time. You're I think what we should do is make a proposal to the U. S. Government that we basically take equity in the agencies and then take them public. >> That's not a bad idea, absolutely not about commercialized. >> The entities create a stock option program, Cory, because listen, if I'm if I'm a talent, why would I gotta work for an agency when I could make three times Mohr get public and be rich, and that's the problem with talent. You walk around the expo for here. The booths are much smaller, and I didn't understand that at first, and then it clicked for me. If you want to sell services to government, you don't buy a bigger booth. You buy a Congress person and it turns out those air less expensive. That's how acquisitions tend to work in this space. So folks walking around or not, generally going to be the customers that buy things. People walking around in many cases are the talent and looking for more talent. And it does become extremely compelling to have those people leave public sector and go into private sector. In some cases where we'll pay you three times more and added bonus most days, this is America. After all, no one's shooting at you, so that does your >> cloud. Economists were kind of joking about your title, but if you think about it, there are economics involved. It's lower cost, faster, time to value. But what we're getting at is an incentive system. So you think fiscal monetary policy of incentives. So you know, Rebecca, this this This is the challenge that the policy guys gotta figure because the mechanisms to get stuff done is by the politicians or do this or do that. We're getting at something, really, to the heart of human beings, that mission of the mission of the agency or objective they're doing for the labor of love or money? Yes, Reed, why not create an incentive system that compensate? >> You think That's incentive system for taxpayers, though, too, in the sense of >> if I can see the trillions of dollars on the >> budget, a lot of what >> governments do shouldn't necessarily be for sale. I think the idea of citizen versus customer tends to be a very wide divergence, and I generally pushback on issues to attempt, I guess, convinced those into the same thing. It's you wind up with a very striated, almost an aristocracy Socratic society. >> I don't think that tends >> to lead anywhere. Good way. Everyone is getting political today for some reason. >> Well, I >> mean fireside chat to digital >> transformations. People process technology. You can superimpose that onto any environment where those public policy or whatever or national governments, the people, his issues there, processes, issues, technologies is each of one of them have their own challenge. Your thoughts on public sectors challenges opportunities. Four people process technology. >> You have to be mission driven for starters in order to get the people involved. As far as the processes go, there are inherently going to be limitations sometimes and easily observable in the form of different regulatory regimes that apply to these different workloads. And when we talk about the technology well, we're already seeing that that is becoming less of a gap over time. What used to be that o on ly we can secure a data center well enough from a physical security standpoint, there's a quote from the CIA that said on its worst day that cloud was cloud. Security was better than any on premises environment that they could build. And there's something to be said for that. Their economies of scale of like by >> the tech gaps going away. Almost zero yes. So if that OK, text, good check training fault of the people side. Absolute awareness competency processes a red tape automation opportunity. That could be. >> But this is also not to assume that the commercial world has unlock either. Where does the next generation come from? You talk to most senior cloud folks these days and most of us tend to have come up from working help desks being grumpy, you nexus in men's or you nexus movement because it's not like there's a second kind of those and we go up through a certain progression. Well, those jobs aren't there anymore. They've been automated away. The road that we walked is largely closed. Where does the next generation come from? I don't have a great answer. >> Talent question is a huge one. This is going to be the difference. Rebecca. We were riffing on this on our opening. >> It's the only one. >> Your thoughts. I mean, were you even hearing all this stuff and you've been researching this? What? Your thoughts. >> I think that we need to think more. I think tech companies need to think more broadly about where they're going to get this next generation of people, and they don't need to necessarily be people who have studied CS in school. Although, of course we need those people too. >> But the people with the bright, the creative, the expansive world views who are thinking about these problems and can learn >> the tech, I mean the tough guy, you know why >> block change you into a nice CEO and everyone gets >> rich, but I think when Jessie was saying today during his fireside, in the sense of we need to make sure that we're building tools, that >> you don't need to be a machine learning expert to deploy, you know we need to make simpler, more intuitive tools, and then that's really important here. >> Amazon does well in that environment about incentives. >> I think that >> one thing that the public sector offers that you don't often see in the venture start of world or corporate America or corporate anywhere, for that matter, is the ability to move beyond next quarter, planning the ability to look at long term projects like What >> does >> it take to wind up causing significant change across the world? Where is it take to build international space Station? You're not gonna be able to ship those things 180 days, no matter how efficiently you build things. And I think that the incentives and as you build them, have to start aligning with that. Otherwise you wind up with government trying to compete on compensation with the private sector. I don't think that works. I think you may have an opportunity to structure alignments around sentence in a very different life. >> It's an open item on the compensation. Until they agree, we'll watch. It was ideas. We'll see what tracks. But to me, in my opinion, what I think's gonna be killer for game game one here. This of this revolution is the people that come out of the woodwork because cloud attracts attract smart people and smart people are leaning into the government with cloud. It was the other way around before the cloud people, I don't want to get involved in government, and that was a big ding on government attracting qualified people. So I think Cloud is going to attract some smart people that want to help for the purpose and mission of whatever the outcome of that political or agency or government initiative with a cyber security there. People will care about this stuff who want the social equity not so much, >> Yeah, I think that's >> going to be a wild card. I think we're going to see like a new might in migration of talented people coming into quote assist government. That's a work for government to figure out how to be better at whatever the competition is and that is going to be I think the first lever of you start to see new names emerge. This person who just changed the organization over here become a hero Dev Ops mindset being applied to new environments. >> And we've seen that to some extent with the U. S. Digital service with 18 half where you have industry leaders from the commercial side moving into public sector and working in government for a time and then matriculating back into the public sector and the private sector, I think that there winds up being a lot of opportunity for more programs like that of scaling this stuff out >> and career change and career passer tissue. And there is this more fluid iti. As you're saying, >> I think that money isn't everything. You know. There's a lot of research that shows up to a certain threshold of income. You >> don't get that much happier. I don't know if Jeff >> basis is that much happier than us. I mean, >> we live in a little more bank and say, you know, >> you see the other side of it, too, is you build all these things together where you have okay. What? >> What is it >> that moves people? What do they care about. It's not just money, and I think that the old styled the old are very strict hierarchy within organizations where things are decided by tenure. Service is a bit of a problem if you have someone who works for. The EPA has been doing a deep dive cloud work for 10 years. There's nothing specific to the EPA about what that person has mastered. They shouldn't be able to laterally transition into the FDA, for example, >> Jackson Fireside Chat, Those interesting point about the fire phone that they talked about. And this is the transfer ability of skill sets and you getting at the thing that I will notice is that with Cloud attracts this interdisciplinary skill sets so you don't have to be just a coder. You khun, note how code works and be an architect, or you could be a change agent some somewhere else in an organization. So that's >> going to >> be interesting. That's not necessarily what how governments have always been siloed right? So can can these silos can these old ways of doing things. This is the question. This is why it's fun to cover this market. >> We're already >> seeing that in the public sector were being able to write code is rapidly transitioning into a very being very similar to I can speak French. Great. That's not a career in and of itself. That's a skill sad that unlocks of different right. A different career paths forward, but it doesn't wind up saving anything. It doesn't want a preserving its own modern aristocracy path forward or >> use the building an example. I don't have to learn how to pour concrete organ, right? The blueprints. Yes. So as we start getting into these systems conversations, you're going to start to see these different skill sets involved. Huge opportunity. If >> you're in >> school today and you're studying computer science, great learned something else, too, because the intersection between that and other spaces are where the knish opportunities are. That's the skill set of the future. That's where you're going to start seeing opportunities. Do not just succeed personally, but start to change the world. >> But Cory Great. Thanks for coming on and make an appearance and sharing what you found on the hallways. Good to see you. Coop con in Europe. Thanks for holding down the fort there. >> Of course I appreciate it. It was an absolute Bonner. >> Excellent. Great. Well, thank you so much. Thank >> you. I'm Rebecca Knight for John Furrier. Stay tuned. You are watching the Cube.

