>> Narrator: Live from San Francisco. It's the theCUBE covering RSA Conference 2020 San Francisco, brought to you by SiliconAngle Media. >> Alright, welcome to theCUBE coverage here at RSA Conference in San Francisco and Moscone Halls, theCUBE. I'm John Furrier, the host of theCUBE, in a cyber security is all about encryption data and also security. We have a very hot startup here, that amazing guest, Dr. Ellison Anne Williams, CEO and Founder of Enveil just recently secured a $10 million Series A Funding really attacking a real problem around encryption and use. Again, data ,security, analytics, making it all secure is great. Allison, and thanks for coming on. Appreciate your time. >> Thanks for having me. >> So congratulations on the funding before we get started into the interview talking about the hard news, you guys that are around the funding. How long have you guys been around? What's the funding going to do? What are you guys doing? >> Yeah, so we're about three and a half years old as a company. We just announced our Series A close last week. So that was led by C5. And their new US Funds The Impact Fund and participating. Other partners included folks like MasterCard, Capital One Ventures, Bloomberg, Beta 1843, etc. >> So some names jumped in C5 led the round. >> For sure. >> How did this get started? What was the idea behind this three years you've been actually doing some work? Are you going to production? Is it R&D? Is it in market? Give us a quick update on the status of product and solution? >> Yeah, so full production. For production of the product. We're in fact in 2.0 of the release. And so we got our start inside of the National Security Agency, where I spent the majority of my career. And we developed some breakthroughs in an area of technology called homomorphic encryption, that allows you to perform computations into the encrypted domain as if they were in the unencrypted world. So the tech had never existed in a practical capacity. So we knew that bringing seeds of that technology out of the intelligence community and using it to seed really and start the company, we would be creating a new commercial market. >> So look at this, right? So you're at the NSA, >> Correct >> Your practitioner, they're doing a lot of work in this area, pioneering a new capability. And did the NSA spin it out did they fund it was the seed capital there or did you guys bootstrap it >> No. So our seed round was done by an entity called Data Tribe. So designed to take teams in technologies that were coming out of the IC that wanted to commercialize to do so. So we took seed funding from them. And then we were actually one of the youngest company ever to be in the RSA Innovation Sandbox here in 2017, to be one of the winners and that's where the conversation really started to change around this technology called homomorphic encryption, the market category space called securing data in use and what that meant. And so from there, we started running the initial version of a product out in the commercial world and we encountered two universal reaction. One that we were expecting and one that we weren't. And the one that we were expecting is that people said, "holy cow, this actually works". Because what we say we do keeping everything encrypted during processing. Sounds pretty impossible. It's not just the math. And then the second reaction that we encountered that we weren't expecting is those initial early adopters turned around and said to us, "can we strategically invest in you?" So our second round of funding was actually a Strategic Round where folks like Bloomberg beta,Thomson Reuters, USA and Incue Towel came into the company. >> That's Pre Series A >> Pre Series A >> So you still moving along, if a sandbox, you get some visibility >> Correct. >> Then were the products working on my god is you know, working. That's great. So I want to get into before I get into some of the overhead involved in traditionally its encryption there always has been that overhead tax. And you guys seem to solve that. But can you describe first data-at-rest versus data-in-motion and data-in-user. data at rest, as means not doing anything but >> Yeah, >> In flight or in you so they the same, is there a difference? Can you just tell us the difference of someone this can be kind of confusing. >> So it's helpful to think of data security in three parts that we call the triad. So securing data at rest on the file system and the database, etc. This would be your more traditional in database encryption, or file based encryption also includes things like access control. The second area, the data security triad is securing data- in- transit when it's moving around through the network. So securing data at rest and in transit. Very well solution. A lot of big name companies do that today, folks like Talus and we partner with them, Talus, Gemalto, etc. Now, the third portion of the data security triad is what happens to that data when you go use or process it in some way when it becomes most valuable. And that's where we focus. So as a company, we secure data-in-use when it's being used or processed. So what does that mean? It means we can do things like take searches or analytics encrypt them, and then go run them without ever decrypting them at any point during processing. So like I said, this represents a new commercial market, where we're seeing it manifest most often right now are in things like enabling secure data sharing, and collaboration, or enabling secure data monetization, because its privacy preserving and privacy enabling as a capability. >> And so that I get this right, the problem that you solved is that during the end use parts of the triad, it had to be decrypted first and then encrypted again, and that was the vulnerability area. Look, can you describe kind of like, the main problem that you guys saw was that-- >> So think more about, if you've got data and you want to give me access to it, I'm a completely different entity. And the way that you're going to give me access to it is allowing me to run a search over your data holdings. We see this quite a bit in between two banks in the areas of anti-money laundering or financial crime. So if I'm going to go run a search in your environment, say I'm going to look for someone that's an EU resident. Well, their personal information is covered under GDPR. Right? So if I go run that search in your environment, just because I'm coming to look for a certain individual doesn't mean you actually know anything about that. And so if you don't, and you have no data on them whatsoever, I've just introduced a new variable into your environment that you now have to account for, From a risk and liability perspective under something like GDPR. Whereas if you use us, we could take that search encrypt it within our walls, send it out to you and you could process it in its encrypted state. And because it's never decrypted during processing, there's no risk to you of any increased liability because that PII or that EU resident identifier is never introduced into your space. >> So the operating side of the business where there's compliance and risk management are going to love this, >> For sure. >> Is that really where the action is? >> Yes, compliance risk privacy. >> Alright, so get a little nerdy action on this one. So encryption has always been an awesome thing depending on who you talk to you, obviously, but he's always been a tax associate with the overhead processing power. He said, there's math involved. How does homeomorphic work? Does it have problems with performance? Is that a problem? Or if not, how do you address that? Where does it? I might say, well, I get it. But what's the tax for me? Or is your tax? >> Encryption is never free. I always tell people that. So there always is a little bit of latency associated with being able to do anything in an encrypted capacity, whether that's at rest at in transit or in use. Now, specifically with homomorphic encryption. It's not a new area of encryption. It's been around 30 or so years, and it had often been considered to be the holy grail of encryption for exactly the reasons we've already talked about. Doing things like taking searches or analytics and encrypting them, running them without ever decrypting anything opens up a world of different types of use cases across verticals and-- >> Give those use case examples. What would be some that would be low hanging fruit. And it would be much more higher level. >> Some of the things that we're seeing today under that umbrella of secure data sharing and collaboration, specifically inside of financial services, for use cases around anti-money laundering and financial crimes so, allowing two banks to be able to securely collaborate with with each other, along the lines of the example that I gave you just a second ago, and then also for large multinational banks to do so across jurisdictions in which they operate that have different privacy and secrecy regulations associated with them. >> Awesome. Well, Ellison, and I want to ask you about your experience at the NSA. And now as an entrepreneur, obviously, you have some, you know, pedigree at the NSA, really, you know, congratulations. It's going to be smart to work there, I guess. Secrets, you know, >> You absolutely do. >> Brains brain surgeon rocket scientist, so you get a lot of good stuff. But now that you're on the commercial space, it's been a conversation around how public and commercial are really trying to work together a lot as innovations are happening on both sides of the fence there. >> Yeah. >> Then the ICC and the Intelligence Community as well as commercial. Yeah, you're an entrepreneur, you got to go make money, you got shareholders down, you got investors? What's the collaboration look like? How does the world does it change for you? Is it the same? What's the vibe in DC these days around the balance between collaboration or is there? >> Well, we've seen a great example of this recently in that anti-money laundering financial crime use case. So the FCA and the Financial Conduct Authority out of the UK, so public entity sponsored a whole event called a tech spread in which they brought the banks together the private entities together with the startup companies, so your early emerging innovative capabilities, along with the public entities, like your privacy regulators, etc, and had us all work together to develop really innovative solutions to real problems within the banks. In the in the context of this text spread. We ended up winning the know your customer customer due diligence side of the text brand and then at the same time that us held an equivalent event in DC, where FinCEN took the lead, bringing in again, the banks, the private companies, etc, to all collaborate around this one problem. So I think that's a great example of when your public and your private and your private small and your private big is in the financial services institutions start to work together, we can really make breakthroughs-- >> So you see a lot happening >> We see a lot happening. >> The encryption solution actually helped that because it makes sense. Now you have the sharing the encryption. >> Yeah. >> Does that help with some of the privacy and interactions? >> It breaks through those barriers? Because if we were two banks, we can't necessarily openly, freely share all the information. But if I can ask you a question and do so in a secure and private capacity, still respecting all the access controls that you've put in place over your own data, then it allows that collaboration to occur, whereas otherwise I really couldn't in an efficient capacity. >> Okay, so here's the curveball question for you. So anybody Startup Series today, but you really got advanced Series A, you got a lot of funding multiple years of operation. If I asked you what's the impact that you're going to have on the world? What would you say to that, >> Over creating a whole new market, completely changing the paradigm about where and how you can use data for business purposes. And in terms of how much funding we have, we have, we've had a few rounds, but we only have 15 million into the company. So to be three and a half years old to see this new market emerging and being created with with only $15 million. It's really pretty impressive. >> Yeah, it's got a lot of growth and keep the ownership with the employees and the founders. >> It's always good, but being bootstrap is harder than it looks, isn't it? >> Yeah. >> Or how about society at large impact. You know, we're living global society these days and get all kinds of challenges. You see anything else in the future for your vision of impact. >> So securing data and your supplies horizontally across verticals. So far we've been focused mainly on financial services. But I think healthcare is a great vertical to move out in. And I think there are a lot of global challenges with healthcare and the more collaborative that we could be from a healthcare standpoint with our data. And I think our capabilities enable that to be possible. And still respecting all the privacy regulations and restrictions. I think that's a whole new world of possibility as well. >> And your secret sauce is what math? What's that? What's the secret sauce, >> Math, Math and grit. >> Alright, so thanks for sharing the insights. Give a quick plug for the company. What are you guys looking to do? Honestly, $10 million in funding priorities for you and the team? What do you guys live in to do? >> So priorities for us? privacy is a global issue now. So we are expanding globally. And you'll be hearing more about that very shortly. We also have new product lines that are going to be coming out enabling people to do more advanced decisioning in a completely secure and private capacity. >> And hiring office locations DC. >> Yes. So our headquarters is in DC, but we're based on over the world, so we're hiring, check out our web page. We're hiring for all kinds of roles from engineering to business functionality >> And virtual is okay virtual hires school >> Virtual hires is great. We're looking for awesome people no matter where they are. >> You know, DC but primary. Okay, so great to have you gone. Congratulations for one, the financing and then three years of bootstrapping and making it happen. Awesome. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for coming ,appreciate it. So keep coming to your RSA conference in Moscone. I'm John Furrier. Thanks for watching more after this short break (pop music playing)

(light music) >> Announcer: TheCUBE's live coverage is made possible by funding from Dell Technologies. Creating technologies that drive human progress. (upbeat music) >> Welcome back to the Fira in Barcelona. Dave Vellante with Dave Nicholson. Lisa Martin's been here all week. John Furrier is in our Palo Alto studio, banging out all the news. Don't forget to check out siliconangle.com, thecube.net. This is day four, our last segment, winding down. MWC23, super excited to be here. Wayne Duso, friend of theCUBE, VP of engineering from products at AWS is here with Iyad Tarazi, who's the CEO of Federated Wireless. Gents, welcome. >> Good to be here. >> Nice to see you. >> I'm so stoked, Wayne, that we connected before the show. We texted, I'm like, "You're going to be there. I'm going to be there. You got to come on theCUBE." So thank you so much for making time, and thank you for bringing a customer partner, Federated Wireless. Everybody knows AWS. Iyad, tell us about Federated Wireless. >> We're a software and services company out of Arlington, Virginia, right outside of Washington, DC, and we're really focused on this new technology called Shared Spectrum and private wireless for 5G. Think of it as enterprises consuming 5G, the way they used to consume WiFi. >> Is that unrestricted spectrum, or? >> It is managed, organized, interference free, all through cloud platforms. That's how we got to know AWS. We went and got maybe about 300 products from AWS to make it work. Quite sophisticated, highly available, and pristine spectrum worth billions of dollars, but available for people like you and I, that want to build enterprises, that want to make things work. Also carriers, cable companies everybody else that needs it. It's really a new revolution for everyone. >> And that's how you, it got introduced to AWS. Was that through public sector, or just the coincidence that you're in DC >> No, I, well, yes. The center of gravity in the world for spectrum is literally Arlington. You have the DOD spectrum people, you have spectrum people from National Science Foundation, DARPA, and then you have commercial sector, and you have the FCC just an Uber ride away. So we went and found the scientists that are doing all this work, four or five of them, Virginia Tech has an office there too, for spectrum research for the Navy. Come together, let's have a party and make a new model. >> So I asked this, I'm super excited to have you on theCUBE. I sat through the keynotes on Monday. I saw Satya Nadella was in there, Thomas Kurian there was no AWS. I'm like, where's AWS? AWS is everywhere. I mean, you guys are all over the show. I'm like, "Hey, where's the number one cloud?" So you guys have made a bunch of announcements at the show. Everybody's talking about the cloud. What's going on for you guys? >> So we are everywhere, and you know, we've been coming to this show for years. But this is really a year that we can demonstrate that what we've been doing for the IT enterprise, IT people for 17 years, we're now bringing for telcos, you know? For years, we've been, 17 years to be exact, we've been bringing the cloud value proposition, whether it's, you know, cost efficiencies or innovation or scale, reliability, security and so on, to these enterprise IT folks. Now we're doing the same thing for telcos. And so whether they want to build in region, in a local zone, metro area, on-prem with an outpost, at the edge with Snow Family, or with our IoT devices. And no matter where they want to start, if they start in the cloud and they want to move to the edge, or they start in the edge and they want to bring the cloud value proposition, like, we're demonstrating all of that is happening this week. And, and very much so, we're also demonstrating that we're bringing the same type of ecosystem that we've built for enterprise IT. We're bringing that type of ecosystem to the telco companies, with CSPs, with the ISP vendors. We've seen plenty of announcements this week. You know, so on and so forth. >> So what's different, is it, the names are different? Is it really that simple, that you're just basically taking the cloud model into telco, and saying, "Hey, why do all this undifferentiated heavy lifting when we can do it for you? Don't worry about all the plumbing." Is it really that simple? I mean, that straightforward. >> Well, simple is probably not what I'd say, but we can make it straightforward. >> Conceptually. >> Conceptually, yes. Conceptually it is the same. Because if you think about, firstly, we'll just take 5G for a moment, right? The 5G folks, if you look at the architecture for 5G, it was designed to run on a cloud architecture. It was designed to be a set of services that you could partition, and run in different places, whether it's in the region or at the edge. So in many ways it is sort of that simple. And let me give you an example. Two things, the first one is we announced integrated private wireless on AWS, which allows enterprise customers to come to a portal and look at the industry solutions. They're not worried about their network, they're worried about solving a problem, right? And they can come to that portal, they can find a solution, they can find a service provider that will help them with that solution. And what they end up with is a fully validated offering that AWS telco SAS have actually put to its paces to make sure this is a real thing. And whether they get it from a telco, and, and quite frankly in that space, it's SIs such as Federated that actually help our customers deploy those in private environments. So that's an example. And then added to that, we had a second announcement, which was AWS telco network builder, which allows telcos to plan, deploy, and operate at scale telco network capabilities on the cloud, think about it this way- >> As a managed service? >> As a managed service. So think about it this way. And the same way that enterprise IT has been deploying, you know, infrastructure as code for years. Telco network builder allows the telco folks to deploy telco networks and their capabilities as code. So it's not simple, but it is pretty straightforward. We're making it more straightforward as we go. >> Jump in Dave, by the way. He can geek out if you want. >> Yeah, no, no, no, that's good, that's good, that's good. But actually, I'm going to ask an AWS question, but I'm going to ask Iyad the AWS question. So when we, when I hear the word cloud from Wayne, cloud, AWS, typically in people's minds that denotes off-premises. Out there, AWS data center. In the telecom space, yes, of course, in the private 5G space, we're talking about a little bit of a different dynamic than in the public 5G space, in terms of the physical infrastructure. But regardless at the edge, there are things that need to be physically at the edge. Do you feel that AWS is sufficiently, have they removed the H word, hybrid, from the list of bad words you're not allowed to say? 'Cause there was a point in time- >> Yeah, of course. >> Where AWS felt that their growth- >> They'll even say multicloud today, (indistinct). >> No, no, no, no, no. But there was a period of time where, rightfully so, AWS felt that the growth trajectory would be supported solely by net new things off premises. Now though, in this space, it seems like that hybrid model is critical. Do you see AWS being open to the hybrid nature of things? >> Yeah, they're, absolutely. I mean, just to explain from- we're a services company and a solutions company. So we put together solutions at the edge, a smart campus, smart agriculture, a deployment. One of our biggest deployment is a million square feet warehouse automation project with the Marine Corps. >> That's bigger than the Fira. >> Oh yeah, it's bigger, definitely bigger than, you know, a small section of here. It's actually three massive warehouses. So yes, that is the edge. What the cloud is about is that massive amount of efficiency has happened by concentrating applications in data centers. And that is programmability, that is APIs that is solutions, that is applications that can run on it, where people know how to do it. And so all that efficiency now is being ported in a box called the edge. What AWS is doing for us is bringing all the business and technical solutions they had into the edge. Some of the data may send back and forth, but that's actually a smaller piece of the value for us. By being able to bring an AWS package at the edge, we're bringing IoT applications, we're bringing high speed cameras, we're able to integrate with the 5G public network. We're able to bring in identity and devices, we're able to bring in solutions for students, embedded laptops. All of these things that you can do much much faster and cheaper if you are able to tap in the 4,000, 5,000 partners and all the applications and all the development and all the models that AWS team did. By being able to bring that efficiency to the edge why reinvent that? And then along with that, there are partners that you, that help do integration. There are development done to make it hardened, to make the data more secure, more isolated. All of these things will contribute to an edge that truly is a carbon copy of the data center. >> So Wayne, it's AWS, Regardless of where the compute, networking and storage physically live, it's AWS. Do you think that the term cloud will sort of drift away from usage? Because if, look, it's all IT, in this case it's AWS and federated IT working together. How, what's your, it's sort of a obscure question about cloud, because cloud is so integrated. >> You Got this thing about cloud, it's just IT. >> I got thing about cloud too, because- >> You and Larry Ellison. >> Because it's no, no, no, I'm, yeah, well actually there's- >> There's a lot of IT that's not cloud, just say that okay. >> Now, a lot of IT that isn't cloud, but I would say- >> But I'll (indistinct) cloud is an IT tool, and you see AWS obviously with the Snow fill in the blank line of products and outpost type stuff. Fair to say that you're, doesn't matter where it is, it could be AWS if it's on the edge, right? >> Well, you know, everybody wants to define the cloud as what it may have been when it started. But if you look at what it was when it started and what it is today, it is different. But the ability to bring the experience, the AWS experience, the services, the operational experience and all the things that Iyad had been talking about from the region all to all the way to, you know, the IoT device, if you would, that entire continuum. And it doesn't matter where you start. Like if you start in region and you need to bring your value to other places because your customers are asking you to do so, we're enabling that experience where you need to bring it. If you started at the edge, and- but you want to build cloud value, you know, whether it's again, cost efficiency, scalability, AI, ML or analytics into those capabilities, you can start at the edge with the same APIs, with the same service, the same capabilities, and you can build that value in right from the get go. You don't build this bifurcation or many separations and try to figure out how do I glue them together? There is no gluing together. So if you think of cloud as being elastic, scalable flexible, where you can drive innovation, it's the same exact model on the continuum. And you can start at either end, it's up to you as a customer. >> And I think if, the key to me is the ecosystem. I mean, if you can do for this industry what you've done for the technology- enterprise technology business from an ecosystem standpoint, you know everybody talks about flywheel, but that gives you like the massive flywheel. I don't know what the ratio is, but it used to be for every dollar spent on a VMware license, $15 is spent in the ecosystem. I've never heard similar ratios in the AWS ecosystem, but it's, I go to reinvent and I'm like, there's some dollars being- >> That's a massive ecosystem. >> (indistinct). >> And then, and another thing I'll add is Jose Maria Alvarez, who's the chairman of Telefonica, said there's three pillars of the future-ready telco, low latency, programmable networks, and he said cloud and edge. So they recognizing cloud and edge, you know, low latency means you got to put the compute and the data, the programmable infrastructure was invented by Amazon. So what's the strategy around the telco edge? >> So, you know, at the end, so those are all great points. And in fact, the programmability of the network was a big theme in the show. It was a huge theme. And if you think about the cloud, what is the cloud? It's a set of APIs against a set of resources that you use in whatever way is appropriate for what you're trying to accomplish. The network, the telco network becomes a resource. And it could be described as a resource. We, I talked about, you know, network as in code, right? It's same infrastructure in code, it's telco infrastructure as code. And that code, that infrastructure, is programmable. So this is really, really important. And in how you build the ecosystem around that is no different than how we built the ecosystem around traditional IT abstractions. In fact, we feel that really the ecosystem is the killer app for 5G. You know, the killer app for 4G, data of sorts, right? We started using data beyond simple SMS messages. So what's the killer app for 5G? It's building this ecosystem, which includes the CSPs, the ISVs, all of the partners that we bring to the table that can drive greater value. It's not just about cost efficiency. You know, you can't save your way to success, right? At some point you need to generate greater value for your customers, which gives you better business outcomes, 'cause you can monetize them, right? The ecosystem is going to allow everybody to monetize 5G. >> 5G is like the dot connector of all that. And then developers come in on top and create new capabilities >> And how different is that than, you know, the original smartphones? >> Yeah, you're right. So what do you guys think of ChatGPT? (indistinct) to Amazon? Amazon turned the data center into an API. It's like we're visioning this world, and I want to ask that technologist, like, where it's turning resources into human language interfaces. You know, when you see that, you play with ChatGPT at all, or I know you guys got your own. >> So I won't speak directly to ChatGPT. >> No, don't speak from- >> But if you think about- >> Generative AI. >> Yeah generative AI is important. And, and we are, and we have been for years, in this space. Now you've been talking to AWS for a long time, and we often don't talk about things we don't have yet. We don't talk about things that we haven't brought to market yet. And so, you know, you'll often hear us talk about something, you know, a year from now where others may have been talking about it three years earlier, right? We will be talking about this space when we feel it's appropriate for our customers and our partners. >> You have talked about it a little bit, Adam Selipsky went on an interview with myself and John Furrier in October said you watch, you know, large language models are going to be enormous and I know you guys have some stuff that you're working on there. >> It's, I'll say it's exciting. >> Yeah, I mean- >> Well proof point is, Siri is an idiot compared to Alexa. (group laughs) So I trust one entity to come up with something smart. >> I have conversations with Alexa and Siri, and I won't judge either one. >> You don't need, you could be objective on that one. I definitely have a preference. >> Are the problems you guys solving in this space, you know, what's unique about 'em? What are they, can we, sort of, take some examples here (indistinct). >> Sure, the main theme is that the enterprise is taking control. They want to have their own networks. They want to focus on specific applications, and they want to build them with a skeleton crew. The one IT person in a warehouse want to be able to do it all. So what's unique about them is that they're now are a lot of automation on robotics, especially in warehousing environment agriculture. There simply aren't enough people in these industries, and that required precision. And so you need all that integration to make it work. People also want to build these networks as they want to control it. They want to figure out how do we actually pick this team and migrate it. Maybe just do the front of the house first. Maybe it's a security team that monitor the building, maybe later on upgrade things that use to open doors and close doors and collect maintenance data. So that ability to pick what you want to do from a new processors is really important. And then you're also seeing a lot of public-private network interconnection. That's probably the undercurrent of this show that haven't been talked about. When people say private networks, they're also talking about something called neutral host, which means I'm going to build my own network, but I want it to work, my Verizon (indistinct) need to work. There's been so much progress, it's not done yet. So much progress about this bring my own network concept, and then make sure that I'm now interoperating with the public network, but it's my domain. I can create air gaps, I can create whatever security and policy around it. That is probably the power of 5G. Now take all of these tiny networks, big networks, put them all in one ecosystem. Call it the Amazon marketplace, call it the Amazon ecosystem, that's 5G. It's going to be tremendous future. >> What does the future look like? We're going to, we just determined we're going to be orchestrating the network through human language, okay? (group laughs) But seriously, what's your vision for the future here? You know, both connectivity and cloud are on on a continuum. It's, they've been on a continuum forever. They're going to continue to be on a continuum. That being said, those continuums are coming together, right? They're coming together to bring greater value to a greater set of customers, and frankly all of us. So, you know, the future is now like, you know, this conference is the future, and if you look at what's going on, it's about the acceleration of the future, right? What we announced this week is really the acceleration of listening to customers for the last handful of years. And, we're going to continue to do that. We're going to continue to bring greater value in the form of solutions. And that's what I want to pick up on from the prior question. It's not about the network, it's not about the cloud, it's about the solutions that we can provide the customers where they are, right? And if they're on their mobile phone or they're in their factory floor, you know, they're looking to accelerate their business. They're looking to accelerate their value. They're looking to create greater safety for their employees. That's what we can do with these technologies. So in fact, when we came out with, you know, our announcement for integrated private wireless, right? It really was about industry solutions. It really isn't about, you know, the cloud or the network. It's about how you can leverage those technologies, that continuum, to deliver you value. >> You know, it's interesting you say that, 'cause again, when we were interviewing Adam Selipsky, everybody, you know, all journalists analysts want to know, how's Adam Selipsky going to be different from Andy Jassy, what's the, what's he going to do to Amazon to change? And he said, listen, the real answer is Amazon has changed. If Andy Jassy were here, we'd be doing all, you know, pretty much the same things. Your point about 17 years ago, the cloud was S3, right, and EC2. Now it's got to evolve to be solutions. 'Cause if that's all you're selling, is the bespoke services, then you know, the future is not as bright as the past has been. And so I think it's key to look for what are those outcomes or solutions that customers require and how you're going to meet 'em. And there's a lot of challenges. >> You continue to build value on the value that you've brought, and you don't lose sight of why that value is important. You carry that value proposition up the stack, but the- what you're delivering, as you said, becomes maybe a bigger or or different. >> And you are getting more solution oriented. I mean, you're not hardcore solutions yet, but we're seeing more and more of that. And that seems to be a trend. We've even seen in the database world, making things easier, connecting things. Not really an abstraction layer, which is sort of antithetical to your philosophy, but it creates a similar outcome in terms of simplicity. Yeah, you're smiling 'cause you guys always have a different angle, you know? >> Yeah, we've had this conversation. >> It's right, it's, Jassy used to say it's okay to be misunderstood. >> That's Right. For a long time. >> Yeah, right, guys, thanks so much for coming to theCUBE. I'm so glad we could make this happen. >> It's always good. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> All right, Dave Nicholson, for Lisa Martin, Dave Vellante, John Furrier in the Palo Alto studio. We're here at the Fira, wrapping out MWC23. Keep it right there, thanks for watching. (upbeat music)

Hello and welcome back to Supercloud 2 where we examine the intersection of cloud and data in the 2020s. My name is Dave Vellante. Our Supercloud panel, our power panel is back. Maribel Lopez is the founder and principal analyst at Lopez Research. Sanjeev Mohan is former Gartner analyst and principal at Sanjeev Mohan. And Keith Townsend is the CTO advisor. Folks, welcome back and thanks for your participation today. Good to see you. >> Okay, great. >> Great to see you. >> Thanks. Let me start, Maribel, with you. Bob Muglia, we had a conversation as part of Supercloud the other day. And he said, "Dave, I like the work, you got to simplify this a little bit." So he said, quote, "A Supercloud is a platform." He said, "Think of it as a platform that provides programmatically consistent services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers." And then Nelu Mihai said, "Well, wait a minute. This is just going to create more stove pipes. We need more standards in an architecture," which is kind of what Berkeley Sky Computing initiative is all about. So there's a sort of a debate going on. Is supercloud an architecture, a platform? Or maybe it's just another buzzword. Maribel, do you have a thought on this? >> Well, the easy answer would be to say it's just a buzzword. And then we could just kill the conversation and be done with it. But I think the term, it's more than that, right? The term actually isn't new. You can go back to at least 2016 and find references to supercloud in Cornell University or assist in other documents. So, having said this, I think we've been talking about Supercloud for a while, so I assume it's more than just a fancy buzzword. But I think it really speaks to that undeniable trend of moving towards an abstraction layer to deal with the chaos of what we consider managing multiple public and private clouds today, right? So one definition of the technology platform speaks to a set of services that allows companies to build and run that technology smoothly without worrying about the underlying infrastructure, which really gets back to something that Bob said. And some of the question is where that lives. And you could call that an abstraction layer. You could call it cross-cloud services, hybrid cloud management. So I see momentum there, like legitimate momentum with enterprise IT buyers that are trying to deal with the fact that they have multiple clouds now. So where I think we're moving is trying to define what are the specific attributes and frameworks of that that would make it so that it could be consistent across clouds. What is that layer? And maybe that's what the supercloud is. But one of the things I struggle with with supercloud is. What are we really trying to do here? Are we trying to create differentiated services in the supercloud layer? Is a supercloud just another variant of what AWS, GCP, or others do? You spoken to Walmart about its cloud native platform, and that's an example of somebody deciding to do it themselves because they need to deal with this today and not wait for some big standards thing to happen. So whatever it is, I do think it's something. I