>> fly from San Francisco. It's the Cube covering Google Cloud next nineteen Tio by Google Cloud and its ecosystem partners. >> Okay, welcome back, everyone here. Live Cube coverage in San Francisco for Google Clouds Conference call Google Next twenty nineteen. Hashtag Google next nineteen. I'm John for us to meet him in and Dave along with a special Cuban sites. Guess Cory Quinn, Cloud a calm said Duck Bill Group will also be filling in as a host on the Cube at a variety of Cloud native shows. Corey, welcome back to the Cube. Good to see you again. Thanks for coming >> on. Great to see me again. Thank you for having me >> and still you looking beautiful. Brilliant is always Dave. You're handsome. Okay, we're here in the Cube, breaking it down our guys. Seriously, let's let's let's wrap this up real quick. And then we'LL get into some of the fun conversations around some of the observations. But Day one's over. Clearly, Anthos is not just the rebrand. Although the CMO clearly talked about how wow has done that, they want to add more stuff into it. So that's the big topic here. We saw the migration tool and those migrate and then a lot of sun apogee here. AP eyes thoughts on Day one. >> Yes, eso John Anthos. I'm still trying to squint through it a little bit, and it's it's more than just Cooper Netease. We know that Google has a strong position, and being the open cloud is they've been saying for a couple of years. But you know what? Air these services who? The partners, How is this different from the, You know, dozens of Cooper, Nettie says. Solutions that are out there. So there's great buzz here at the show, Really good attendance here. A lot of really smart people. So we expect that coming off Google show So good start Day one. It was really excited to dig with you on some of the answers stuff as well as some of the surveillance pieces, which I've got some commentary on >> our partner and Chan sent a lot of time on the state. Duggan Cory, I know you've been putting in your ear the ground. What's happening? What do you see what he reporting? What have you collected? The >> I think one of the biggest things that I'm seeing in this entire conference to date has been almost a mind shift change. I mean, this is conferences called Google Next, and for a long time that's been one of the biggest problems. They're focusing on what's next rather than what is today, and they're inventing the future to almost at the expense of the present. I think the big messaging today was both about reassuring enterprises that yes, they're serious about this and also building a narrative where there now talking about coming at this from a position of being able to embrace customers where they are and speak their language? I think that that's transformative for Google. And it's something I don't think that we've seen them do seriously, at least not for very long. >> Dave. We've been talking about this all the time. Do they have the enterprise? Charles. We've been following the new team. When Diane Greene came in here to put the pieces together, it was a tough job. She had. They put the pieces together. But as Cory's pointing out, some one's like they're growing up now, saying Okay, we gotta realize that customers matter, not just addict attack or the future. This has been an Amazon playbook, customer, customer, customer and build a product. Customers. It seems to be your thoughts on this. >> Well, so I think Corey made a good point is they're always looking at the future. And if you want to get beyond search male and maps, I got to solve a problem today. And I'm not sure exactly like you said Stew. What problem Anthos is solving. I think it may still be a little early for this multi cloud management, but I think it is coming, you know, look, to think about how Amazon talks. Well, we're gonna eliminate heavy lifting. Microsoft clearly is got a software, a state that they could help you connect, you know, Oracle. Same. Same who? Google. It's always been about the tech and the future, and they're starting to get there, but still about to me, the tech and the future. >> It's a tragic Corey. I remember. I believe you were quoted in ah. News article recently is that Amazon listens to customers and Google historically talks to customers and tells them this is the way you should be doing it with a new Google. Now, >> I don't know. I don't think you change anything. Is biggest Google overnight. I think that there's a long story tradition of the Google engineer being the smartest person in the room. Just ask them. I'm kidding. You won't have to ask them. They're going to tell you on prompted. And I think that has to change because fundamentally addressing developers is a great way of building traction. It's a great way of getting to where they tend to be. But developers generally do not sign fifty million dollar deals. Well, more than once anyway. >> Well, this is a good point. This pretty customer attraction, which I think they've shown chops for the work they're doing that cnc f with continued open source. Great. But then when you got to go support the open source when you got to start putting lays together, this is where you start to get into procurement. Some requirements operations, security, a whole new level of grinding it out. I mean, the enterprise is a grind it out game. Google now has to go down that road stew. Dave, Corey, do you think they're ready? You think they're ready to grind it out? >> Way talked about in our kickoff this morning. Partnerships are critical and they had a bunch of really good ones up on stage this morning. You know, Cisco, VM wear some good ones to hang your hat on. You know, I would like to see more from an application standpoint as to where they sent him then they But you >> know, there's no question. I mean, I think there's an emphatic yes. Why? Because they got the global scale. They got the world's biggest cloud. They get a ton of dough. You know, we always say, though the best tech doesn't always win, and that's true. But usually the best tech runs out of money or they give up. You know, I don't see that happening in, >> Well, it's in the >> midterm or even semi long term for Google. So So I do think they have the chops to grind it out. >> I mean, I think they have attack. I've always said that love some of their tech, but they try to force Google Tech down the enterprise throats over the years. And I think Diane Green realized that that was the start of seeing real product management shop start to come in some of the work that they know they gotta get down and dirty on But to me it's a story that matters. The story has to be there. I think we're starting to see here, at least from my observation story of customers. So get in salt, create value, think this whole positioning of we want to be the open cloud where they say, Oh, you want to negotiate your contracts Don't want lock in You want developer productivity and you want operations I think it's a smart play by Google Stew. I think that's a good move. And again there, the dark horse in this. They don't have a lot to lose by going changing the game, changing the rules. Amazon, certainly in the lead, has a lot to lose, but they're so far ahead. Google just kind of catch up pretty quickly if they make the right moves. >> T K is making a lot of the right moves, but there's only so much it can be done so quickly. When you wind up in a story like we're seeing right now with customers who are taking workloads and haven't really been touched in there on from environments since nineteen ninety eight and they're migrating them into a GP environment and GPS formal deprecation Policy says We'LL give you one year's notice before turning anything off once it goes, g et. That's no time at all For an enterprise. Wait, we might have to move again. Absolutely not. It's still a language >> A C enterprise's years just to figure out Should we move? And where do we dio >> exactly their enterprise to go out of business and some of their divisions wouldn't know for five >> years. So is Google. What's what's the reaction when you press them on this, >> uh, usually starts with well, actually, And then they breathe and they reach for a whiteboard to show me exactly why I'm wrong. And then I lose interest and wander off, at which point they realized, Wow, you have no attention span for anything. Would you like to work here? And so far no dice, but we'LL see. >> So that's it. Well, that's a good business model, right? I think. Still your reaction to that? I mean, yeah, I read that they support rail For what? A deck like zillions of years. Right. This is what an example of how an enterprise needs to behave. >> Well, right, John Thie question we've had for a number of years is, you know, can cos b'more googly on DH. You know, the message here seems to be more. We're going to meet you where we are. We're going to be able to work with you on that. But there's some of those underlying things that Cory brings out that that need to change here. So that's a big change for Google. >> So what is the story that we heard from from Thomas carrying today? He said, Hybrid cloud Mina multi cloud, consistent framework with standard infrastructure in a platform to secure and manage data across the enterprise. Okay, sounds good. A lot of work to be done there. If you think about I mean, look at Amazon hybrid guard. If you announce outposts doesn't shift till later this year, it's a one small slice. There's got to be partnerships. There's gotta be an ecosystem to deliver on those three components of the vision on the story, and I say there's a lot of work to be done there now. What I do like about it is I do think that that multi cloud is a problem. I don't think thus far from most enterprises, it's a strategy I think it's if in multi vendor and so it will become a problem. The question I have is who's going to be in the best position to solve that problem? And you pointed out today still, well, Google has got VM wears a partner. Sisko is a partner. Red Hat as a partner. You know, IBM and Red Hat sort of lining up on that. Maybe service now tries to get into that game, but it's a wide open space. It's jump ball. >> Yeah, it's interesting. One of the things that I worry a little about and, you know, love. Corey's opinion on this is, you know, Google. Absolutely. If you talk about the container space, clear leadership, you know, first time I heard about containers, Google was front and center. They're leading this Cooper Netease march, but communities isn't magic, and even their server lis move movement. John and I interviewed Polly today, and it's very much, you know, Kay Native, we're going to take your containers and Goober Netease and extended service. That's not what I hear from you know, customers that I talked to today that are doing survivalists according what? What? What? What's your take there. >> I think that you sort of see almost the same problem emerging both with that narrative and the current multi cloud approach. It's It's not the fact that I can take this arbitrary code and Ronit anywhere that makes something server. Lis. We have a restaurant to run code or a raspberry pie or a burning dumpster with enterprise logo on the side of it that does. That isn't what's interesting. That isn't what delivers value to customers. It's the event model for starters, and I think right now that's not quite there. A lot of stuff. It's been announced and is coming out as we speak. And various block Post is still http endpoint activated, which means that you're not quite to an event model separately. What we're seeing with Anthos and the current approach to multicloud is you can deploy this to any cloud provider you'd like. Well, yes, in so far is a cloud provider to you is a bunch of disc, a pile of VMs and a network, and that's about it. That's not a cloud in the modern sense that is effectively outsourcing your data center and you'll find it runs on money pretty quickly. Once you start down that path, it's the higher level services, these renovations. >> This brings up a good point and that I think what I'm seeing and this is what I think, A lot of people, it's very aspirational. Views on Google People love Google. They love. They know about Google and they hope that they're as good as Amazon tomorrow. And let's just face it, Amazon is way out front. So I think this expectations for Google that are a little bit to hide. I think what I'm hearing the executives, at least the positive side would be. They understand where they are. I mean, the fact that we're not home on edge and I ot and all these other things, it means that they're still in foundational mode, in my opinion. So I mean, think about it. They're just getting their act together, building that foundational things. So I think they're cautious because we're not hearing about the eye ot. We're not hearing about some of the more advanced challenges that the enterprise is air. Having heard a little bit about from the sigh from a group that came on about data migration, Sata, Gata so OK, they got database at the Big Cloud. Big table, Big queer. OK, great stuff. Ml So data, certainly in their wheelhouse. But outside of that, I mean they're still foundational. So >> tomorrow's product day, though. So you know he may be here more there. I'm surprised they didn't hear more about machine intelligence. Give it. No, they talked about a little bit. But this company is the leader in a >> way. Maybe that's part of the issue. And I think that there is no question that when you want something far future that looks like robots from space Bill, you go to Google. You know that. I think there's a lot less of an awareness that Okay, I just need a bunch of the EMS to run somewhere, and I feel like that is more or less. It's a story of today, >> and you know Google. I mean, like their story. You know, I love the code cloud code, cloud run, cloud building. They have all the right. Like Jeff Bob's like linguistic that gets my attention. You get is kind of like it feels like it feels like they're really close. It's getting so >> far away. Cultures also extremely hard. You have a bunch of execs that have just shown up from Oracle seemingly yesterday in these terms, and there's a lot of knee jerk reactions of, Oh, Google is now taking on a bunch of Oracle approaches, like hiring sales people and talking to customers. That's not a bad thing. Meanwhile, the executives who come Teo out of Oracle after decades there and are now working at Google. We're having to adjust to a more rapid pace of innovation to this new world in which they have customers that don't actively hate. Um, and it's turning into a very different story for everyone involved. I'm curious to see what comes out of it, but it's still very much earlier, >> and I think they could build fast. Like you said, they like Google's. The parties like him. What they don't like about Google is responsiveness and being, you know, the white gloves they need. They need to have that kind of service ability. >> And Google also, by having a single overarching brand in the term of the word Google is their consumer efforts do wind up playing into people's perception of through the clouds like yes, we want Google to listen to us? No, not through our thermostats. >> Well, they got a lot of Regis developing. They got the footprint. Guys, great job student. Final comments. >> I mean, just you talk about the customer you've heard there was. You know, my comment. My comment on Twitter this morning that got the most reaction is you no question to retail or why are you choosing Google Cloud? Answer is, you're not Amazon, and you know, the long and short being the alternative to a leader in the market today. Not a bad thing. So Google has, you know, a good position at the market. They we always knew that they had great tak es o >> Also thing on that comments do is that I think in watching Google, I think I personally in critical of what they need to do more obviously. But they know their people are doing the work. I mean, you've got to grind it out to me. This is a grind it out game. It's on ly early. You gotta get the discipline up there. They got the right product management type chops and there Can they get those things done that Thomas Curry and, um, it's Avery can bring to the table and kind of shed the Oracle and put the New Jersey on and fight the battle with the new Google Way. That's going to be the tell Signe. >> Well, the hard part for me is it. So it's hard to measure. You see some logo's. You don't know what they're really buy. I mean, with them is on, you know, it's it's infrastructures of service. Microsoft. Okay, I'm not sure. How much is there Oracle? Clearly not sure, you know, etcetera. But so lookit Proof was talking to customers, right? Huh? How much they're actually adopting this stuff for riel Business problems. >> Yeah, not multi cloud if your infrastructure runs on a different cloud provider. But you're using g sweet. I mean that that's not really what people think of when they say multi cloud. But that is what analysts chalk it up as something >> it's a battle at least accomplishes lining up. You got Amazon, Microsoft, Google lying it up. It's the cube coverage wrapping it up with the team here day one of three days of wall to wall coverage. Stay with us. Go to the cube dot net the check out all the video silken angle dot com. We have a special report and a lot of constant flowing there, and we're back with more coverage tomorrow day, too. Thanks for watching.

(upbeat music) >> Hello, and welcome to The Great Cloud Debate. I'm your moderator Rachel Dines. I'm joined by two debaters today Corey Quinn, Cloud Economist at the Duckbill Group and Stu Miniman, Senior Analyst and Host of theCube. Welcome Corey and Stu, this when you can say hello. >> Hey Rachel, great to talk to you. >> And it's better to talk to me. It's always a pleasure to talk to the fine folks over at CloudHealth at by VMware and less of the pleasure to talk to Stu. >> Smack talk is scheduled for later in the agenda gentlemen, so please keep it to a minimum now to keep us on schedule. So here's how today is going to work. I'm going to introduce a debate topic and assign Corey and Stu each to a side. Remember, their assignments are what I decide and they might not actually match their true feelings about a topic, and it definitely does not represent the feelings of their employer or my employer, importantly. Each debater is going to have two minutes to state their opening arguments, then we'll have rebuttals. And each round you the audience gets to vote of who you think is winning. And at the end of the debate, I'll announce the winner. The prize is bragging rights of course, but then also we're having each debater play to win lunch for their local hospital, which is really exciting. So Stu, which hospital are you playing for? >> Yeah, so Rachel, I'm choosing Brigham Women's Hospital. I get a little bit of a home vote for the Boston audience here and was actually my wife's first job out of school. >> Great hospital. Very, very good. All right, Corey, what about you? >> My neighbor winds up being as specialist in infectious diseases as a doctor, and that was always one of those weird things you learn over a cocktail party until this year became incredibly relevant. So I will absolutely be sending the lunch to his department. >> Wonderful! All right. Well, is everyone ready? Any last words? This is your moment for smack talk. >> I think I'll say that for once we can apply it to a specific technology area. Otherwise, it was insulting his appearance and that's too easy. >> All right, let's get going. The first topic is multicloud. Corey, you'll be arguing that companies are better off standardizing on a single cloud. While Stu, you're going to argue the companies are better off with a multicloud strategy. Corey, you're up first, two minutes on the clock and go. >> All right. As a general rule, picking a single provider and going all in leads to the better outcome. Otherwise, you're trying to build every workload to run seamlessly on other providers on a moment's notice. You don't ever actually do it and all you're giving up in return is the ability to leverage whatever your primary cloud provider is letting you build. Now you're suddenly trying to make two differently behaving load balancers work together in the same way, you're using terraform or as I like to call it multicloud formation in the worst of all possible ways. Because now you're having to only really build on one provider, but all the work you're putting in to make that scale to other providers, you might theoretically want to go to at some point, it slows you down, you're never going to be able to move as quickly trying to build for everyone as you are for one particular provider. And I don't care which provider you pick, you probably care which one you pick, I don't care which one. The point is, you've got to pick what's right for your business. And in almost every case, that means start on a single platform. And if you need to migrate down the road years from now, great, that means A you've survived that long, and B you now have the longevity as a business to understand what migrating looks like. Otherwise you're not able to take care of any of the higher level offerings these providers offer that are even slightly differentiated from each other. And even managed database services behave differently. You've got to become a master of all the different ways these things can fail and unfortunate and displeasing ways. It just leaves you in a position where you're not able to specialize, and of course, makes hiring that much harder. Stu, fight me! >> Tough words there. All right, Stu, your turn. Why are companies better off if they go with a multicloud strategy? Got two minutes? >> Yeah, well first of all Corey, I'm really glad that I didn't have to whip out the AWS guidelines, you were not sticking strictly to it and saying that you could not use the words multicloud, cross-cloud, any cloud or every cloud so thank you for saving me that argument. But I want you to kind of come into the real world a little bit. We want access to innovation, we want flexibility, and well, we used to say I would have loved to have a single provider, in the real world we understand that people end up using multiple solutions. If you look at the AI world today, there's not a provider that is a clear leader in every environment that I have. So there's a reason why I might want to use a lot of clouds. Most companies I talked to, Corey, they still have some of their own servers. They're working in a data center, we've seen huge explosion in the service provider world connecting to multiple clouds. So well, a couple of years ago, multicloud was a complete mess. Now, it's only a little bit of a mess, Corey. So absolutely, there's work that we need to do as an industry to make these solutions better. I've been pining for a couple years to say that multicloud needs to be stronger than the sum of its pieces. And we might not yet be there but limiting yourself to a single cloud is reducing your access to innovation, it's reducing your flexibility. And when you start looking at things like edge computing and AI, I'm going to need to access services from multiple providers. So single cloud is a lovely ideal, but in the real world, we understand that teams come with certain skill sets. We end up in many industries, we have mergers and acquisitions. And it's not as easy to just rip out all of your cloud, like you would have 20 years ago, if you said, "Oh, well, they have a phone system or a router "that didn't match what our corporate guidelines is." Cloud is what we're doing. There's lots of solutions out there. And therefore, multicloud is the reality today, and will be the reality