think we're trying to maybe create an architecture out of it would be a better way of saying it so that it does get to those set of principles, but it also needs to be edge aware. I think whenever we talk about supercloud, we're always talking about like the big centralized cloud. And I think we need to think about all the distributed clouds that we're looking at in edge as well. So that might be one of the ways that supercloud evolves. >> So thank you, Maribel. Keith, Brian Gracely, Gracely's law, things kind of repeat themselves. We've seen it all before. And so what Muglia brought to the forefront is this idea of a platform where the platform provider is really responsible for the architecture. Of course, the drawback is then you get a a bunch of stove pipes architectures. But practically speaking, that's kind of the way the industry has always evolved, right? >> So if we look at this from the practitioner's perspective and we talk about platforms, traditionally vendors have provided the platforms for us, whether it's distribution of lineage managed by or provided by Red Hat, Windows, servers, .NET, databases, Oracle. We think of those as platforms, things that are fundamental we can build on top. Supercloud isn't today that. It is a framework or idea, kind of a visionary goal to get to a point that we can have a platform or a framework. But what we're seeing repeated throughout the industry in customers, whether it's the Walmarts that's kind of supersized the idea of supercloud, or if it's regular end user organizations that are coming out with platform groups, groups who normalize cloud native infrastructure, AWS multi-cloud, VMware resources to look like one thing internally to their developers. We're seeing this trend that there's a desire for a platform that provides the capabilities of a supercloud. >> Thank you for that. Sanjeev, we often use Snowflake as a supercloud example, and now would presumably would be a platform with an architecture that's determined by the vendor. Maybe Databricks is pushing for a more open architecture, maybe more of that nirvana that we were talking about before to solve for supercloud. But regardless, the practitioner discussions show. At least currently, there's not a lot of cross-cloud data sharing. I think it could be a killer use case, egress charges or a barrier. But how do you see it? Will that change? Will we hide that underlying complexity and start sharing data across cloud? Is that something that you think Snowflake or others will be able to achieve? >> So I think we are already starting to see some of that happen. Snowflake is definitely one example that gets cited a lot. But even we don't talk about MongoDB in this like, but you could have a MongoDB cluster, for instance, with nodes sitting in different cloud providers. So there are companies that are starting to do it. The advantage that these companies have, let's take Snowflake as an example, it's a centralized proprietary platform. And they are building the capabilities that are needed for supercloud. So they're building things like you can push down your data transformations. They have the entire security and privacy suite. Data ops, they're adding those capabilities. And if I'm not mistaken, it'll be very soon, we will see them offer data observability. So it's all works great as long as you are in one platform. And if you want resilience, then Snowflake, Supercloud, great example. But if your primary goal is to choose the most cost-effective service irrespective of which cloud it sits in, then things start falling sideways. For example, I may be a very big Snowflake user. And I like Snowflake's resilience. I can move from one cloud to another cloud. Snowflake does it for me. But what if I want to train a very large model? Maybe Databricks is a better platform for that. So how do I do move my workload from one platform to another platform? That tooling does not exist. So we need server hybrid, cross-cloud, data ops platform. Walmart has done a great job, but they built it by themselves. Not every company is Walmart. Like Maribel and Keith said, we need standards, we need reference architectures, we need some sort of a cost control. I was just reading recently, Accenture has been public about their AWS bill. Every time they get the bill is tens of millions of lines, tens of millions 'cause there are over thousand teams using AWS. If we have not been able to corral a usage of a single cloud, now we're talking about supercloud, we've got multiple clouds, and hybrid, on-prem, and edge. So till we've got some cross-platform tooling in place, I think this will still take quite some time for it to take shape. >> It's interesting. Maribel, Walmart would tell you that their on-prem infrastructure is cheaper to run than the stuff in the cloud. but at the same time, they want the flexibility and the resiliency of their three-legged stool model. So the point as Sanjeev was making about hybrid. It's an interesting balance, isn't it, between getting your lowest cost and at the same time having best of breed and scale? >> It's basically what you're trying to optimize for, as you said, right? And by the way, to the earlier point, not everybody is at Walmart's scale, so it's not actually cheaper for everybody to have the purchasing power to make the cloud cheaper to have it on-prem. But I think what you see almost every company, large or small, moving towards is this concept of like, where do I find the agility? And is the agility in building the infrastructure for me? And typically, the thing that gives you outside advantage as an organization is not how you constructed your cloud computing infrastructure. It might be how you structured your data analytics as an example, which cloud is related to that. But how do you marry those two things? And getting back to sort of Sanjeev's point. We're in a real struggle now where one hand we want to have best of breed services and on the other hand we want it to be really easy to manage, secure, do data governance. And those two things are really at odds with each other right now. So if you want all the knobs and switches of a service like geospatial analytics and big query, you're going to have to use Google tools, right? Whereas if you want visibility across all the clouds for your application of state and understand the security and governance of that, you're kind of looking for something that's more cross-cloud tooling at that point. But whenever you talk to somebody about cross-cloud tooling, they look at you like that's not really possible. So it's a very interesting time in the market. Now, we're kind of layering this concept of supercloud on it. And some people think supercloud's about basically multi-cloud tooling, and some people think it's about a whole new architectural stack. So we're just not there yet. But it's not all about cost. I mean, cloud has not been about cost for a very, very long time. Cloud has been about how do you really make the most of your data. And this gets back to cross-cloud services like Snowflake. Why did they even exist? They existed because we had data everywhere, but we need to treat data as a unified object so that we can analyze it and get insight from it. And so that's where some of the benefit of these cross-cloud services are moving today. Still a long way to go, though, Dave. >> Keith, I reached out to my friends at ETR given the macro headwinds, And you're right, Maribel, cloud hasn't really been about just about cost savings. But I reached out to the ETR, guys, what's your data show in terms of how customers are dealing with the economic headwinds? And they said, by far, their number one strategy to cut cost is consolidating redundant vendors. And a distant second, but still notable was optimizing cloud costs. Maybe using reserve instances, or using more volume buying. Nowhere in there. And I asked them to, "Could you go look and see if you can find it?" Do we see repatriation? And you hear this a lot. You hear people whispering as analysts, "You better look into that repatriation trend." It's pretty big. You can't find it. But some of the Walmarts in the world, maybe even not repatriating, but they maybe have better cost structure on-prem. Keith, what are you seeing from the practitioners that you talk to in terms of how they're dealing with these headwinds? >> Yeah, I just got into a conversation about this just this morning with (indistinct) who is an analyst over at GigaHome. He's reading the same headlines. Repatriation is happening at large scale. I think this is kind of, we have these quiet terms now. We have quiet quitting, we have quiet hiring. I think we have quiet repatriation. Most people haven't done away with their data centers. They're still there. Whether they're completely on-premises data centers, and they own assets, or they're partnerships with QTX, Equinix, et cetera, they have these private cloud resources. What I'm seeing practically is a rebalancing of workloads. Do I really need to pay AWS for this instance of SAP that's on 24 hours a day versus just having it on-prem, moving it back to my data center? I've talked to quite a few customers who were early on to moving their static SAP workloads onto the public cloud, and they simply moved them back. Surprising, I was at VMware Explore. And we can talk about this a little bit later on. But our customers, net new, not a lot that were born in the cloud. And they get to this point where their workloads are static. And they look at something like a Kubernetes, or a OpenShift, or VMware Tanzu. And they ask the question, "Do I need the scalability of cloud?" I might consider being a net new VMware customer to deliver this base capability. So are we seeing repatriation as the number one reason? No, I think internal IT operations are just naturally come to this realization. Hey, I have these resources on premises. The private cloud technologies have moved far along enough that I can just simply move this workload back. I'm not calling it repatriation, I'm calling it rightsizing for the operating model that I have. >> Makes sense. Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> If I missed something, Dave, why we are on this topic of repatriation. I'm actually surprised that we are talking about repatriation as a very big thing. I think repatriation is happening, no doubt, but it's such a small percentage of cloud migration that to me it's a rounding error in my opinion. I think there's a bigger problem. The problem is that people don't know where the cost is. If they knew where the cost was being wasted in the cloud, they could do something about it. But if you don't know, then the easy answer is cloud costs a lot and moving it back to on-premises. I mean, take like Capital One as an example. They got rid of all the data centers. Where are they going to repatriate to? They're all in the cloud at this point. So I think my point is that data observability is one of the places that has seen a lot of traction is because of cost. Data observability, when it first came into existence, it was all about data quality. Then it was all about data pipeline reliability. And now, the number one killer use case is FinOps. >> Maribel, you had a comment? >> Yeah, I'm kind of in violent agreement with both Sanjeev and Keith. So what are we seeing here? So the first thing that we see is that many people wildly overspent in the big public cloud. They had stranded cloud credits, so to speak. The second thing is, some of them still had infrastructure that was useful. So why not use it if you find the right workloads to what Keith was talking about, if they were more static workloads, if it was already there? So there is a balancing that's going on. And then I think fundamentally, from a trend standpoint, these things aren't binary. Everybody, for a while, everything was going to go to the public cloud and then people are like, "Oh, it's kind of expensive." Then they're like, "Oh no, they're going to bring it all on-prem 'cause it's really expensive." And it's like, "Well, that doesn't necessarily get me some of the new features and functionalities I might want for some of my new workloads." So I'm going to put the workloads that have a certain set of characteristics that require cloud in the cloud. And if I have enough capability on-prem and enough IT resources to manage certain things on site, then I'm going to do that there 'cause that's a more cost-effective thing for me to do. It's not binary. That's why we went to hybrid. And then we went to multi just to describe the fact that people added multiple public clouds. And now we're talking about super, right? So I don't look at it as a one-size-fits-all for any of this. >> A a number of practitioners leading up to Supercloud2 have told us that they're solving their cloud complexity by going in monocloud. So they're putting on the blinders. Even though across the organization, there's other groups using other clouds. You're like, "In my group, we use AWS, or my group, we use Azure. And those guys over there, they use Google. We just kind of keep it separate." Are you guys hearing this in your view? Is that risky? Are they missing out on some potential to tap best of breed? What do you guys think about that? >> Everybody thinks they're monocloud. Is anybody really monocloud? It's like a group is monocloud, right? >> Right. >> This genie is out of the bottle. We're not putting the genie back in the bottle. You might think your monocloud and you go like three doors down and figure out the guy or gal is on a fundamentally different cloud, running some analytics workload that you didn't know about. So, to Sanjeev's earlier point, they don't even know where their cloud spend is. So I think the concept of monocloud, how that's actually really realized by practitioners is primary and then secondary sources. So they have a primary cloud that they run most of their stuff on, and that they try to optimize. And we still have forked workloads. Somebody decides, "Okay, this SAP runs really well on this, or these analytics workloads run really well on that cloud." And maybe that's how they parse it. But if you really looked at it, there's very few companies, if you really peaked under the hood and did an analysis that you could find an actual monocloud structure. They just want to pull it back in and make it more manageable. And I respect that. You want to do what you can to try to streamline the complexity of that. >> Yeah, we're- >> Sorry, go ahead, Keith. >> Yeah, we're doing this thing where we review AWS service every day. Just in your inbox, learn about a new AWS service cursory. There's 238 AWS products just on the AWS cloud itself. Some of them are redundant, but you get the idea. So the concept of monocloud, I'm in filing agreement with Maribel on this that, yes, a group might say I want a primary cloud. And that primary cloud may be the AWS. But have you tried the licensed Oracle database on AWS? It is really tempting to license Oracle on Oracle Cloud, Microsoft on Microsoft. And I can't get RDS anywhere but Amazon. So while I'm driven to desire the simplicity, the reality is whether be it M&A, licensing, data sovereignty. I am forced into a multi-cloud management style. But I do agree most people kind of do this one, this primary cloud, secondary cloud. And I guarantee you're going to have a third cloud or a fourth cloud whether you want to or not via shadow IT, latency, technical reasons, et cetera. >> Thank you. Sanjeev, you had a comment? >> Yeah, so I just wanted to mention, as an organization, I'm complete agreement, no organization is monocloud, at least if it's a large organization. Large organizations use all kinds of combinations of cloud providers. But when you talk about a single workload, that's where the program arises. As Keith said, the 238 services in AWS. How in the world am I going to be an expert in AWS, but then say let me bring GCP or Azure into a single workload? And that's where I think we probably will still see monocloud as being predominant because the team has developed its expertise on a particular cloud provider, and they just don't have the time of the day to go learn yet another stack. However, there are some interesting things that are happening. For example, if you look at a multi-cloud example where Oracle and Microsoft Azure have that interconnect, so that's a beautiful thing that they've done because now in the newest iteration, it's literally a few clicks. And then behind the scene, your .NET application and your Oracle database in OCI will be configured, the identities in active directory are federated. And you can just start using a database in one cloud, which is OCI, and an application, your .NET in Azure. So till we see this kind of a solution coming out of the providers, I think it's is unrealistic to expect the end users to be able to figure out multiple clouds. >> Well, I have to share with you. I can't remember if he said this on camera or if it was off camera so I'll hold off. I won't tell you who it is, but this individual was sort of complaining a little bit saying, "With AWS, I can take their best AI tools like SageMaker and I can run them on my Snowflake." He said, "I can't do that in Google. Google forces me to go to BigQuery if I want their excellent AI tools." So he was sort of pushing, kind of tweaking a little bit. Some of the vendor talked that, "Oh yeah, we're so customer-focused." Not to pick on Google, but I mean everybody will say that. And then you say, "If you're so customer-focused, why wouldn't you do a ABC?" So it's going to be interesting to see who leads that integration and how broadly it's applied. But I digress. Keith, at our first supercloud event, that was on August 9th. And it was only a few months after Broadcom announced the VMware acquisition. A lot of people, myself included said, "All right, cuts are coming." Generally, Tanzu is probably going to be under the radar, but it's Supercloud 22 and presumably VMware Explore, the company really... Well, certainly the US touted its Tanzu capabilities. I wasn't at VMware Explore Europe, but I bet you heard similar things. Hawk Tan has been blogging and very vocal about cross-cloud services and multi-cloud, which doesn't happen without Tanzu. So what did you hear, Keith, in Europe? What's your latest thinking on VMware's prospects in cross-cloud services/supercloud? >> So I think our friend and Cube, along host still be even more offended at this statement than he was when I sat in the Cube. This was maybe five years ago. There's no company better suited to help industries or companies, cross-cloud chasm than VMware. That's not a compliment. That's a reality of the industry. This is a very difficult, almost intractable problem. What I heard that VMware Europe were customers serious about this problem, even more so than the US data sovereignty is a real problem in the EU. Try being a company in Switzerland and having the Swiss data solvency issues. And there's no local cloud presence there large enough to accommodate your data needs. They had very serious questions about this. I talked to open source project leaders. Open source project leaders were asking me, why should I use the public cloud to host Kubernetes-based workloads, my projects that are building around Kubernetes, and the CNCF infrastructure? Why should I use AWS, Google, or even Azure to host these projects when that's undifferentiated? I know how to run Kubernetes, so why not run it on-premises? I don't want to deal with the hardware problems. So again, really great questions. And then there was always the specter of the problem, I think, we all had with the acquisition of VMware by Broadcom potentially. 