going forward for many years to come. >> Strong words from you, Stu. Corey, you've got 60 seconds for rebuttal. I mostly agree with what you just said. I think that having different workloads in different clouds makes an awful lot of sense. Data gravity becomes a bit of a bear. But if you acquire a company that's running on a different cloud than the one that you've picked, you'd be ridiculous to view migrating as anything approaching a strategic priority. Now, this also gets into the question of what is cloud? Our G Suite stuff counts as cloud, but no one really views it in that way. Similarly, when you have an AI specific workload, that's great. As long as it isn't you seriously expensive to move data between providers. That workload doesn't need to live in the same place as your marketing website does. I think that the idea of having a specific cloud provider that you go all in on for every use case, well, at some point that leads to ridiculous things like pretending that Amazon WorkDocs has customers, it does not. But for things that matter to your business and looking at specific workloads, I think that you're going to find a primary provider with secondary workloads here and they're scattered elsewhere to be the strategy that people are getting at when they use the word multicloud badly. >> Time's up for you Corey, Stu we've got time for rebuttal and remember, for those of you in the audience, you can vote at any time and who you think is winning this round. Stu, 60 seconds for a rebuttal. >> Yeah, absolutely Corey. Look, you just gave the Andy Jassy of what multicloud should be 70 to 80% goes to a single provider. And it does make sense we know nobody ever said multicloud equals the same amount in multiple environments but you made a clear case as to why multicloud leveraging multi providers is likely what most companies are going to do. So thank you so much for making a clear case as to why multicloud not equal cloud, across multiple providers is the way to go. So thank you for conceding the victory. >> Last Words, Corey. >> If that's what you took from it Stu, I can't get any closer to it than you have. >> All right, let's move on to the next topic then. The next topic is serverless versus containers which technology is going to be used in, let's say, five to 10 years time? And as a reminder, I'm going to assign each of the debaters these topics, their assignments may or may not match their true feelings about this topic, and they definitely don't represent the topics of my employer, CloudHealth by VMware. Stu, you're going to argue for containers. Corey you're going to argue for start serverless. Stu, you're up first. Two minutes on the clock and go. >> All right, so with all respect to my friends in the serverless community, We need to have a reality check as to how things work. We all know that serverless is a ridiculous name because underneath we do need to worry about all of the infrastructure underneath. So containers today are the de facto building block for cloud native architectures, just as the VM defined the ecosystem for an entire generation of solutions. Containers are the way we build things today. It is the way Google has architected their entire solution and underneath it is often something that's used with serverless. So yes, if you're, building an Alexa service, serverless make what's good for you. But for the vast majority of solutions, I need to have flexibility, I need to understand how things work underneath it. We know in IT that it's great when things work, but we need to understand how to fix them when they break. So containerization gets us to that atomic level, really close to having the same thing as the application. And therefore, we saw the millions of users that deploy Docker, we saw the huge wave of container orchestration led by Kubernetes. And the entire ecosystem and millions of customers are now on board with this way of designing and architecting and breaking down the silos between the infrastructure world and the application developer world. So containers, here to stay growing fast. >> All right, Corey, what do you think? Why is serverless the future? >> I think that you're right in that containers are the way you get from where you were to something that runs effectively in a cloud environment. That is why Google is so strongly behind Kubernetes it helps get the entire industry to write code the way that Google might write code. And that's great. But if you're looking at effectively rewriting something from scratch, or building something that new, the idea of not having to think about infrastructure in the traditional sense of being able to just here, take this code and run it in a given provider that takes whatever it is that you need to do and could loose all these other services together, saves an awful lot of time. As that continues to move up the stack towards the idea of no code or low code. And suddenly, you're now able to build these applications in ways that require just a little bit of code that tie together everything else. We're closer than ever to that old trope of the only code you write is business logic. Serverless gives a much clearer shot of getting there, if you can divorce yourself from the past of legacy workloads. Legacy, of course meaning older than 18 months and makes money. >> Stu, do you have a rebuttal, 60 seconds? >> Yeah. So Corey, we've been talking about this Nirvana in many ways. It's the discussion that we had for paths for over a decade now. I want to be able to write my code once not worry about where it lives, and do all this. But sometimes, there's a reason why we keep trying the same thing over and over again, but never reaching it. So serverless is great for some application If you talked about, okay, if you're some brand new webby thing there and I don't want to have to do this team, that's awesome. I've talked to some wonderful people that don't know anything about coding that have built some cool stuff with serverless. But cool stuff isn't what most business runs on, and therefore containerization is, as you said, it's a bridge to where I need to go, it lives in these cloud environments, and it is the present and it is the future. >> Corey, your response. >> I agree that it's the present, I doubt that it's the future in quite the same way. Right now Kubernetes is really scratching a major itch, which is how all of these companies who are moving to public cloud still I can have their infrastructure teams be able to cosplay as cloud providers themselves. And over time, that becomes simpler and I think on some level, you might even see a convergence of things that are container workloads begin to look a lot more like serverless workloads. Remember, we're aiming at something that is five years away in the context of this question. I think that the serverless and container landscape will look very different. The serverless landscape will be bright and exciting and new, whereas unfortunately the container landscape is going to be represented by people like you Stu. >> Hoarse words from Corey. Stu, any last words or rebuttals? >> Yeah, and look Corey absolutely just like we don't really think about the underlying server or VM, we won't think about the containers you won't think about Kubernetes in the future, but, the question is, which technology will be used in five to 10 years, it'll still be there. It will be the fabric of our lives underneath there for containerization. So, that is what we were talking about. Serverless I think will be useful in pockets of places but will not be the predominant technology, five years from now. >> All right, tough to say who won that one? I'm glad I don't have to decide. I hope everyone out there is voting, last chance to vote on this question before we move on to the next. Next topic is cloud wars. I'm going to give a statement and then I'm going to assign each of you a pro or a con, Google will never be an actual contender in the cloud wars always a far third, we're going to have Corey arguing that Google is never going to be an actual contender. And Stu, you're going to argue that Google is eventually going to overtake the top two AWS and Azure. As a constant reminder, I'm assigning these topics, it's my decision and also they don't match the opinions of me, my employer, or likely Stu or Corey. This is all just for fun and games. But I really want to hear what everyone has to say. So Corey, you're up first two minutes. Why is Google never going to be an actual contender and go. >> The biggest problem Google has in the time of cloud is their ability to forecast longer term on anything that isn't their advertising business, and their ability to talk to human beings long enough to meet people where they are. We're replacing their entire culture is what it's going to take to succeed in the time of cloud and with respect, Thomas Kurian is a spectacular leader internally but look at where he's come from. He spent 22 years at Oracle and now has been transplanted into Google. If we take a look at Satya Nadella's cloud transformation at Microsoft, he was able to pull that off as an insider, after having known intimately every aspect of that company, and he grew organically with it and was perfectly positioned to make that change. You can't instill that kind of culture change by dropping someone externally, on top of an organization and expecting anything to go with this magic one day wake up and everything's going to work out super well. Google has a tremendous amount of strengths, and I don't see that providing common denominator cloud computing services to a number of workloads that from a Google perspective are horrifying, is necessarily in their wheelhouse. It feels like their entire focus on this is well, there's money over there. We should go get some of that too. It comes down to the traditional Google lack of focus. >> Stu, rebuttal? Why do you think Google has a shaft? >> Yeah, so first of all, Corey, I think we'd agree Google is a powerhouse in the world today. My background is networking, when they first came out with with Google Cloud, I said, Google has the best network, second to none in the world. They are ubiquitous today. If you talk about the impact they have on the world, Android phones, you mentioned Kubernetes, everybody uses G Suite maps, YouTube, and the like. That does not mean that they are necessarily going to become the clear leader in cloud but, Corey, they've got really, really smart people. If you're not familiar with that talk to them. They'll tell you how smart they are. And they have built phenomenal solutions, who's going to be able to solve, the challenge every day of, true distributed systems, that a global database that can handle the clock down to the atomic level, Google's the one that does that we've all read the white papers on that. They've set the tone for Hadoop, and various solutions that are all over the place, and their secret weapon is not the advertising, of course, that is a big concern for them, but is that if you talk about, the consumer adoption, everyone uses Google. My kids have all had Chromebooks growing up. It isn't their favorite thing, but they get, indoctrinated with Google technology. And as they go out and leverage technologies in the world, Google is one that is known. Google has the strength of technology and a lot of positioning and partnerships to move them forward. Everybody wants a strong ecosystem in cloud, we don't want a single provider. We already discussed this before, but just from a competitive nature standpoint, if