4.5 billion in increased profitability in three years is a unbelievable amount of money when you look at the size of the problem. So a lot of the conversation in Europe was about industry at large. How do we do what regulators are asking us to do in a practical way from a true technology sense? Is VMware cross-cloud great? >> Yeah. So, VMware, obviously, to your point. OpenStack is another way of it. Actually, OpenStack, uptake is still alive and well, especially in those regions where there may not be a public cloud, or there's public policy dictating that. Walmart's using OpenStack. As you know in IT, some things never die. Question for Sanjeev. And it relates to this new breed of data apps. And Bob Muglia and Tristan Handy from DBT Labs who are participating in this program really got us thinking about this. You got data that resides in different clouds, it maybe even on-prem. And the machine polls data from different systems. No humans involved, e-commerce, ERP, et cetera. It creates a plan, outcomes. No human involvement. Today, you're on a CRM system, you're inputting, you're doing forms, you're, you're automating processes. We're talking about a new breed of apps. What are your thoughts on this? Is it real? Is it just way off in the distance? How does machine intelligence fit in? And how does supercloud fit? >> So great point. In fact, the data apps that you're talking about, I call them data products. Data products first came into limelight in the last couple of years when Jamal Duggan started talking about data mesh. I am taking data products out of the data mesh concept because data mesh, whether data mesh happens or not is analogous to data products. Data products, basically, are taking a product management view of bringing data from different sources based on what the consumer needs. We were talking earlier today about maybe it's my vacation rentals, or it may be a retail data product, it may be an investment data product. So it's a pre-packaged extraction of data from different sources. But now I have a product that has a whole lifecycle. I can version it. I have new features that get added. And it's a very business data consumer centric. It uses machine learning. For instance, I may be able to tell whether this data product has stale data. Who is using that data? Based on the usage of the data, I may have a new data products that get allocated. I may even have the ability to take existing data products, mash them up into something that I need. So if I'm going to have that kind of power to create a data product, then having a common substrate underneath, it can be very useful. And that could be supercloud where I am making API calls. I don't care where the ERP, the CRM, the survey data, the pricing engine where they sit. For me, there's a logical abstraction. And then I'm building my data product on top of that. So I see a new breed of data products coming out. To answer your question, how early we are or is this even possible? My prediction is that in 2023, we will start seeing more of data products. And then it'll take maybe two to three years for data products to become mainstream. But it's starting this year. >> A subprime mortgages were a data product, definitely were humans involved. All right, let's talk about some of the supercloud, multi-cloud players and what their future looks like. You can kind of pick your favorites. VMware, Snowflake, Databricks, Red Hat, Cisco, Dell, HP, Hashi, IBM, CloudFlare. There's many others. cohesive rubric. Keith, I wanted to start with CloudFlare because they actually use the term supercloud. and just simplifying what they said. They look at it as taking serverless to the max. You write your code and then you can deploy it in seconds worldwide, of course, across the CloudFlare infrastructure. You don't have to spin up containers, you don't go to provision instances. CloudFlare worries about all that infrastructure. What are your thoughts on CloudFlare this approach and their chances to disrupt the current cloud landscape? >> As Larry Ellison said famously once before, the network is the computer, right? I thought that was Scott McNeley. >> It wasn't Scott McNeley. I knew it was on Oracle Align. >> Oracle owns that now, owns that line. >> By purpose or acquisition. >> They should have just called it cloud. >> Yeah, they should have just called it cloud. >> Easier. >> Get ahead. >> But if you think about the CloudFlare capability, CloudFlare in its own right is becoming a decent sized cloud provider. If you have compute out at the edge, when we talk about edge in the sense of CloudFlare and points of presence, literally across the globe, you have all of this excess computer, what do you do with it? First offering, let's disrupt data in the cloud. We can't start the conversation talking about data. When they say we're going to give you object-oriented or object storage in the cloud without egress charges, that's disruptive. That we can start to think about supercloud capability of having compute EC2 run in AWS, pushing and pulling data from CloudFlare. And now, I've disrupted this roach motel data structure, and that I'm freely giving away bandwidth, basically. Well, the next layer is not that much more difficult. And I think part of CloudFlare's serverless approach or supercloud approaches so that they don't have to commit to a certain type of compute. It is advantageous. It is a feature for me to be able to go to EC2 and pick a memory heavy model, or a compute heavy model, or a network heavy model, CloudFlare is taken away those knobs. and I'm just giving code and allowing that to run. CloudFlare has a massive network. If I can put the code closest using the CloudFlare workers, if I can put that code closest to where the data is at or residing, super compelling observation. The question is, does it scale? I don't get the 238 services. While Server List is great, I have to know what I'm going to build. I don't have a Cognito, or RDS, or all these other services that make AWS, GCP, and Azure appealing from a builder's perspective. So it is a very interesting nascent start. It's great because now they can hide compute. If they don't have the capacity, they can outsource that maybe at a cost to one of the other cloud providers, but kind of hiding the compute behind the surplus architecture is a really unique approach. >> Yeah. And they're dipping their toe in the water. And they've announced an object store and a database platform and more to come. We got to wrap. So I wonder, Sanjeev and Maribel, if you could maybe pick some of your favorites from a competitive standpoint. Sanjeev, I felt like just watching Snowflake, I said, okay, in my opinion, they had the right strategy, which was to run on all the clouds, and then try to create that abstraction layer and data sharing across clouds. Even though, let's face it, most of it might be happening across regions if it's happening, but certainly outside of an individual account. But I felt like just observing them that anybody who's traditional on-prem player moving into the clouds or anybody who's a cloud native, it just makes total sense to write to the various clouds. And to the extent that you can simplify that for users, it seems to be a logical strategy. Maybe as I said before, what multi-cloud should have been. But are there companies that you're watching that you think are ahead in the game , or ones that you think are a good model for the future? >> Yes, Snowflake, definitely. In fact, one of the things we have not touched upon very much, and Keith mentioned a little bit, was data sovereignty. Data residency rules can require that certain data should be written into certain region of a certain cloud. And if my cloud provider can abstract that or my database provider, then that's perfect for me. So right now, I see Snowflake is way ahead of this pack. I would not put MongoDB too far behind. They don't really talk about this thing. They are in a different space, but now they have a lakehouse, and they've got all of these other SQL access and new capabilities that they're announcing. So I think they would be quite good with that. Oracle is always a dark forest. Oracle seems to have revived its Cloud Mojo to some extent. And it's doing some interesting stuff. Databricks is the other one. I have not seen Databricks. They've been very focused on lakehouse, unity, data catalog, and some of those pieces. But they would be the obvious challenger. And if they come into this space of supercloud, then they may bring some open source technologies that others can rely on like Delta Lake as a table format. >> Yeah. One of these infrastructure players, Dell, HPE, Cisco, even IBM. I mean, I would be making my infrastructure as programmable and cloud friendly as possible. That seems like table stakes. But Maribel, any companies that stand out to you that we should be paying attention to? >> Well, we already mentioned a bunch of them, so maybe I'll go a slightly different route. I'm watching two companies pretty closely to see what kind of traction they get in their established companies. One we already talked about, which is VMware. And the thing that's interesting about VMware is they're everywhere. And they also have the benefit of having a foot in both camps. If you want to do it the old way, the way you've always done it with VMware, they got all that going on. If you want to try to do a more cross-cloud, multi-cloud native style thing, they're really trying to build tools for that. So I think they have really good access to buyers. And that's one of the reasons why I'm interested in them to see how they progress. The other thing, I think, could be a sleeping horse oddly enough is Google Cloud. They've spent a lot of work and time on Anthos. They really need to create a certain set of differentiators. Well, it's not necessarily in their best interest to be the best multi-cloud player. If they decide that they want to differentiate on a different layer of the stack, let's say they want to be like the person that is really transformative, they talk about transformation cloud with analytics workloads, then maybe they do spend a good deal of time trying to help people abstract all of the other underlying infrastructure and make sure that they get the sexiest, most meaningful workloads into their cloud. So those are two people that you might not have expected me to go with, but I think it's interesting to see not just on the things that might be considered, either startups or more established independent companies, but how some of the traditional providers are trying to reinvent themselves as well. >> I'm glad you brought that up because if you think about what Google's done with Kubernetes. I mean, would Google even be relevant in the cloud without Kubernetes? I could argue both sides of that. But it was quite a gift to the industry. And there's a motivation there to do something unique and different from maybe the other cloud providers. And I'd throw in Red Hat as well. They're obviously a key player and Kubernetes. And Hashi Corp seems to be becoming the standard for application deployment, and terraform, or cross-clouds, and there are many, many others. I know we're leaving lots out, but we're out of time. Folks, I got to thank you so much for your insights and your participation in Supercloud2. Really appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> This is Dave Vellante for John Furrier and the entire Cube community. Keep it right there for more content from Supercloud2.

>> Presenter: theCUBE presents Ignite '22, brought to you by Palo Alto Networks. >> Hey guys and girls. Welcome back to theCube's live coverage at Palo Alto Ignite '22. We're live at the MGM Grand Hotel in beautiful Las Vegas. Lisa Martin here with Dave Vellante. This is day one of our coverage. We've been talking with execs from Palo Alto, Partners, but one of our most exciting things is talking with Founders day. We get to do that next. >> The thing is, it's like I wrote this weekend in my breaking analysis. Understanding the problem in cybersecurity is really easy, but figuring out how to fix it ain't so much. >> It definitely isn't. >> So I'm excited to have Nir here. >> Very excited. Nir Zuk joins us, the founder and CTO of Palo Alto Networks. Welcome, Nir. Great to have you on the program. >> Thank you. >> So Palo Alto Networks, you founded it back in 2005. It's hard to believe that's been 18 years, almost. You did something different, which I want to get into. But tell us, what was it back then? Why did you found this company? >> I thought the world needed another cybersecurity company. I thought it's because there were so many cybersecurity vendors in the world, and just didn't make any sense. This industry has evolved in a very weird way, where every time there was a new challenge, rather than existing vendors dealing with a challenge, you had new vendors dealing with it, and I thought I could put a stop to it, and I think I did. >> You did something differently back in 2005, looking at where you are now, the leader, what was different in your mind back then? >> Yeah. When you found a new company, you have really two good options. There's also a bad option, but we'll skip that. You can either disrupt an existing market, or you can create a new market. So first, I decided to disrupt an existing market, go into an existing market first, network security, then cyber security, and change it. Change the way it works. And like I said, the challenges that every problem had a new vendor, and nobody just stepped back and said, "I think I can solve it with the platform." Meaning, I think I can spend some time not solving a specific problem, but building a platform that then can be used to solve many different problems. And that's what I've done, and that's what Palo Alto Networks has done, and that's where we are today. >> So you look back, you call it now, I think you call it a next gen firewall, but nothing in 2005, can it be next gen? Do you know the Silicon Valley Show? Do you know the show Silicon Valley? >> Oh! Yeah. >> Yeah, of course. >> You got to have a box. But it was a different kind of box- >> Actually. >> Explain that. >> Actually, it's exactly the same thing. You got to have a box. So I actually wanted to call it a necessary evil. Marketing wouldn't go for that. >> No. >> And the reason I wanted to call it a necessary evil, because one of the things that we've done in order to platform our cyber security, again, first network security now, also cloud security, and security operations, is to turn it into a SaaS delivered industry. Today every cyber security professional knows that, when they buy cyber security, they buy usually a SaaS delivered service. Back then, people thought I was crazy to think that customers are going to send their data to their vendor in order to process, and they wanted everything on premise and so on, but I said, "No, customers are going to send information to us for processing, because we have much more processing power than they have." And we needed something in the infrastructure to send us the information. So that's why I wanted to call it the necessary evil. We ended up calling it next generation firewall, which was probably a better term. >> Well, even Veritas. Remember Veritas? They had the no hardware agenda. Even they have a box. So it is like you say, you got to have it. >> It's necessary. >> Okay. You did this, you started this on your own cloud, kind of like Salesforce, ServiceNow. >> Correct. >> Similar now- >> Build your own data centers. >> Build your own data center. Okay, I call it a cloud, but no. >> No, it's the same. There's no cloud, it's just someone else's computer. >> According to Larry Ellison, he was actually probably right about that. But over time, you've had this closer partnership with the public clouds. >> Correct. >> What does that bring you and your customers, and how hard was that to navigate? >> It wasn't that hard for us, because we didn't have that many services. Usually it's harder. Of course, we didn't do a lift and shift, which is their own thing to do with the cloud. We rebuild things for the cloud, and the benefits, of course, are time to market, scale, agility, and in some cases also, cost. >> Yeah, some cases. >> In some cases. >> So you have a sort of a hybrid model today. You still run your own data centers, do you not? >> Very few. >> Really? >> There are very, very few things that we have to do on hardware, like simulating malware and things that cannot be done in a virtual machine, which is pretty much the only option you have in the cloud. They provide bare metal, but doesn't serve our needs. I think that we don't view cloud, and your viewers should not be viewing cloud, as a place where they're going to save money. It's a place where they're going to make money. >> I like that. >> You make much more money, because you're more agile. >> And that's why this conversation is all about, your cost of goods sold they're going to be so high, you're going to have to come back to your own data centers. That's not on your mind right now. What's on your mind is advancing the unit, right? >> Look, my own data center would limit me in scale, would limit my agility. If you want to build something new, you don't have all the PaaS services, the platform as a service, services like database, and AI, and so on. I have to build them myself. It takes time. So yeah, it's going to be cheaper, but I'm not going to be delivering the same thing. So my revenues will be much lower. >> Less top line. What can humans do better than machines? You were talking about your keynote... I'm just going to chat a little bit. You were talking about your keynote. Basically, if you guys didn't see the keynote, that AI is going to run every soc within five years, that was a great prediction that you made. >> Correct. >> And they're going to do things that you can't do today, and then in the future, they're going to do things that you can't... Better than you can do. >> And you just have to be comfortable with that. >> So what do you think humans can do today and in the future better than machines? >> Look, humans can always do better than machines. The human mind can do things that machines cannot do. We are conscious, I don't think machines will be conscious. And you can do things... My point was not that machines can do things that humans cannot do. They can just do it better. The things that humans do today, machines can do better, once machines do that, humans will be free to do things that they don't do today, that machines cannot do. >> Like what? >> Like finding the most difficult, most covert attacks, dealing with the most difficult incidents, things that machines just can't do. Just that today, humans are consumed by finding attacks that machines can find, by dealing with incidents that machines can deal with. It's a waste of time. We leave it to the machines and go and focus on the most difficult problems, and then have the machines learn from you, so that next time or a hundred or a thousand times from now, they can do it themselves, and you focus on the even more difficult. >> Yeah, just like after 9/11, they said that we lack the creativity. That's what humans have, that machines don't, at least today. >> Machines don't. Yeah, look, every airplane has two pilots, even though airplanes have been flying themselves for 30 years now, why do you have two pilots, to do the things that machines cannot do? Like land on the Hudson, right? You always need humans to do the things that machines cannot do. But to leave the things that machines can do to the machines, they'll do it better. >> And autonomous vehicles need breaks. (indistinct) >> In your customer conversations, are customers really grappling with that, are they going, "Yeah, you're right?" >> It depends. It's hard for customers to let go of old habits. First, the habit of buying a hundred different solutions from a hundred different vendors, and you know what? Why would I trust one vendor to do everything, put all my eggs in the same basket? They have all kind of slogans as to why not to do that, even though it's been proven again and again that, doing everything in one system with one brain, versus a hundred systems with a hundred brains, work much better. So that's one thing. The second thing is, we always have the same issue that we've had, I think, since the industrial revolution, of what machines are going to take away my job. No, they're just going to make your job better. So I think that some of our customers are also grappling with that, like, "What do I do if the machines take over?" And of course, like we've said, the machines aren't taking over. They're going to do the benign work, you're going to do the interesting work. You should embrace it. >> When I think about your history as a technology pro, from Check Point, a couple of startups, one of the things that always frustrated you, is when when a larger company bought you out, you ended up getting sucked into the bureaucratic vortex. How do you avoid that at Palo Alto Networks? >> So first, you mean when we acquire company? >> Yes. >> The first thing is that, when we acquire companies, we always acquire for integration. Meaning, we don't just buy something and then leave it on the side, and try to sell it here and there. We integrate it into the core of our products. So that's very important, so that the technology lives, thrives and continues to grow as part of our bigger platform. And I think that the second thing that is very important, from past experience what we've learned, is to put the people that we acquire in key positions. Meaning, you don't buy a company and then put the leader of that company five levels below the CEO. You always put them in very senior positions. Almost always, we have the leaders of the companies that we acquire, be two levels below the CEO, so very senior in the company, so they can influence and make changes. >> So two questions related to that. One is, as you grow your team, can you be both integrated? And second part of the question, can you be both integrated and best of breed? Second part of the question is, do you even have to be? >> So I'll answer it in the third way, which is, I don't think you can be best of breed without being integrated in cybersecurity. And the reason is, again, this split brain that I've mentioned twice. When you have different products do a part of cybersecurity and they don't talk to each other, and they don't share a single brain, you always compromise. You start looking for things the wrong way. I can be a little bit technical here, but please. Take the example of, traditionally you would buy an IDS/IPS, separately from your filtering, separately from DNS security. One of the most important things we do in network security is to find combining control connections. Combining control connections where the adversaries controlling something behind your firewall and is now going around your network, is usually the key heel of the attack. That's why attacks like ransomware, that don't have a commanding control connection, are so difficult to deal with, by the way. So commanding control connections are a key seal of the attacks, and there are three different technologies that deal with it. Neural filtering for neural based commanding control, DNS security for DNS based commanding control, and IDS/IPS for general commanding control. If those are three different products, they'll be doing the wrong things. The oral filter will try to find things that it's not really good at, that the IPS really need to find, and the DN... It doesn't work. It works much better when it's one product doing everything. So I think the choice is not between best of breed and integrated. I think the only choice is integrated, because that's the only way to be best of breed. >> And behind that technology is some kind of realtime data store, I'll call it data lake, database. >> Yeah. >> Whatever. >> It's all driven by the same data. All the URLs, all the domain graph. Everything goes to one big data lake. We collect about... I think we collect about, a few petabytes per day. I don't write the exact number of data. It's all going to the same data lake, and all the intelligence is driven by that. >> So you mentioned in a cheeky comment about, why you founded the company, there weren't enough cybersecurity companies. >> Yeah. >> Clearly the term expansion strategy that Palo Alto Networks has done has been very successful. You've been, as you talked about, very focused on integration, not just from the technology perspective, but from the people perspective as well. >> Correct. >> So why are there still so many cybersecurity companies, and what are you thinking Palo Alto Networks can do to change that? >> So first, I think that there are a lot of cybersecurity companies out there, because there's a lot of money going into cybersecurity. If you look at the number of companies that have been really successful, it's a very small percentage of those cybersecurity companies. And also look, we're not going to be responsible for all the innovation in cybersecurity. We need other people to innovate. It's also... Look, always the question is, "Do you buy something or do you build it yourself?" Now we think we're the smartest people in the world. Of course, we can build everything, but it's not always true that we can build everything. Know that we're the smartest people in the world, for sure. You see, when you are a startup, you live and die by the thing that you build. Meaning if it's good, it works. If it's not good, you die. You run out of money, you shut down, and you just lost four years of your life to this, at least. >> At least. >> When you're a large company, yeah, I can go and find a hundred engineers and hire them. And especially nowadays, it becomes easier, as it became easier, and give them money, and have them go and build the same thing that the startup is building, but they're part of a bigger company, and they'll have more coffee breaks, and they'll be less incentive to go and do that, because the company will survive with or without them. So that's why startups can do things much better, sometimes than larger companies. We can do things better than startups, when it comes to being data driven because we have the data, and nobody can compete against the amount of data that we have. So we have a good combination of finding the right startups that have already built something, already proven that it works with some customers, and of course, building a lot of things internally that we cannot do outside. >> I heard you say in one of the, I dunno, dozens of videos I've listened to you talked to. The industry doesn't need or doesn't want another IoT stovepipe. Okay, I agree. So you got on-prem, AWS, Azure, Google, maybe Alibaba, IoT is going to be all over the place. So can you build, I call it the security super cloud, in other words, a consistent experience with the same policies and edicts across all my estates, irrespective of physical location? Is that technically feasible? Is it what you are trying to do? >> Certainly, what we're trying to do with Prisma Cloud, with our cloud security product, it works across all the clouds that you mentioned, and Oracle as well. It's almost entirely possible. >> Almost. >> Almost. Well, the things that... What you do is you normalize the language that the different cloud scale providers use, into one language. This cloud calls it a S3, and so, AWS calls it S3, and (indistinct) calls it GCS, and so on. So you normalize their terminology, and then build policy using a common terminology that your customers have to get used to. Of course, there are things that are different between the different cloud providers that cannot be normalized, and there, it has to be cloud specific. >> In that instance. So is that, in part, your strategy, is to actually build that? >> Of course. >> And does that necessitate running on all the major clouds? >> Of course. It's not just part of our strategy, it's a major part of our strategy. >> Compulsory. >> Look, as a standalone vendor that is not a cloud provider, we have two advantages. The first one is we're security product, security focused. So we can do much better than them when it comes to security. If you are a AWS, GCP, Azure, and so on, you're not going to put your best people on security, you're going to put them on the core business that you have. So we can do much better. Hey, that's interesting. >> Well, that's not how they talk. >> I don't care how they talk. >> Now that's interesting. >> When something is 4% of your business, you're not going to put it... You're not going to put your best people there. It's just, why would you? You put your best people on 96%. >> That's not driving their revenue. >> Look, it's simple. It's not what we- >> With all due respect. With all due respect. >> So I think we do security much better than them, and they become the good enough, and we become the premium. But certainly, the second thing that give us an advantage and the right to be a standalone security provider, is that we're multicloud, private cloud and all the major cloud providers. >> But they also have a different role. I mean, your role is not the security, the Nitro card or the Graviton chip, or is it? >> They are responsible for securing up to the operating system. We secure everything. >> They do a pretty good job of that. >> No, they do, certainly they have to. If they get bridged at that level, it's not just that one customer is going to suffer, the entire customer base. They have to spend a lot of time and money on it, and frankly, that's where they put their best security people. Securing the infrastructure, not building some cloud security feature. >> Absolutely. >> So Palo Alto Networks is, as we wrap here, on track to nearly double its revenues to nearly seven billion in FY '23, just compared to 2020, you were quoted in the press by saying, "We will be the first $100 billion cyber company." What is next for Palo Alto to achieve that? >> Yeah, so it was Nikesh, our CEO and chairman, that was quoted saying that, "We will double to a hundred billion." I don't think he gave it a timeframe, but what it takes is to double the sales, right? We're at 50 billion market cap right now, so we need to double sales. But in reality, you mentioned that we're growing the turn by doing more and more cybersecurity functions, and taking away pieces. Still, we have a relatively small, even though we're the largest cybersecurity vendor in the world, we have a very low market share that shows you how fragmented the market is. I would also like to point out something that is less known. Part of what we do with AI, is really take the part of the cybersecurity industry, which are service oriented, and that's about 50% of the cybersecurity industry services, and turn it into products. I mean, not all of it. But a good portion of what's provided today by people, and tens of billions of dollars are spent on that, can be done with products. And being one of the very, very few vendors that do that, I think we have a huge opportunity at turning those tens of billions of dollars in human services to AI. >> It's always been a good business taking human labor and translating into R and D, vendor R and D. >> Especially- >> It never fails if you do it well. >> Especially in difficult times, difficult economical times like we are probably experiencing right now around the world. We, not we, but we the world. >> Right, right. Well, congratulations. Coming up on the 18th anniversary. Tremendous amount of success. >> Thank you. >> Great vision, clear vision, STEM expansion strategy, really well underway. We are definitely going to continue to keep our eyes. >> Big company, a hundred billion, that's market capital, so that's a big company. You said you didn't want to work for a big company unless you founded it, is that... >> Unless it acts like a small company. >> There's the caveat. We'll keep our eye on that. >> Thank you very much. >> It's such a pleasure having you on. >> Thank you. >> Same here, thank you. >> All right, for our guests and for Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in live emerging and enterprise tech coverage. (upbeat music)

>>When Oracle acquired my SQL via the Sun acquisition, nobody really thought the company would put much effort into the platform preferring to focus all the wood behind its leading Oracle database, Arrow pun intended. But two years ago, Oracle surprised many folks by announcing my SQL Heatwave a new database as a service with a massively parallel hybrid Columbia in Mary Mary architecture that brings together transactional and analytic data in a single platform. Welcome to our latest database, power panel on the cube. My name is Dave Ante, and today we're gonna discuss Oracle's MySQL Heat Wave with a who's who of cloud database industry analysts. Holgar Mueller is with Constellation Research. Mark Stammer is the Dragon Slayer and Wikibon contributor. And Ron Westfall is with Fu Chim Research. Gentlemen, welcome back to the Cube. Always a pleasure to have you on. Thanks for having us. Great to be here. >>So we've had a number of of deep dive interviews on the Cube with Nip and Aggarwal. You guys know him? He's a senior vice president of MySQL, Heatwave Development at Oracle. I think you just saw him at Oracle Cloud World and he's come on to describe this is gonna, I'll call it a shock and awe feature additions to to heatwave. You know, the company's clearly putting r and d into the platform and I think at at cloud world we saw like the fifth major release since 2020 when they first announced MySQL heat wave. So just listing a few, they, they got, they taken, brought in analytics machine learning, they got autopilot for machine learning, which is automation onto the basic o l TP functionality of the database. And it's been interesting to watch Oracle's converge database strategy. We've contrasted that amongst ourselves. Love to get your thoughts on Amazon's get the right tool for the right job approach. >>Are they gonna have to change that? You know, Amazon's got the specialized databases, it's just, you know, the both companies are doing well. It just shows there are a lot of ways to, to skin a cat cuz you see some traction in the market in, in both approaches. So today we're gonna focus on the latest heat wave announcements and we're gonna talk about multi-cloud with a native MySQL heat wave implementation, which is available on aws MySQL heat wave for Azure via the Oracle Microsoft interconnect. This kind of cool hybrid action that they got going. Sometimes we call it super cloud. And then we're gonna dive into my SQL Heatwave Lake house, which allows users to process and query data across MyQ databases as heatwave databases, as well as object stores. So, and then we've got, heatwave has been announced on AWS and, and, and Azure, they're available now and Lake House I believe is in beta and I think it's coming out the second half of next year. So again, all of our guests are fresh off of Oracle Cloud world in Las Vegas. So they got the latest scoop. Guys, I'm done talking. Let's get into it. Mark, maybe you could start us off, what's your opinion of my SQL Heatwaves competitive position? When you think about what AWS is doing, you know, Google is, you know, we heard Google Cloud next recently, we heard about all their data innovations. You got, obviously Azure's got a big portfolio, snowflakes doing well in the market. What's your take? >>Well, first let's look at it from the point of view that AWS is the market leader in cloud and cloud services. They own somewhere between 30 to 50% depending on who you read of the market. And then you have Azure as number two and after that it falls off. There's gcp, Google Cloud platform, which is further way down the list and then Oracle and IBM and Alibaba. So when you look at AWS and you and Azure saying, hey, these are the market leaders in the cloud, then you start looking at it and saying, if I am going to provide a service that competes with the service they have, if I can make it available in their cloud, it means that I can be more competitive. And if I'm compelling and compelling means at least twice the performance or functionality or both at half the price, I should be able to gain market share. >>And that's what Oracle's done. They've taken a superior product in my SQL heat wave, which is faster, lower cost does more for a lot less at the end of the day and they make it available to the users of those clouds. You avoid this little thing called egress fees, you avoid the issue of having to migrate from one cloud to another and suddenly you have a very compelling offer. So I look at what Oracle's doing with MyQ and it feels like, I'm gonna use a word term, a flanking maneuver to their competition. They're offering a better service on their platforms. >>All right, so thank you for that. Holger, we've seen this sort of cadence, I sort of referenced it up front a little bit and they sat on MySQL for a decade, then all of a sudden we see this rush of announcements. Why did it take so long? And and more importantly is Oracle, are they developing the right features that cloud database customers are looking for in your view? >>Yeah, great question, but first of all, in your interview you said it's the edit analytics, right? Analytics is kind of like a marketing buzzword. Reports can be analytics, right? The interesting thing, which they did, the first thing they, they, they crossed the chasm between OTP and all up, right? In the same database, right? So major engineering feed very much what customers want and it's all about creating Bellevue for customers, which, which I think is the part why they go into the multi-cloud and why they add these capabilities. And they certainly with the AI capabilities, it's kind of like getting it into an autonomous field, self-driving field now with the lake cost capabilities and meeting customers where they are, like Mark has talked about the e risk costs in the cloud. So that that's a significant advantage, creating value for customers and that's what at the end of the day matters. >>And I believe strongly that long term it's gonna be ones who create better value for customers who will get more of their money From that perspective, why then take them so long? I think it's a great question. I think largely he mentioned the gentleman Nial, it's largely to who leads a product. I used to build products too, so maybe I'm a little fooling myself here, but that made the difference in my view, right? So since he's been charged, he's