there is a clear counterbalance to AWS, I would say that it is Google, not Microsoft, that is positioned to be that clear and opportune. >> Interesting, very interesting Stu. So your argument is the Gen Zers will of ultimately when they come of age become the big Google proponents. Some strong words that as well but they're the better foil to AWS, Corey rebuttal? >> I think that Stu is one t-shirt change away from a pitch perfect reenactment of Charlie Brown. In this case with Google playing the part of Lucy yanking the football away every time. We've seen it with inbox, Google Reader, Google Maps, API pricing, GKE's pricing for control plane. And when your argument comes down to a suddenly Google is going to change their entire nature and become something that it is as proven as constitutionally incapable of being, namely supporting something that its customers want that it doesn't itself enjoy working on. And to the exclusion of being able to get distracted and focused on other things. Even their own conferences called Next because Google is more interested in what they're shipping than what they're building, than what they're currently shipping. I think that it is a fantasy to pretend that that is somehow going to change without a complete cultural transformation, which again, I don't see the seeds being planted for. >> Some sick burns in there Stu, rebuttal? >> Yeah. So the final word that I'll give you on this is, one of the most important pieces of what we need today. And we need to tomorrow is our data. Now, there are some concerns when we talk about Google and data, but Google also has strong strength in data, understanding data, helping customers leverage data. So while I agree to your points about the cultural shift, they have the opportunity to take the services that they have, and enable customers to be able to take their data to move forward to the wonderful world of AI, cloud, edge computing, and all of those pieces and solve the solution with data. >> Strong words there. All right, that's a tough one. Again, I hope you're all out there voting for who you think won that round. Let's move on to the last round before we start hitting the lightning questions. I put a call out on several channels and social media for people to have questions that they want you to debate. And this one comes from Og-AWS Slack member, Angelo. Angelo asks, "What about IBM Cloud?" Stu you're pro, Corey you're con. Let's have Stu you're up first. The question is, what about IBM Cloud? >> All right, so great question, Angelo. I think when you look at the cloud providers, first of all, you have to understand that they're not all playing the same game. We talked about AWS and they are the elephant in the room that moves nimbly as a cheetah. Every other provider plays a little bit of a different game. Google has strength in data. Microsoft, of course, has their, business productivity applications. IBM has a strong legacy. Now, Corey is going to say that they are just legacy and you need to think about them but IBM has strong innovation. They are a player in really what we call chapter two of the cloud. So when we start talking about multicloud, when we start talking about living in many environments, IBM was the first one to partner with VMware for VMware cloud before the mega VMware AWS announcement, there was IBM up on stage and if I remember right, they actually have more VMware customers on IBM Cloud than they do in the AWS cloud. So over my shoulder here, there's of course, the Red Hat $34 billion to bet on that multicloud solution. So as we talk about containerization, and Kubernetes, Red Hat is strongly positioned in open-source, and flexibility. So you really need a company that understands both the infrastructure side and the application side. IBM has database, IBM has infrastructure, IBM has long been the leader in middleware, and therefore IBM has a real chance to be a strong player in this next generation of platforms. Doesn't mean that they're necessarily going to go attack Amazon, they're partnering across the board. So I think you will see a kinder, gentler IBM and they are leveraging open source and Red Hat and I think we've let the dogs out on the IBM solution. >> Indeed. >> So before Corey goes, I feel the need to remind everyone that the views expressed here are not the views of my employer nor myself, nor necessarily of Corey or Stu. I have Corey. >> I haven't even said anything yet. And you're disclaiming what I'm about to say. >> I'm just warning the audience, 'cause I can't wait to hear what you're going to say next. >> Sounds like I have to go for the high score. All right. IBM's best days are behind it. And that is pretty clear. They like to get angry when people talk about how making the jokes about a homogenous looking group of guys in blue suits as being all IBM has to offer. They say that hasn't been true since the '80s. But that was the last time people cared about IBM in any meaningful sense and no one has bothered to update the relevance since then. Now, credit where due, I am seeing an awful lot of promoted tweets from IBM into my timeline, all talking about how amazing their IBM blockchain technology is. And yes, that is absolutely the phrasing of someone who's about to turn it all around and win the game. I don't see it happening. >> Stu, rebuttal? >> Look, Corey, IBM was the company that brought us the UPC code. They understand Mac manufacturing and blockchain actually shows strong presence in supply chain management. So maybe you're not quite aware of some of the industries that IBM is an expert in. So that is one of the big strengths of IBM, they really understand verticals quite well. And, at the IBM things show, I saw a lot in the healthcare world, had very large customers that were leveraging those solutions. So while you might dismiss things when they say, Oh, well, one of the largest telecom providers in India are leveraging OpenStack and you kind of go with them, well, they've got 300 million customers, and they're thrilled with the solution that they're doing with IBM, so it is easy to scoff at them, but IBM is a reliable, trusted provider out there and still very strong financially and by the way, really excited with the new leadership in place there, Arvind Krishna knows product, Jim Whitehurst came from the Red Hat side. So don't be sleeping on IBM. >> Corey, any last words? >> I think that they're subject to massive disruption as soon as they release the AWS 400 mainframe in the cloud. And I think that before we, it's easy to forget this, but before Google was turning off Reader, IBM stopped making the model M buckling spring keyboards. Those things were masterpieces and that was one of the original disappointments that we learned that we can't fall in love with companies, because companies in turn will not love us back. IBM has demonstrated that. Lastly, I think I'm thrilled to be working with IBM is exactly the kind of statement one makes only at gunpoint. >> Hey, Corey, by the way, I think you're spending too much time looking at all titles of AWS services, 'cause you don't know the difference between your mainframe Z series and the AS/400 which of course is heavily pending. >> Also the i series. Oh yes. >> The i series. So you're conflating your system, which still do billions of dollars a year, by the way. >> Oh, absolutely. But that's not we're not seeing new banks launching and then building on top of IBM mainframe technology. I'm not disputing that mainframes were phenomenal. They were, I just don't see them as the future and I don't see a cloud story. >> Only a cloud live your mainframe related smack talk. That's the important thing that we're getting to here. All right, we move-- >> I'm hoping there's an announcement from CloudHealth by VMware that they also will now support mainframe analytics as well as traditional cloud. >> I'll look into that. >> Excellent. >> We're moving on to the lightning rounds. Each debater in this round is only going to get 60 seconds for their opening argument and then 30 seconds for a rebuttal. We're going to hit some really, really big important questions here like this first one, which is who deserves to sit on the Iron Throne at the end of "Game of Thrones?" I've been told that Corey has never seen this TV show so I'm very interested to hear him argue for Sansa. But let's Sansa Stark, let's hear Stu go first with his argument for Jon Snow. Stu one minute on the clock, go. >> All right audience let's hear it from the king of the north first of all. Nothing better than Jon Snow. He made the ultimate sacrifice. He killed his love to save Westeros from clear destruction because Khaleesi had gone mad. So Corey is going to say something like it's time for the women to do this but it was a woman she went mad. She started burning the place down and Jon Snow saved it so it only makes sense that he should have done it. Everyone knows it was a travesty that he was sent back to the Wall, and to just wander the wild. So absolutely Jon Snow vote for King of the North. >> Compelling arguments. Corey, why should Sansa Stark sit on the throne? Never having seen the show I've just heard bits and pieces about it and all involves things like bloody slaughters, for example, the AWS partner Expo right before the keynote is best known as AWS red wedding. We take a look at that across the board and not having seen it, I don't know the answer to this question, but how many of the folks who are in positions of power we're in fact mediocre white dudes and here we have Stu advocating for yet another one. Sure, this is a lightning round of a fun event but yes, we should continue to wind up selecting this mediocre white person has many parallels in terms of power, et cetera, politics, current tech industry as a whole. I think she's right we absolutely should give someone with a look like this a potential opportunity to see what they can do instead. >> Ouch, Stu 30 seconds rebuttal. >> Look, I would just give a call out to the women in the audience and say, don't you want Jon Snow to be king? >> I also think it's quite bold of Corey to say that he looks like Kit Harington. Corey, any last words? >> I think that it sad you think Stu was running for office at this point because he's become everyone's least favorite animal, a panda bear. >> Fire. All right, so on to the next question. This one also very important near and dear to my heart personally, is a hot dog a sandwich. Corey you'll be arguing no, Stu will be arguing yes. I must also add this important disclaimer that these assignments are made by me and might not reflect the actual views of the debaters here so Corey, you're up first. Why is a hot dog not a sandwich? >> Because you'll get punched in the face if you go to a deli of any renown and order a hot dog. That is not what they serve there. They wind up having these famous delicatessen in New York they have different sandwiches named after different celebrities. I shudder to think of the deadly insult that naming a hot dog after a celebrity would be to that not only celebrity in some cases also the hot dog too. If you take a look and you want to get sandwiches for lunch? Sure. What are we having catered for this event? Sandwiches. You show up and you see a hot dog, you're looking around the hot dog to find the rest of the sandwich. Now while it may check all of the boxes for a technical definition of what a sandwich is, as I'm sure Stu will boringly get into, it's not what people expect, there's a matter of checking the actual boxes, and then delivering what customers actually want. It's why you can let your product roadmap be guided by cart by customers or by Gartner but rarely both. >> Wow, that one hurts. Stu, why is the hot dog a sandwich? >> Yeah so like Corey, I'm sorry that you must not have done some decent traveling 'cause I'm glad you brought up the definition because I'm not going to bore you with yes, there's bread and there's meat and there's toppings and everything else like that but there are some phenomenal hot dogs out there. I traveled to Iceland a few years ago, and there's a little hot dog stand out there that's been there for over 40 or 50 years. And it's one of the top 10 culinary experience I put in. And I've been to Michelin star restaurants. You go to Chicago and any local will be absolutely have to try our creation. There are regional hot dogs. There are lots of solutions there and so yeah, of course you don't go to a deli. Of course if you're going to the deli for takeout and you're buying meats, they do sell hot dogs, Corey, it's just not the first thing that you're going to order on the menu. So I think you're underselling the hot dog. Whether you are a child and grew up and like eating nothing more than the mustard or ketchup, wherever you ate on it, or if you're a world traveler, and have tried some of the worst options out there. There are a lot of options for hot dogs so hot dog, sandwich, culinary delight. >> Stu, don't think we didn't hear that pun. I'm not sure if that counts for or against you, but Corey 30 seconds rebuttal. >> In the last question, you were agitating for putting a white guy back in power. Now you're sitting here arguing that, "Oh some of my best friend slash meals or hot dogs." Yeah, I think we see what you're putting down Stu and it's not pretty, it's really not pretty and I think people are just going to start having to ask some very pointed, delicate questions. >> Tough words to hear Stu. Close this out or rebuttal. >> I'm going to take the high road, Rachel and leave that where it stands. >> I think that is smart. All right, next question. Tabs versus spaces. Stu, you're going to argue for tabs, Corey, you're going to argue for spaces just to make this fun. Stu, 60 seconds on the clock, you're up first. Why are tabs the correct approach? >> First of all, my competitor here really isn't into pop culture. So he's probably not familiar with the epic Silicon Valley argument over this discussion. So, Corey, if you could explain the middle of algorithm, we will be quite impressed but since you don't, we'll just have to go with some of the technology first. Looks, developers, we want to make things simple on you. Tabs, they're faster to do they take up less memory. Yes, they aren't quite as particular as using spaces but absolutely, they get the job done and it is important to just, focus on productivity, I believe that the conversation as always, the less code you can write, the better and therefore, if you don't have to focus on exactly how many spaces and you can just simplify with the tabs, you're gona get close enough for most of the job. And it is easier to move forward and focus on the real work rather than some pedantic discussion as to whether one thing is slightly more efficient than the other. >> Great points Stu. Corey, why is your pedantic approach better? >> No one is suggesting you sit there and whack the spacebar four times or eight times you hit the Tab key, but your editor should be reasonably intelligent enough to expand that. At that point, you have now set up a precedent where in other cases, other parts of your codebase you're using spaces because everyone always does. And that winds up in turn, causing a weird dissonance you'll see a bunch of linters throwing issues if you use tabs as a direct result. Now the wrong answer is, of course, and I think Steve will agree with me both in the same line. No one is ever in favor of that. But I also want to argue with Stu over his argument about "Oh, it saves a little bit of space "is the reason one should go with tabs instead." Sorry, that argument said bye bye a long time ago, and that time was the introduction of JavaScript, where it takes many hundreds of Meg's of data to wind up building hello world. Yeah, at that point optimization around small character changes are completely irrelevant. >> Stu, rebuttal? >> Yeah, I didn't know that Corey did not try to defend that he had any idea what Silicon Valley was, or any of the references in there. So Rachel, we might have to avoid any other pop culture references. We know Corey just looks at very specific cloud services and can't have fun with some of the broader themes there. >> You're right my mistake Stu. Corey, any last words? >> It's been suggested that whole middle out seen on the whiteboard was came from a number of conversations I used to have with my co-workers as in people who were sitting in the room with me watching that episode said, Oh my God, I've been in the room while you had this debate with your friend and I will not name here because they at least still strive to remain employable. Yeah, it's, I understand the value in the picking these fights, we could have gone just as easily with vi versus Emacs, AWS versus Azure, or anything else that you really care to pick a fight with. But yeah, this is exactly the kind of pedantic fight that everyone loves to get involved with, which is why I walked a different path and pick other ridiculous arguments. >> Speaking of those ridiculous arguments that brings us to our last debate topic of the day, Corey you are probably best known for your strong feelings about the pronunciation of the acronym for Amazon Machine Image. I will not be saying how I think it is pronounced. We're going to have you argue each. Stu, you're going to argue that the acronym Amazon Machine Image should be pronounced to rhyme with butterfly. Corey, you'll be arguing that it rhymes with mommy. Stu, rhymes with butterfly. Let's hear it, 60 seconds on the clock. >> All right, well, Rachel, first of all, I wish I could go to the videotape because I have clear video evidence from a certain Corey Quinn many times arguing why AMI is the proper way to pronounce this, but it is one of these pedantic arguments, is it GIF or GIF? Sometimes you go back and you say, Okay, well, there's the way that the community did it. And the way that oh wait, the founder said it was a certain way. So the only argument against AMI, Jeff Barr, when he wrote about the history of all of the blogging that he's done from AWS said, I wish when I had launched the service that I pointed out the correct pronunciation, which I won't even deem to talk it because the community has agreed by and large that AMI is the proper way to pronounce it. And boy, the tech industry is rific on this kind of thing. Is it SQL and no SQL and you there's various ways that we butcher these constantly. So AMI, almost everyone agrees and the lead champion for this argument, of course is none other than Corey Quinn. >> Well, unfortunately today Corey needs to argue the opposite. So Corey, why does Amazon Machine Image when pronounce as an acronym rhyme with mommy? >> Because the people who built it at Amazon say that it is and an appeal to authorities generally correct when the folks built this. AWS has said repeatedly that they're willing to be misunderstood for long periods of time. And this is one of those areas in which they have been misunderstood by virtually the entire industry, but they are sticking to their guns and continuing to wind up advocating for AMI as the correct pronunciation. But I'll take it a step further. Let's take a look at the ecosystem companies. Whenever Erica Brescia, who is now the COO and GitHub, but before she wound up there, she was the founder of Bitnami. And whenever I call it Bitn AMI she looks like she is barely successfully restraining herself from punching me right in the mouth for that pronunciation of the company. Clearly, it's Bitnami named after the original source AMI, which is what the proper term pronunciation of the three letter acronym becomes. Fight me Stu. >> Interesting. Interesting argument, Stu 30 seconds, rebuttal. >> Oh, the only thing he can come up with is that, you take the word Bitnami and because it has that we know that things sound very different if you put a prefix or a suffix, if you talk to the Kubernetes founders, Kubernetes should be coop con but the people that run the conference, say it cube con so there are lots of debates between the people that create it and the community. I in general, I'm going to vote with the community most of the time. Corey, last words on this topic 'cause I know you have very strong feelings about it. >> I'm sorry, did Stu just say Kubernetes and its community as bastions of truth when it comes to pronouncing anything correctly? Half of that entire conference is correcting people's pronunciation of Kubernetes, Kubernetes, Kubernetes, Kubernetes and 15 other mispronunciations that they will of course yell at you for but somehow they're right on this one. All right. >> All right, everyone, I hope you've been voting all along for who you think is winning each round, 'cause this has been a tough call. But I would like to say that's a wrap for today. big thank you to our debaters. You've been very good sports, even when I've made you argue for against things that clearly are hurting you deep down inside, we're going to take a quick break and tally all the votes. And we're going to announce a winner up on the Zoom Q and A. So go to the top of your screen, Click on Zoom Q and A to join us and hear the winner announced and also get a couple minutes to chat live with Corey and Stu. Thanks again for attending this session. And thank you again, Corey and Stu. It's been The Great Cloud Debate. All right, so each round I will announce the winner and then we're going to announce the overall winner. Remember that Corey and Stu are playing not just for bragging rights and ownership of all of the internet for the next 24 hours, but also for lunch to be donated to their local hospital. Corey is having lunch donated to the California Pacific Medical Centre. And Stu is having lunch donated to Boston Medical Centre. All right, first up round one multicloud versus monocloud. Stu, you were arguing for multicloud, Corey, you were arguing for one cloud. Stu won that one by 64% of the vote. >> The vendor fix was in. >> Yeah, well, look, CloudHealth started all in AWS by supporting customers across those environments. So and Corey you basically conceded it because we said multicloud does not mean we evenly split things up. So you got to work on those two skills, buddy, 'cause, absolutely you just handed the victory my way. So thank you so much and thank you to the audience for understanding multicloud is where we are today, and unfortunately, it's where we're gonnao be in the future. So as a whole, we're going to try to make it better 'cause it is, as Corey and I both agree, a bit of a mess right now. >> Don't get too cocky. >> One of those days the world is going to catch up with me and realize that ad hominem is not a logical fallacy so much as it is an excellent debating skill. >> Well, yeah, I was going to say, Stu, don't get too cocky because round two serverless versus containers. Stu you argued for containers, Corey you argued for serverless. Corey you won that one with 65, 66 or most percent of the vote. >> You can't fight the future. >> Yeah, and as you know Rachel I'm a big fan of serverless. I've been to the serverless