been building things faster than the rest of the competition, than my SQL space, which in hindsight we thought was a hot and smoking innovation phase. It kind of like was a little self complacent when it comes to the traditional borders of where, where people think, where things are separated between OTP and ola or as an example of adjacent support, right? Structured documents, whereas unstructured documents or databases and all of that has been collapsed and brought together for building a more powerful database for customers. >>So I mean it's certainly, you know, when, when Oracle talks about the competitors, you know, the competitors are in the, I always say they're, if the Oracle talks about you and knows you're doing well, so they talk a lot about aws, talk a little bit about Snowflake, you know, sort of Google, they have partnerships with Azure, but, but in, so I'm presuming that the response in MySQL heatwave was really in, in response to what they were seeing from those big competitors. But then you had Maria DB coming out, you know, the day that that Oracle acquired Sun and, and launching and going after the MySQL base. So it's, I'm, I'm interested and we'll talk about this later and what you guys think AWS and Google and Azure and Snowflake and how they're gonna respond. But, but before I do that, Ron, I want to ask you, you, you, you can get, you know, pretty technical and you've probably seen the benchmarks. >>I know you have Oracle makes a big deal out of it, publishes its benchmarks, makes some transparent on on GI GitHub. Larry Ellison talked about this in his keynote at Cloud World. What are the benchmarks show in general? I mean, when you, when you're new to the market, you gotta have a story like Mark was saying, you gotta be two x you know, the performance at half the cost or you better be or you're not gonna get any market share. So, and, and you know, oftentimes companies don't publish market benchmarks when they're leading. They do it when they, they need to gain share. So what do you make of the benchmarks? Have their, any results that were surprising to you? Have, you know, they been challenged by the competitors. Is it just a bunch of kind of desperate bench marketing to make some noise in the market or you know, are they real? What's your view? >>Well, from my perspective, I think they have the validity. And to your point, I believe that when it comes to competitor responses, that has not really happened. Nobody has like pulled down the information that's on GitHub and said, Oh, here are our price performance results. And they counter oracles. In fact, I think part of the reason why that hasn't happened is that there's the risk if Oracle's coming out and saying, Hey, we can deliver 17 times better query performance using our capabilities versus say, Snowflake when it comes to, you know, the Lakehouse platform and Snowflake turns around and says it's actually only 15 times better during performance, that's not exactly an effective maneuver. And so I think this is really to oracle's credit and I think it's refreshing because these differentiators are significant. We're not talking, you know, like 1.2% differences. We're talking 17 fold differences, we're talking six fold differences depending on, you know, where the spotlight is being shined and so forth. >>And so I think this is actually something that is actually too good to believe initially at first blush. If I'm a cloud database decision maker, I really have to prioritize this. I really would know, pay a lot more attention to this. And that's why I posed the question to Oracle and others like, okay, if these differentiators are so significant, why isn't the needle moving a bit more? And it's for, you know, some of the usual reasons. One is really deep discounting coming from, you know, the other players that's really kind of, you know, marketing 1 0 1, this is something you need to do when there's a real competitive threat to keep, you know, a customer in your own customer base. Plus there is the usual fear and uncertainty about moving from one platform to another. But I think, you know, the traction, the momentum is, is shifting an Oracle's favor. I think we saw that in the Q1 efforts, for example, where Oracle cloud grew 44% and that it generated, you know, 4.8 billion and revenue if I recall correctly. And so, so all these are demonstrating that's Oracle is making, I think many of the right moves, publishing these figures for anybody to look at from their own perspective is something that is, I think, good for the market and I think it's just gonna continue to pay dividends for Oracle down the horizon as you know, competition intens plots. So if I were in, >>Dave, can I, Dave, can I interject something and, and what Ron just said there? Yeah, please go ahead. A couple things here, one discounting, which is a common practice when you have a real threat, as Ron pointed out, isn't going to help much in this situation simply because you can't discount to the point where you improve your performance and the performance is a huge differentiator. You may be able to get your price down, but the problem that most of them have is they don't have an integrated product service. They don't have an integrated O L T P O L A P M L N data lake. Even if you cut out two of them, they don't have any of them integrated. They have multiple services that are required separate integration and that can't be overcome with discounting. And the, they, you have to pay for each one of these. And oh, by the way, as you grow, the discounts go away. So that's a, it's a minor important detail. >>So, so that's a TCO question mark, right? And I know you look at this a lot, if I had that kind of price performance advantage, I would be pounding tco, especially if I need two separate databases to do the job. That one can do, that's gonna be, the TCO numbers are gonna be off the chart or maybe down the chart, which you want. Have you looked at this and how does it compare with, you know, the big cloud guys, for example, >>I've looked at it in depth, in fact, I'm working on another TCO on this arena, but you can find it on Wiki bod in which I compared TCO for MySEQ Heat wave versus Aurora plus Redshift plus ML plus Blue. I've compared it against gcps services, Azure services, Snowflake with other services. And there's just no comparison. The, the TCO differences are huge. More importantly, thefor, the, the TCO per performance is huge. We're talking in some cases multiple orders of magnitude, but at least an order of magnitude difference. So discounting isn't gonna help you much at the end of the day, it's only going to lower your cost a little, but it doesn't improve the automation, it doesn't improve the performance, it doesn't improve the time to insight, it doesn't improve all those things that you want out of a database or multiple databases because you >>Can't discount yourself to a higher value proposition. >>So what about, I wonder ho if you could chime in on the developer angle. You, you followed that, that market. How do these innovations from heatwave, I think you used the term developer velocity. I've heard you used that before. Yeah, I mean, look, Oracle owns Java, okay, so it, it's, you know, most popular, you know, programming language in the world, blah, blah blah. But it does it have the, the minds and hearts of, of developers and does, where does heatwave fit into that equation? >>I think heatwave is gaining quickly mindshare on the developer side, right? It's not the traditional no sequel database which grew up, there's a traditional mistrust of oracles to developers to what was happening to open source when gets acquired. Like in the case of Oracle versus Java and where my sql, right? And, but we know it's not a good competitive strategy to, to bank on Oracle screwing up because it hasn't worked not on Java known my sequel, right? And for developers, it's, once you get to know a technology product and you can do more, it becomes kind of like a Swiss army knife and you can build more use case, you can build more powerful applications. That's super, super important because you don't have to get certified in multiple databases. You, you are fast at getting things done, you achieve fire, develop velocity, and the managers are happy because they don't have to license more things, send you to more trainings, have more risk of something not being delivered, right? >>So it's really the, we see the suite where this best of breed play happening here, which in general was happening before already with Oracle's flagship database. Whereas those Amazon as an example, right? And now the interesting thing is every step away Oracle was always a one database company that can be only one and they're now generally talking about heat web and that two database company with different market spaces, but same value proposition of integrating more things very, very quickly to have a universal database that I call, they call the converge database for all the needs of an enterprise to run certain application use cases. And that's what's attractive to developers. >>It's, it's ironic isn't it? I mean I, you know, the rumor was the TK Thomas Curian left Oracle cuz he wanted to put Oracle database on other clouds and other places. And maybe that was the rift. Maybe there was, I'm sure there was other things, but, but Oracle clearly is now trying to expand its Tam Ron with, with heatwave into aws, into Azure. How do you think Oracle's gonna do, you were at a cloud world, what was the sentiment from customers and the independent analyst? Is this just Oracle trying to screw with the competition, create a little diversion? Or is this, you know, serious business for Oracle? What do you think? >>No, I think it has lakes. I think it's definitely, again, attriting to Oracle's overall ability to differentiate not only my SQL heat wave, but its overall portfolio. And I think the fact that they do have the alliance with the Azure in place, that this is definitely demonstrating their commitment to meeting the multi-cloud needs of its customers as well as what we pointed to in terms of the fact that they're now offering, you know, MySQL capabilities within AWS natively and that it can now perform AWS's own offering. And I think this is all demonstrating that Oracle is, you know, not letting up, they're not resting on its laurels. That's clearly we are living in a multi-cloud world, so why not just make it more easy for customers to be able to use cloud databases according to their own specific, specific needs. And I think, you know, to holder's point, I think that definitely lines with being able to bring on more application developers to leverage these capabilities. >>I think one important announcement that's related to all this was the JSON relational duality capabilities where now it's a lot easier for application developers to use a language that they're very familiar with a JS O and not have to worry about going into relational databases to store their J S O N application coding. So this is, I think an example of the innovation that's enhancing the overall Oracle portfolio and certainly all the work with machine learning is definitely paying dividends as well. And as a result, I see Oracle continue to make these inroads that we pointed to. But I agree with Mark, you know, the short term discounting is just a stall tag. This is not denying the fact that Oracle is being able to not only deliver price performance differentiators that are dramatic, but also meeting a wide range of needs for customers out there that aren't just limited device performance consideration. >>Being able to support multi-cloud according to customer needs. Being able to reach out to the application developer community and address a very specific challenge that has plagued them for many years now. So bring it all together. Yeah, I see this as just enabling Oracles who ring true with customers. That the customers that were there were basically all of them, even though not all of them are going to be saying the same things, they're all basically saying positive feedback. And likewise, I think the analyst community is seeing this. It's always refreshing to be able to talk to customers directly and at Oracle cloud there was a litany of them and so this is just a difference maker as well as being able to talk to strategic partners. The nvidia, I think partnerships also testament to Oracle's ongoing ability to, you know, make the ecosystem more user friendly for the customers out there. >>Yeah, it's interesting when you get these all in one tools, you know, the Swiss Army knife, you expect that it's not able to be best of breed. That's the kind of surprising thing that I'm hearing about, about heatwave. I want to, I want to talk about Lake House because when I think of Lake House, I think data bricks, and to my knowledge data bricks hasn't been in the sites of Oracle yet. Maybe they're next, but, but Oracle claims that MySQL, heatwave, Lakehouse is a breakthrough in terms of capacity and performance. Mark, what are your thoughts on that? Can you double click on, on Lakehouse Oracle's claims for things like query performance and data loading? What does it mean for the market? Is Oracle really leading in, in the lake house competitive landscape? What are your thoughts? >>Well, but name in the game is what are the problems you're solving for the customer? More importantly, are those problems urgent or important? If they're urgent, customers wanna solve 'em. Now if they're important, they might get around to them. So you look at what they're doing with Lake House or previous to that machine learning or previous to that automation or previous to that O L A with O ltp and they're merging all this capability together. If you look at Snowflake or data bricks, they're tacking one problem. You look at MyQ heat wave, they're tacking multiple problems. So when you say, yeah, their queries are much better against the lake house in combination with other analytics in combination with O ltp and the fact that there are no ETLs. So you're getting all this done in real time. So it's, it's doing the query cross, cross everything in real time. >>You're solving multiple user and developer problems, you're increasing their ability to get insight faster, you're having shorter response times. So yeah, they really are solving urgent problems for customers. And by putting it where the customer lives, this is the brilliance of actually being multicloud. And I know I'm backing up here a second, but by making it work in AWS and Azure where people already live, where they already have applications, what they're saying is, we're bringing it to you. You don't have to come to us to get these, these benefits, this value overall, I think it's a brilliant strategy. I give Nip and Argo wallet a huge, huge kudos for what he's doing there. So yes, what they're doing with the lake house is going to put notice on data bricks and Snowflake and everyone else for that matter. Well >>Those are guys that whole ago you, you and I have talked about this. Those are, those are the guys that are doing sort of the best of breed. You know, they're really focused and they, you know, tend to do well at least out of the gate. Now you got Oracle's converged philosophy, obviously with Oracle database. We've seen that now it's kicking in gear with, with heatwave, you know, this whole thing of sweets versus best of breed. I mean the long term, you know, customers tend to migrate towards suite, but the new shiny toy tends to get the growth. How do you think this is gonna play out in cloud database? >>Well, it's the forever never ending story, right? And in software right suite, whereas best of breed and so far in the long run suites have always won, right? So, and sometimes they struggle again because the inherent problem of sweets is you build something larger, it has more complexity and that means your cycles to get everything working together to integrate the test that roll it out, certify whatever it is, takes you longer, right? And that's not the case. It's a fascinating part of what the effort around my SQL heat wave is that the team is out executing the previous best of breed data, bringing us something together. Now if they can maintain that pace, that's something to to, to be seen. But it, the strategy, like what Mark was saying, bring the software to the data is of course interesting and unique and totally an Oracle issue in the past, right? >>Yeah. But it had to be in your database on oci. And but at, that's an interesting part. The interesting thing on the Lake health side is, right, there's three key benefits of a lakehouse. The first one is better reporting analytics, bring more rich information together, like make the, the, the case for silicon angle, right? We want to see engagements for this video, we want to know what's happening. That's a mixed transactional video media use case, right? Typical Lakehouse use case. The next one is to build more rich applications, transactional applications which have video and these elements in there, which are the engaging one. And the third one, and that's where I'm a little critical and concerned, is it's really the base platform for artificial intelligence, right? To run deep learning to run things automatically because they have all the data in one place can create in one way. >>And that's where Oracle, I know that Ron talked about Invidia for a moment, but that's where Oracle doesn't have the strongest best story. Nonetheless, the two other main use cases of the lake house are very strong, very well only concern is four 50 terabyte sounds long. It's an arbitrary limitation. Yeah, sounds as big. So for the start, and it's the first word, they can make that bigger. You don't want your lake house to be limited and the terabyte sizes or any even petabyte size because you want to have the certainty. I can put everything in there that I think it might be relevant without knowing what questions to ask and query those questions. >>Yeah. And you know, in the early days of no schema on right, it just became a mess. But now technology has evolved to allow us to actually get more value out of that data. Data lake. Data swamp is, you know, not much more, more, more, more logical. But, and I want to get in, in a moment, I want to come back to how you think the competitors are gonna respond. Are they gonna have to sort of do a more of a converged approach? AWS in particular? But before I do, Ron, I want to ask you a question about autopilot because I heard Larry Ellison's keynote and he was talking about how, you know, most security issues are human errors with autonomy and autonomous database and things like autopilot. We take care of that. It's like autonomous vehicles, they're gonna be safer. And I went, well maybe, maybe someday. So Oracle really tries to emphasize this, that every time you see an announcement from Oracle, they talk about new, you know, autonomous capabilities. It, how legit is it? Do people care? What about, you know, what's new for heatwave Lakehouse? How much of a differentiator, Ron, do you really think autopilot is in this cloud database space? >>Yeah, I think it will definitely enhance the overall proposition. I don't think people are gonna buy, you know, lake house exclusively cause of autopilot capabilities, but when they look at the overall picture, I think it will be an added capability bonus to Oracle's benefit. And