comp, I actually just published an excellent interview with Liberty Mutual and what they're doing with serverless. So love the future, it's got a lot of maturity to deliver on the promise that it has today but containers isn't going anyway or either so. >> So, you're not sad that you lost that one. Got it, good concession speech. Next one up was cloud wars specifically Google. is Google a real contender in the clouds? Stu, you were arguing yes they are. Corey, you were arguing no they aren't. Corey also won this round was 72% of the votes. >> Yeah, it's one of those things where at some point, it's sort of embarrassing if you miss a six inch pot. So it's nice that that didn't happen in this case. >> Yeah, so Corey, is this the last week that we have any competitors to AWS? Is that what we're saying? And we all accept our new overlords. Thank you so much, Corey. >> Well I hope not, my God, I don't know what to be an Amazonian monoculture anymore than I do anyone else. Competition makes all of us better. But again, we're seeing a lot of anti competitive behaviour. For example, took until this year for Microsoft to finally make calculator uninstallable and I trust concerned took a long time to work its way of course. >> Yeah, and Corey, I think everyone is listening to what you've been saying about what Google's doing with Google Meet and forcing that us when we make our pieces there. So definitely there's some things that Google culture, we'd love them to clean up. And that's one of the things that's really held back Google's enterprise budget is that advertised advertising driven culture. So we will see. We are working hand-- >> That was already opted out of Hangouts, how do we fix it? We call it something else that they haven't opted out of yet. >> Hey, but Corey, I know you're looking forward to at least two months of weekly Google live stuff starting this summer. So we'll have a lot of time to talk about google. >> Let's not kid ourselves they're going to cancel it halfway through. (Stu laughs) >> Boys, I thought we didn't have any more smack talk left in you but clearly you do. So, all right, moving on. Next slide. This is the last question that we did in the main part of the debate. IBM Cloud. What about IBM Cloud was the question, Stu, you were pro, Corey you were con. Corey, you won this one again with 62% of the vote and for the main. >> It wasn't just me, IBM Cloud also won. The problem is that competition was oxymoron of the day. >> I don't know Rachel, I thought this one had a real shot as to putting where IBM fits. I thought we had a good discussion there. It seemed like some of the early voting was going my way but it just went otherwise. >> It did. We had some last minute swings in these polls. They were going one direction they rapidly swung another it's a fickle crowd today. So right now we've got Corey with three points Stu with one but really the lightning round anyone's game. They got very close here. The next question, lightning round question one, was "Game of Thrones" who deserves to sit on the Iron Throne? Stu was arguing for Jon Snow, Corey was arguing for Sansa Stark also Corey has never seen Game of Thrones. This was shockingly close with Stu at 51.5% of the vote took the crown on this King of the North Stu. >> Well, I'm thrilled and excited that King of the North pulled things out because it would have been just a complete embarrassment if I lost to Corey on this question. >> It would. >> It was the right answer, and as you said, he had no idea what he's talking about, which, unfortunately is how he is on most of the rest of it. You just don't realize that he doesn't know what he's talking about. 'Cause he uses all those fast words and discussion points. >> Well, thank you for saying the quiet part out loud. Now, I am completely crestfallen as to the results of this question about a thing I've never seen and could not possibly care less about not going in my favor. I will someday managed to get over this. >> I'm glad you can really pull yourself together and keep on going with life, Corey it's inspiring. All right, next question. Was the lightning round question two is a hot dog a sandwich? Stu, you were arguing yes. Corey, you were arguing no. Corey landslide, you won this 75% of the vote. >> It all comes down to customer expectations. >> Yeah. >> Just disappointment. Disappointment. >> All right, next question tabs versus spaces. Another very close one. Stu, what were you arguing for Stu? >> I was voting tabs. >> Tabs, yeah. And Corey, you were arguing spaces. This did not turn out the way I expected. So Stu you lost this by slim margin Corey 53% of the vote. You won with spaces. >> Yep. And I use spaces in my day to day life. So that's a position I can actually believe in. >> See, I thought I was giving you the opposite point of view there. I mistook you for the correct answer, in my opinion, which is tabs. >> Well, it is funnier to stalk me on Twitter and look what I have to there than on GitHub where I just completely commit different kinds of atrocities. So I don't blame you. >> Caught that pun there. All right, the last rounds. Speaking of atrocities, AMI, Amazon Machine Image is it pronounced AMI or AMI? >> I better not have won this one. >> So Stu you were arguing that this is pronounced AMI rhymes with butterfly. Corey, you were arguing that it's pronounced AMI like mommy. Any guesses under who won this? >> It better be Stu. >> It was a 50, 50 split complete tie. So no points to anyone. >> For your complete and utterly failed on this because I should have won in a landslide. My entire argument was based on every discussion you've had on this. So, Corey I think they're just voting for you. So I'm really surprised-- >> I think at this point it shows I'm such a skilled debater that I could have also probably brought you to a standstill taking the position that gravity doesn't exist. >> You're a master of few things, Corey. Usually it's when you were dressed up nicely and I think they like the t-shirt. It's a nice t-shirt but not how we're usually hiding behind the attire. >> Truly >> Well. >> Clothes don't always make a demand. >> Gentlemen, I would like to say overall our winner today with five points is Corey. Congratulations, Corey. >> Thank you very much. It's always a pleasure to mop the floor with you Stu. >> Actually I was going to ask Stu to give the acceptance speech for you, Corey and, Corey, if you could give a few words of concession, >> Oh, that's a different direction. Stu, we'll start with you, I suppose. >> Yeah, well, thank you to the audience. Obviously, you voted for me without really understanding that I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm a loudmouth on Twitter. I just create a bunch of arguments out there. I'm influential for reasons I don't really understand. But once again, thank you for your votes so much. >> Yeah, it's always unfortunate to wind up losing a discussion with someone and you wouldn't consider it losing 'cause most of the time, my entire shtick is that I sit around and talk to people who know what they're talking about. And I look smart just by osmosis sitting next to them. Video has been rough on me. So I was sort of hoping that I'd be able to parlay that into something approaching a victory. But sadly, that hasn't worked out quite so well. This is just yet another production brought to you by theCube which shut down my original idea of calling it a bunch of squares. (Rachael laughs) >> All right, well, on that note, I would like to say thank you both Stu and Corey. I think we can close out officially the debate, but we can all stick around for a couple more minutes in case any fans have questions for either of them or want to get them-- >> Find us a real life? Yeah. >> Yeah, have a quick Zoom fight. So thanks, everyone, for attending. And thank you Stu, thank you Corey. This has been The Great Cloud Debate.

>> Live, from Barcelona Spain, it's theCube! Covering, KubeCon CloudNativeCon Europe 2019: Brought to you by RedHat, the Cloud Native Computing Foundation and the Ecosystem Partners. >> Hi, and welcome back. this is theCube's coverage of KubeCon CloudNativeCon 2019 here in Barcelona, Spain. We're at the end of day one of two days of live, wall-to-wall coverage. I'm Stu Miniman, and at the end of the day, what we try to do always is do our independent analysis and say what we really think. And joining me is someone that usually has no problem telling you exactly what he thinks online. So, I've challenged Mr. Corey Quinn. Cloud economist, of the Duckbill Group. and the curator, author, Last Week in AWS. To tell us what he actually thinks. >> Well, Stu, you know what your problem is. All the best feedback starts off that way. Now, this has been a fascinating experience for me. This is the first time I've ever been to KubeCon. I didn't quite know what to expect- >> It's KubeCon, not Koob-Con. Come on. It is in GitHub, how you have to make the pronunciation correct. >> We are on theCube. We would think that we would be subject matter experts on this. >> CNCF will be cracking down on you if I don't correct you on this. >> I still maintain we're in Barcelona, Italy. But that's a whole separate argument to have with other people. >> Yes, well, most Americans are geographically challenged. And we understand you have some challenges too. >> Exactly, most Americans need to learn geography, we go to war. (chuckling) >> All right, so, Corey, I guess the first question for you is, you usually go to mostly AWS shows. Most of the customers we've talked to have been AWS customers. So is this feeling much different from the usual show you go to? >> The focus of the conversations is different, and to be clear, I'm not much of a cloud partisan myself. I deal with AWS primarily because, not for nothing, that's where my customers are. That tends to be exactly where the expensive problems tend to live. For better or worse. If that changes, so will I. >> So, you're saying yet that the other cloud providers don't have their customers big enough bills, or they just haven't figured out how you might be able to help them in the future? >> To be very honest with you. Yes, is the short answer. Right now on aggregate, my customers spend about a billion dollars a year on AWS. I don't see the same order of magnitude on other providers, but it's coming. It is very clearly coming. None of these providers are shrinking as far as size goes. It's largely a matter of time. >> Alright. But Corey, I hope at least you've understood that Kubernetes at the center for all things. And that multi-cloud is the way that we are today and will always be in the future. And we should all hold hands and sing along, that we all get along. Is that what you've learned so far? >> I think that's absolutely what I've learned so far. It comes down to religion and it's perfectly name for it. I mean, Kubernetes was the Greek God of spending money on cloud services. >> All right. But seriously. Corey, I think one of the things that I really liked is. We talk to customers and there were some interesting things at least I heard when you talked about they see huge value in what they're doing with Kubernetes. Many of them only have one cloud provider today. Yet they are choosing to lay on Kubernetes either with AWS or with another solution there. What's been your take of what you've heard about. Kind of the why and what they're doing? >> There've been a few different reasons on it. One that resonated with me did validate what I talked about at the beginning of the day. Which was, that by trying to position yourself to be strategically amenable to any potential provider you might want to use in the future. You are sacrificing velocity. And you're gaining agility, losing velocity to do that. Is that trade off worth it? I don't think I'm qualified to judge. I think that's a decision every business has to make on its own. My argument has always been that if that's the decision you make, do it knowingly. And I don't think we've talked to anyone who's made that unknowingly today. >> Yeah. I think that's a really good point. What is it, you know, surprised you or interest you that we've heard so far? >> I have to be honest. I have a long and storied history in open source. I was staff at the Freenode IRC network for about a decade. Which was an interesting time. And I've seen a lot of stuff, but I don't think I've ever seen two open source projects merge before. The fact that we saw that today is still swirling around in my head for better or worse. >> Yeah. And it was OpenCensus and OpenTracing coming together. Open Telemetry. So, definitely check out Ben Siegelman. and it was Morgan McLean from a Google cloud. You know, really interested in discussion. I don't think we're sharing too much when we say off camera. There were like, look, it's like, yes, they got us in a room and we worked, but we'll try not to throw punches here on the set and everything like that. We understand that look, there are people that put these things together and you have smart people that build things the way that it should be done. And these were not like two very similar projects going in the same direction, they were built with different design principles and therefore there'll be somethings that they all need to reconcile to be able to go forward. But yeah, very interesting. >> And everyone we spoke to today was very focused on what the needs of their customers, whoever they happen to be and how to meet those customers and their business requirements. There's no one that we spoke to that was sitting here saying, oh, this is the right answer because it is technically correct. The answer is we're always of the form. This is what we need to do in order to serve customers. And it's very hard to argue against that strategy. >> All right, but none of this really matters because Serverless, right Corey? >> Oh, absolutely. Serverless is the way and the light of the future and to some extent I believe that. >> But they're not doing Serverless. I'm pretty sure they're half a step behind you. Yes, it tends to be, it's easy to make go ahead and die and say, Oh, if you're not running the absolute latest bleeding edge thing, you're behind, you're backwards, etc. And I don't get that all the sense that that is reality. I think that there's, if you're building something greenfield today, you are fundamentally going to make different choices, than if you have something you're trying to carry forward. And I don't just mean carrying forward a technical sense. I mean carrying it forward in terms of process, in terms of culture, in terms of existing business units that need to modernize. People are moving in the same general direction. The question that I think is still on answered is, today, there's a perception rightly or wrongly, that Containers are slightly behind Serverless. I don't know that that necessarily holds true. I think that they are aligned towards the same business value. I think, judge either one of them by today's constraints in the context of longer term strategy is a mistake. I'm curious to see what happens. >> Corey, I love. So we had Jeff Brewer from Intuit and they were like look, we're doing Serverless, we're doing a lot of Containerless stuffs and I'd love it for my developer not to have to worry about. And they've had been moved down that path. So, we know one of the truisms out there is everything in IT is always additive. When you talk to them and say, oh, well I'm going into cloud wait, I still have some stuff that, running on my main frame or my eyes series. And that we'll probably be running there when I've retired. We were talking offline. It's like, well, there's been a little resurgence in COBOL. Just because it did not die after Y2K and so did these things always come back and it's always additive and the longer you've been in business as a company, the more legacy you need to be able to maintain and extend and connect to where you want to go with the future. >> It's almost a sawtooth curve. As complexity continues to rise it becomes to a point where it's untenable. There's something that comes out that abstracts that away and you're back down to a level a human being might actually be able to understand. And you take it a step further and you start to see it again and again and again, and then it collapses down. Docker and a lot of the handbuilt orchestration systems were like that. And then Kubernetes came out. Initially it was fairly simple and then things have been added to it now. And I think we're climbing that sawtooth curve again. Whether or not that maintains? Whether or not that simplifies again? I find that history rhymes particularly in tech. >> Well yeah and I always worry sometimes when you talk about the abstraction layer you got to be really careful what you're abstracting. What we see here a lot, is a lot of times it's people, how can I just consume that? I want to buy it as a service and somebody take care of that not, it hides the complexity for me but some of the complexity is still there. >> Right. So our site is now intermittently slow what do you plan to do? Its update my resume immediately cause we're never untangling that Gordian knot of an infrastructure. That's not a great answer but it is an honest one in some shops. >> I've talked to, we know that there was, for a long time people outsourced what they were doing. And we need to make sure that when you're buying something as a service that you haven't outsourced, That you understand what's important to your business, what happens when things go wrong. We had some discussion today about, networking and observability that we need to be able to go down that rabbit hole, at least turn to somebody who can. Because just because I can't touch that gear doesn't mean my next not on the line, If something goes wrong. >> You can outsource a lot of work. You can't outsource responsibility. I put slightly more succinctly, the line I've always liked was you own your own availability. If you have a provider that you've thrown a lot of these things over to and they go down, well sure you're going to have loud angry phone calls and maybe a few bucks back from an SLA credit. We your customers we're down and we're suffering. So the choices you made impact your businesses perception in the market and your customer's happiness. So as much as fun as it is to be able to throw things over the wall for someone else to deal with, you're still responsible. And I think that people forget that at their own peril. >> One of the things I like. I've got a long history in open source to. If there are things that aren't perfect or things that are maturing. A lot of times we're talking about them in public. Because there is a roadmap and people are working on it and we can all go to the repositories and see where people are complaining. So at a show like this, I feel like we do have some level of transparency and we can actually have realism here. What's been your experience so far? >> I think that people have been remarkably transparent about the challenges that they're facing in a way that you don't often get at a vendor show. Where you have a single vendor, you're at their show, regardless of who that might be. You're not going to be invited back if you wind up with a litany of people coming on a video show or a podcast or screaming and sobbing in the bathroom, however you want to, whatever your media is. Just have a litany of complaints the entire time or make that provider look bad. I don't sense that there's any of that pressure. And for some reason, and this is my first coop gone, so maybe this is just the way this culture it works. Everyone, regardless of who they worked for or what they're working on or what their experience has been, seems happy. I can only assume there's something in the water. >> All right. Well, I've just been informed that the CNCF had asked me to remove Corey because he refuses to say KubeCon. But, Corey. Since this might be your last time on the program, any other final words that you have for it or I will let you do something very rare and if you have any questions for me. Love on my way. >> Absolutely. What did you find today that you didn't expect to find? >> The one that jumps out for me really is two things. One, we discussed it already is the, the observability piece coming together. The other one is. You talk about that maturation of where Amazon fits in this ecosystem. And we had lovely conversation, with Abby fuller. But not just that one. We talked to the users and how they think about it. Which is what really matters is, there's so much talk about, who contributes more code and who does the most here. But look, we're talking cloud. Most of these customers are using AWS as if not the cloud, one of the clouds. I've set it on theCube many times. When you live in a hybrid and multi-cloud world and the public cloud, AWS is the far leader. There's no debating that. So they are participating here. They are doing plenty for what their customers want and they give choice and they listen to the feedback. So that was interesting to me that maturation of where that sits because when I come into the show and many times it is, it is the open source in this whole ecosystem, trying to prevent Amazon from taking over the world. And look, we want a good robust ecosystem out there. >> We absolutely do. >> While I have many friends that work for Amazon. We probably don't want to all be working for a single company down the road. >> I certainly don't. >> We like a nice robust ecosystem where there is choice out there and that keeps its (mumbles). So that maturation of where they are on has been interesting to me so far, especially from the user stand point. >> Very much so. I don't think that anyone wants to look back and say, wow, I'm sure glad we have only one option in this entire space that does anything useful. And then a whole bunch of could have the didn't. And for better or worse, I don't think that the future is nearly as clear cut as the past of cloud. Historically, AWS has been the 800 pound gorilla. I think that we hearing fascinating things from GCP and from Azure. I don't necessarily think that the future is preordained. I do think right now it is AWS game to lose, but I'm starting to see a lot of other players in his face start to make a lot of very interesting and arguably very correct moves. >> All right. Well, we know you as our audience have lots of places where you can turn to find your information and we are always pleased that when you turn to us to watch theCube. if you have any feedback for ourselves, Corey Quinn and myself, Stu Miniman. Reach out on Twitter. We are easy to reach on that. And we have lots of posts. So if you're like, Hey, tired of looking at this mug here. Let us know. But hopefully we're asking the questions and digging into the areas that you want and we'll help your businesses going forward. So we are at the end of day one, Two days live coverage here at KubeCon CloudNativeCon. This is the cube. You're a leader in live tech coverage. Thanks for watching. (music)