yeah, I think it's kind of one of these age old questions, how much do you automate and what is the bounce to strike? And I think we all understand with the automatic car, autonomous car analogy that there are limitations to being able to use that. However, I think it's a tool that basically every organization out there needs to at least have or at least evaluate because it goes to the point of it helps with ease of use, it helps make automation more balanced in terms of, you know, being able to test, all right, let's automate this process and see if it works well, then we can go on and switch on on autopilot for other processes. >>And then, you know, that allows, for example, the specialists to spend more time on business use cases versus, you know, manual maintenance of, of the cloud database and so forth. So I think that actually is a, a legitimate value proposition. I think it's just gonna be a case by case basis. Some organizations are gonna be more aggressive with putting automation throughout their processes throughout their organization. Others are gonna be more cautious. But it's gonna be, again, something that will help the overall Oracle proposition. And something that I think will be used with caution by many organizations, but other organizations are gonna like, hey, great, this is something that is really answering a real problem. And that is just easing the use of these databases, but also being able to better handle the automation capabilities and benefits that come with it without having, you know, a major screwup happened and the process of transitioning to more automated capabilities. >>Now, I didn't attend cloud world, it's just too many red eyes, you know, recently, so I passed. But one of the things I like to do at those events is talk to customers, you know, in the spirit of the truth, you know, they, you know, you'd have the hallway, you know, track and to talk to customers and they say, Hey, you know, here's the good, the bad and the ugly. So did you guys, did you talk to any customers my SQL Heatwave customers at, at cloud world? And and what did you learn? I don't know, Mark, did you, did you have any luck and, and having some, some private conversations? >>Yeah, I had quite a few private conversations. The one thing before I get to that, I want disagree with one point Ron made, I do believe there are customers out there buying the heat wave service, the MySEQ heat wave server service because of autopilot. Because autopilot is really revolutionary in many ways in the sense for the MySEQ developer in that it, it auto provisions, it auto parallel loads, IT auto data places it auto shape predictions. It can tell you what machine learning models are going to tell you, gonna give you your best results. And, and candidly, I've yet to meet a DBA who didn't wanna give up pedantic tasks that are pain in the kahoo, which they'd rather not do and if it's long as it was done right for them. So yes, I do think people are buying it because of autopilot and that's based on some of the conversations I had with customers at Oracle Cloud World. >>In fact, it was like, yeah, that's great, yeah, we get fantastic performance, but this really makes my life easier and I've yet to meet a DBA who didn't want to make their life easier. And it does. So yeah, I've talked to a few of them. They were excited. I asked them if they ran into any bugs, were there any difficulties in moving to it? And the answer was no. In both cases, it's interesting to note, my sequel is the most popular database on the planet. Well, some will argue that it's neck and neck with SQL Server, but if you add in Mariah DB and ProCon db, which are forks of MySQL, then yeah, by far and away it's the most popular. And as a result of that, everybody for the most part has typically a my sequel database somewhere in their organization. So this is a brilliant situation for anybody going after MyQ, but especially for heat wave. And the customers I talk to love it. I didn't find anybody complaining about it. And >>What about the migration? We talked about TCO earlier. Did your t does your TCO analysis include the migration cost or do you kind of conveniently leave that out or what? >>Well, when you look at migration costs, there are different kinds of migration costs. By the way, the worst job in the data center is the data migration manager. Forget it, no other job is as bad as that one. You get no attaboys for doing it. Right? And then when you screw up, oh boy. So in real terms, anything that can limit data migration is a good thing. And when you look at Data Lake, that limits data migration. So if you're already a MySEQ user, this is a pure MySQL as far as you're concerned. It's just a, a simple transition from one to the other. You may wanna make sure nothing broke and every you, all your tables are correct and your schema's, okay, but it's all the same. So it's a simple migration. So it's pretty much a non-event, right? When you migrate data from an O LTP to an O L A P, that's an ETL and that's gonna take time. >>But you don't have to do that with my SQL heat wave. So that's gone when you start talking about machine learning, again, you may have an etl, you may not, depending on the circumstances, but again, with my SQL heat wave, you don't, and you don't have duplicate storage, you don't have to copy it from one storage container to another to be able to be used in a different database, which by the way, ultimately adds much more cost than just the other service. So yeah, I looked at the migration and again, the users I talked to said it was a non-event. It was literally moving from one physical machine to another. If they had a new version of MySEQ running on something else and just wanted to migrate it over or just hook it up or just connect it to the data, it worked just fine. >>Okay, so every day it sounds like you guys feel, and we've certainly heard this, my colleague David Foyer, the semi-retired David Foyer was always very high on heatwave. So I think you knows got some real legitimacy here coming from a standing start, but I wanna talk about the competition, how they're likely to respond. I mean, if your AWS and you got heatwave is now in your cloud, so there's some good aspects of that. The database guys might not like that, but the infrastructure guys probably love it. Hey, more ways to sell, you know, EC two and graviton, but you're gonna, the database guys in AWS are gonna respond. They're gonna say, Hey, we got Redshift, we got aqua. What's your thoughts on, on not only how that's gonna resonate with customers, but I'm interested in what you guys think will a, I never say never about aws, you know, and are they gonna try to build, in your view a converged Oola and o LTP database? You know, Snowflake is taking an ecosystem approach. They've added in transactional capabilities to the portfolio so they're not standing still. What do you guys see in the competitive landscape in that regard going forward? Maybe Holger, you could start us off and anybody else who wants to can chime in, >>Happy to, you mentioned Snowflake last, we'll start there. I think Snowflake is imitating that strategy, right? That building out original data warehouse and the clouds tasking project to really proposition to have other data available there because AI is relevant for everybody. Ultimately people keep data in the cloud for ultimately running ai. So you see the same suite kind of like level strategy, it's gonna be a little harder because of the original positioning. How much would people know that you're doing other stuff? And I just, as a former developer manager of developers, I just don't see the speed at the moment happening at Snowflake to become really competitive to Oracle. On the flip side, putting my Oracle hat on for a moment back to you, Mark and Iran, right? What could Oracle still add? Because the, the big big things, right? The traditional chasms in the database world, they have built everything, right? >>So I, I really scratched my hat and gave Nipon a hard time at Cloud world say like, what could you be building? Destiny was very conservative. Let's get the Lakehouse thing done, it's gonna spring next year, right? And the AWS is really hard because AWS value proposition is these small innovation teams, right? That they build two pizza teams, which can be fit by two pizzas, not large teams, right? And you need suites to large teams to build these suites with lots of functionalities to make sure they work together. They're consistent, they have the same UX on the administration side, they can consume the same way, they have the same API registry, can't even stop going where the synergy comes to play over suite. So, so it's gonna be really, really hard for them to change that. But AWS super pragmatic. They're always by themselves that they'll listen to customers if they learn from customers suite as a proposition. I would not be surprised if AWS trying to bring things closer together, being morely together. >>Yeah. Well how about, can we talk about multicloud if, if, again, Oracle is very on on Oracle as you said before, but let's look forward, you know, half a year or a year. What do you think about Oracle's moves in, in multicloud in terms of what kind of penetration they're gonna have in the marketplace? You saw a lot of presentations at at cloud world, you know, we've looked pretty closely at the, the Microsoft Azure deal. I think that's really interesting. I've, I've called it a little bit of early days of a super cloud. What impact do you think this is gonna have on, on the marketplace? But, but both. And think about it within Oracle's customer base, I have no doubt they'll do great there. But what about beyond its existing install base? What do you guys think? >>Ryan, do you wanna jump on that? Go ahead. Go ahead Ryan. No, no, no, >>That's an excellent point. I think it aligns with what we've been talking about in terms of Lakehouse. I think Lake House will enable Oracle to pull more customers, more bicycle customers onto the Oracle platforms. And I think we're seeing all the signs pointing toward Oracle being able to make more inroads into the overall market. And that includes garnishing customers from the leaders in, in other words, because they are, you know, coming in as a innovator, a an alternative to, you know, the AWS proposition, the Google cloud proposition that they have less to lose and there's a result they can really drive the multi-cloud messaging to resonate with not only their existing customers, but also to be able to, to that question, Dave's posing actually garnish customers onto their platform. And, and that includes naturally my sequel but also OCI and so forth. So that's how I'm seeing this playing out. I think, you know, again, Oracle's reporting is indicating that, and I think what we saw, Oracle Cloud world is definitely validating the idea that Oracle can make more waves in the overall market in this regard. >>You know, I, I've floated this idea of Super cloud, it's kind of tongue in cheek, but, but there, I think there is some merit to it in terms of building on top of hyperscale infrastructure and abstracting some of the, that complexity. And one of the things that I'm most interested in is industry clouds and an Oracle acquisition of Cerner. I was struck by Larry Ellison's keynote, it was like, I don't know, an hour and a half and an hour and 15 minutes was focused on healthcare transformation. Well, >>So vertical, >>Right? And so, yeah, so you got Oracle's, you know, got some industry chops and you, and then you think about what they're building with, with not only oci, but then you got, you know, MyQ, you can now run in dedicated regions. You got ADB on on Exadata cloud to customer, you can put that OnPrem in in your data center and you look at what the other hyperscalers are, are doing. I I say other hyperscalers, I've always said Oracle's not really a hyperscaler, but they got a cloud so they're in the game. But you can't get, you know, big query OnPrem, you look at outposts, it's very limited in terms of, you know, the database support and again, that that will will evolve. But now you got Oracle's got, they announced Alloy, we can white label their cloud. So I'm interested in what you guys think about these moves, especially the industry cloud. We see, you know, Walmart is doing sort of their own cloud. You got Goldman Sachs doing a cloud. Do you, you guys, what do you think about that and what role does Oracle play? Any thoughts? >>Yeah, let me lemme jump on that for a moment. Now, especially with the MyQ, by making that available in multiple clouds, what they're doing is this follows the philosophy they've had the past with doing cloud, a customer taking the application and the data and putting it where the customer lives. If it's on premise, it's on premise. If it's in the cloud, it's in the cloud. By making the mice equal heat wave, essentially a plug compatible with any other mice equal as far as your, your database is concern and then giving you that integration with O L A P and ML and Data Lake and everything else, then what you've got is a compelling offering. You're making it easier for the customer to use. So I look the difference between MyQ and the Oracle database, MyQ is going to capture market more market share for them. >>You're not gonna find a lot of new users for the Oracle debate database. Yeah, there are always gonna be new users, don't get me wrong, but it's not gonna be a huge growth. Whereas my SQL heatwave is probably gonna be a major growth engine for Oracle going forward. Not just in their own cloud, but in AWS and in Azure and on premise over time that eventually it'll get there. It's not there now, but it will, they're doing the right thing on that basis. They're taking the services and when you talk about multicloud and making them available where the customer wants them, not forcing them to go where you want them, if that makes sense. And as far as where they're going in the future, I think they're gonna take a page outta what they've done with the Oracle database. They'll add things like JSON and XML and time series and spatial over time they'll make it a, a complete converged database like they did with the Oracle database. The difference being Oracle database will scale bigger and will have more transactions and be somewhat faster. And my SQL will be, for anyone who's not on the Oracle database, they're, they're not stupid, that's for sure. >>They've done Jason already. Right. But I give you that they could add graph and time series, right. Since eat with, Right, Right. Yeah, that's something absolutely right. That's, that's >>A sort of a logical move, right? >>Right. But that's, that's some kid ourselves, right? I mean has worked in Oracle's favor, right? 10 x 20 x, the amount of r and d, which is in the MyQ space, has been poured at trying to snatch workloads away from Oracle by starting with IBM 30 years ago, 20 years ago, Microsoft and, and, and, and didn't work, right? Database applications are extremely sticky when they run, you don't want to touch SIM and grow them, right? So that doesn't mean that heat phase is not an attractive offering, but it will be net new things, right? And what works in my SQL heat wave heat phases favor a little bit is it's not the massive enterprise applications which have like we the nails like, like you might be only running 30% or Oracle, but the connections and the interfaces into that is, is like 70, 80% of your enterprise. >>You take it out and it's like the spaghetti ball where you say, ah, no I really don't, don't want to do all that. Right? You don't, don't have that massive part with the equals heat phase sequel kind of like database which are more smaller tactical in comparison, but still I, I don't see them taking so much share. They will be growing because of a attractive value proposition quickly on the, the multi-cloud, right? I think it's not really multi-cloud. If you give people the chance to run your offering on different clouds, right? You can run it there. The multi-cloud advantages when the Uber offering comes out, which allows you to do things across those installations, right? I can migrate data, I can create data across something like Google has done with B query Omni, I can run predictive models or even make iron models in different place and distribute them, right? And Oracle is paving the road for that, but being available on these clouds. But the multi-cloud capability of database which knows I'm running on different clouds that is still yet to be built there. >>Yeah. And >>That the problem with >>That, that's the super cloud concept that I flowed and I I've always said kinda snowflake with a single global instance is sort of, you know, headed in that direction and maybe has a league. What's the issue with that mark? >>Yeah, the problem with the, with that version, the multi-cloud is clouds to charge egress fees. As long as they charge egress fees to move data between clouds, it's gonna make it very difficult to do a real multi-cloud implementation. Even Snowflake, which runs multi-cloud, has to pass out on the egress fees of their customer when data moves between clouds. And that's really expensive. I mean there, there is one customer I talked to who is beta testing for them, the MySQL heatwave and aws. The only reason they didn't want to do that until it was running on AWS is the egress fees were so great to move it to OCI that they couldn't afford it. Yeah. Egress fees are the big issue but, >>But Mark the, the point might be you might wanna root query and only get the results set back, right was much more tinier, which been the answer before for low latency between the class A problem, which we sometimes still have but mostly don't have. Right? And I think in general this with fees coming down based on the Oracle general E with fee move and it's very hard to justify those, right? But, but it's, it's not about moving data as a multi-cloud high value use case. It's about doing intelligent things with that data, right? Putting into other places, replicating it, what I'm saying the same thing what you said before, running remote queries on that, analyzing it, running AI on it, running AI models on that. That's the interesting thing. Cross administered in the same way. Taking things out, making sure compliance happens. Making sure when Ron says I don't want to be American anymore, I want to be in the European cloud that is gets migrated, right? So tho those are the interesting value use case which are really, really hard for enterprise to program hand by hand by developers and they would love to have out of the box and that's yet the innovation to come to, we have to come to see. But the first step to get there is that your software runs in multiple clouds and that's what Oracle's doing so well with my SQL >>Guys. Amazing. >>Go ahead. Yeah. >>Yeah. >>For example, >>Amazing amount of data knowledge and, and brain power in this market. Guys, I really want to thank you for coming on to the cube. Ron Holger. Mark, always a pleasure to have you on. Really appreciate your time. >>Well all the last names we're very happy for Romanic last and moderator. Thanks Dave for moderating us. All right, >>We'll see. We'll see you guys around. Safe travels to all and thank you for watching this power panel, The Truth About My SQL Heat Wave on the cube. Your leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage.

>> Welcome back to Supercloud22, #Supercloud22. This is Dave Vellante. In 2019 Oracle and Microsoft announced a collaboration to bring interoperability between OCI, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure and Azure Clouds. It was Oracle's initial foray into so-called multi-cloud and we're joined by Karan Batta, who's the Vice President for Product Management at OCI. And Kris Rice is the Vice President of Software Development at Oracle Database. And we're going to talk about how this technology's evolving and whether it fits our view of what we call supercloud. Welcome gentlemen, thank you. >> Thanks for having us. >> So you recently just last month announced the new service. It extends on the initial partnership with Microsoft Oracle interconnect with Azure, and you refer to this as a secure private link between the two clouds, it cross 11 regions around the world, under two milliseconds data transmission sounds pretty cool. It enables customers to run Microsoft applications against data stored in Oracle databases without any loss in efficiency or presumably performance. So we use this term supercloud to describe a service or sets of services built on hyper scale infrastructure that leverages the core primitives and APIs of an individual cloud platform, but abstracts that underlying complexity to create a continuous experience across more than one cloud. Is that what you've done? >> Absolutely. I think it starts at the top layer in terms of just making things very simple for the customer, right. I think at the end of the day we want to enable true workloads running across two different clouds where you're potentially running maybe the app layer in one and the database layer or the back in another. And the integration I think starts with, you know, making it ease of use. Right. So you can start with things like, okay can you log into your second or your third cloud with the first cloud provider's credentials? Can you make calls against another cloud using another cloud's APIs? Can you peer the networks together? Can you make it seamless? I think those are all the components that are sort of, they're kind of the ingredients to making a multi-cloud or supercloud experience successful. >> Oh, thank you for that, Karan. So I guess there's a question for Chris is I'm trying to understand what you're really solving for? What specific customer problems are you focused on? What's the service optimized for presumably it's database but maybe you could double click on that. >> Sure. So, I mean, of course it's database. So it's a super fast network so that we can split the workload across two different clouds leveraging the best from both, but above the networking, what we had to do do is we had to think about what a true multi-cloud or what you're calling supercloud experience would be it's more than just making the network bites flow. So what we did is we took a look as Karan hinted at right, is where is my identity? Where is my observability? How do I connect these things across how it feels native to that other cloud? >> So what kind of engineering do you have to do to make that work? It's not just plugging stuff together. Maybe you could explain a little bit more detail, the the resources that you had to bring to bear and the technology behind the architecture. >> Sure. I think, it starts with actually, what our goal was, right? Our goal was to actually provide customers with a fully managed experience. What that means is we had to basically create a brand new service. So, we have obviously an Azure like portal and an experience that allows customers to do this but under the covers, we actually have a fully managed service that manages the networking layer, the physical infrastructure, and it actually calls APIs on both sides of the fence. It actually manages your Azure resources, creates them but it also interacts with OCI at the same time. And under the covers this service actually takes Azure primitives as inputs. And then it sort of like essentially translates them to OCI action. So, we actually truly integrated this as a service that's essentially built as a PaaS layer on top of these two clouds. >> So, the customer doesn't really care or know maybe they know cuz they might be coming through, an Azure experience, but you can run work on either Azure and or OCI. And it's a common experience across those clouds. Is that correct? >> That's correct. So like you said, the customer does know that they know there is a relationship with both clouds but thanks to all the things we built there's this thing we invented we created called a multi-cloud control plane. This control plane does operate against both clouds at the same time to make it as seamless as possible so that maybe they don't notice, you know, the power of the interconnect is extremely fast networking, as fast as what we could see inside a single cloud. If you think about how big a data center might be from edge to edge in that cloud, going across the interconnect makes it so that that workload is not important that it's spanning two clouds anymore. >> So you say extremely fast networking. I remember I used to, I wrote a piece a long time ago. Larry Ellison loves InfiniBand. I presume we've moved on from them, but maybe not. What is that interconnect? >> Yeah, so it's funny you mentioned interconnect you know, my previous history comes from Edge PC where we actually inside OCI today, we've moved from Infinite Band as is part of Exadata's core to what we call Rocky V two. So that's just another RDMA network. We actually use it very successfully, not just for Exadata but we use it for our standard computers that we provide to high performance computing customers. >> And the multi-cloud control plane runs. Where does that live? Does it live on OCI? Does it live on Azure? Yes? >> So it does it lives on our side. Our side of the house as part of our Oracle OCI control plane. And it is the veneer that makes these two clouds possible so that we can wire them together. So it knows how to take those Azure primitives and the OCI primitives and wire them at the appropriate levels together. >> Now I want to talk about this PaaS layer. Part of supercloud, we said to actually make it work you're going to have to have a super PaaS. I know we're taking this this term a little far but it's still it's instructive in that, what we surmised was you're probably not going to just use off the shelf, plain old vanilla PaaS, you're actually going to have a purpose built PaaS to solve for the specific problem. So as an example, if you're solving for ultra low latency, which I think you're doing, you're probably no offense to my friends at Red Hat but you're probably not going to develop this on OpenShift, but tell us about that PaaS layer or what we call the super PaaS layer. >> Go ahead, Chris. >> Well, so you're right. We weren't going to build it out on OpenShift. So we have Oracle OCI, you know, the standard is Terraform. So the back end of everything we do is based around Terraform. Today, what we've done is we built that control plane and it will be API drivable, it'll be drivable from the UI and it will let people operate and create primitives across both sides. So you can, you mentioned developers, developers love automation, right, because it makes our lives easy. We will be able to automate a multi-cloud workload from ground up config is code these days. So we can config an entire multi-cloud experience from one place. >> So, double click Chris on that developer experience. What is that like? They're using the same tool set irrespective of, which cloud we're running on is, and it's specific to this service or is it more generic, across other Oracle services? >> There's two parts to that. So one is the, we've only onboarded a portion. So the database portfolio and other services will be coming into this multi-cloud. For the majority of Oracle cloud, the automation, the config layer is based on Terraform. So using Terraform, anyone can configure everything from a mid-tier to an Exadata, all the way soup to nuts from smallest thing possible to the largest. What we've not done yet is integrated truly with the Azure API, from command line drivable. That is coming in the future. It is on the roadmap, it is coming. Then they could get into one tool but right now they would have half their automation for the multi-cloud config on the Azure tool set and half on the OCI tool set. >> But we're not crazy saying from a roadmap standpoint that will provide some benefit to developers and is a reasonable direction for the industry generally but Oracle and Microsoft specifically. >> Absolutely. I'm a developer at heart. And so one of the things we want to make sure is that developers' lives are as easy as possible. >> And is there a metadata management layer or intelligence that you've built in to optimize for performance or low latency or cost across the respective clouds? >> Yeah, definitely. I think, latency's going to be an important factor. The service that we've initially built isn't going to serve, the sort of the tens of microseconds but most applications that are sort of in, running on top of the enterprise applications that are running on top of the database are in the several millisecond range. And we've actually done a lot of work on the networking pairing side to make sure that when we launch these resources across the two clouds we actually picked the right trial site. We picked the right region we pick the right availability zone or domain. So we actually do the due diligence under the cover so the customer doesn't have to do the trial and error and try to find the right latency range. And this is actually one of the big reasons why we only launch the service on the interconnect regions. Even though we have close to, I think close to 40 regions at this point in OCI, this service is only built for the regions that we have an interconnect relationship with Microsoft. >> Okay, so you started with Microsoft in 2019. You're going deeper now in that relationship, is there any reason that you couldn't, I mean technically what would you have to do to go to other clouds? You talked about understanding the primitives and leveraging the primitives of Azure. Presumably if you wanted to do this with AWS or Google or Alibaba, you would have to do similar engineering work, is that correct? Or does what you've developed just kind of poured over to any cloud? >> Yeah, that's absolutely correct Dave. I think Chris talked a lot about the multi-cloud control plane, right? That's essentially the control plane that goes and does stuff on other clouds. We would have to essentially go and build that level of integration into the other clouds. And I think, as we get more popularity and as more products come online through these services I think we'll listen to what customers want. Whether it's, maybe it's the other way around too, Dave maybe it's the fact that they want to use Oracle cloud but they want to use other complimentary services within Oracle cloud. So I think it can go both ways. I think, the market and the customer base will dictate that. >> Yeah. So if I understand that correctly, somebody from another cloud Google cloud could say, Hey we actually want to run this service on OCI cuz we want to expand our market. And if TK gets together with his old friends and figures that out but then we're just, hypothesizing here. But, like you said, it can go both ways. And then, and I have another question related to that. So, multi clouds. Okay, great. Supercloud. How about the Edge? Do you ever see a day where that becomes part of the equation? Certainly the near Edge would, you know, a Home Depot or Lowe's store or a bank, but what about the far Edge, the tiny Edge. Can you talk about the Edge and where that fits in your vision? >> Yeah, absolutely. I think Edge is a interestingly, it's getting fuzzier and fuzzier day by day. I think, the term. Obviously every cloud has their own sort of philosophy in what Edge is, right. We have our own. It starts from, if you do want to do far Edge, we have devices like red devices, which is our ruggedized servers that talk back to our control plane in OCI. You could deploy those things unlike, into war zones and things like that underground. But then we also have things like clouded customer where customers can actually deploy components of our infrastructure like compute or Exadata into a facility where they only need that certain capability. And then a few years ago we launched, what's now called Dedicated Region. And that actually is a different take on Edge in some sense where you get the entire capability of our public commercial region, but within your facility. So imagine if a customer was to essentially point a finger on a commercial map and say, Hey, look, that region is just mine. Essentially that's the capability that we're providing to our customers, where if you have a white space if you have a facility, if you're exiting out of your data center space, you could essentially place an OCI region within your confines behind your firewall. And then you could interconnect that to a cloud provider if you wanted to, and get the same multi-cloud capability that you get in a commercial region. So we have all the spectrums of possibilities here. >> Guys, super interesting discussion. It's very clear to us that the next 10 years of cloud ain't going to be like the last 10. There's a whole new layer. Developing, data is a big key to that. We see industries getting involved. We obviously didn't get into the Oracle Cerner acquisitions. It's a little too early for that but we've actually predicted that companies like Cerner and you're seeing it with Goldman Sachs and Capital One they're actually building services on the cloud. So this is a really exciting new area and really appreciate you guys coming on the Supercloud22 event and sharing your insights. Thanks for your time. >> Thanks for having us. >> Okay. Keep it right there. #Supercloud22. We'll be right back with more great content right after this short break. (lighthearted marimba music)

>>We're back in Boston, the Cube's coverage of AWS reinforced 2022. My name is Dave ante. Steve Malanney is here as the CEO of Aviatrix longtime cube alum sort of collaborator on super cloud. Yeah. Uh, which we have an event, uh, August 9th, which you guys are participating in. So, um, thank you for that. And, yep. Welcome to the cube. >>Yeah. Thank you so great to be here as >>Always back in Boston. Yeah. I'd say good show. Not, not like blow me away. We were AWS, um, summit in New York city three weeks ago. I >>Took, heard it took three hours to get in >>Out control. I heard, well, there were some people two I, maybe three <laugh>, but there was, they expected like maybe nine, 10,000, 19,000 showed up. Now it's a free event. Yeah. 19,000 people. >>Oh, I didn't know it >>Was that many. It was unbelievable. I mean, it was packed. Yeah. You know, so it's a little light here and I think it's cuz you know, everybody's down the Cape, >>There are down the Cape, Rhode Island that's after the fourth. The thing is that we were talking about this. The quality of people are pretty good though. Yeah. Right. This is there's no looky lose it's everybody. That's doing stuff in cloud. They're moving in. This is no longer, Hey, what's this thing called cloud. Right. I remember three, four years ago at AWS. You'd get a lot of that, that kind of stuff. Some the summit meetings and things like that. Now it's, we're a full on deployment mode even >>Here in 2019, the conversation was like, so there's this shared responsibility model and we may have to make sure you understand. I mean, nobody's questioning that today. Yeah. It's more really hardcore best practices and you know how to apply tools. Yeah. You know, dos and don't and so it's a much more sophisticated narrative, I think. Yeah. >>Well, I mean, that's one of the things that Aviatrix does is our whole thing is architecturally. I would say, where does network security belong in the network? It shouldn't be a bolt on it. Shouldn't be something that you add on. It should be something that actually gets integrated into the fabric of the network. So you shouldn't be able to point to network security. It's like, can you point to the network? It's everywhere. Point to air it's everywhere. Network security should be integrated in the fabric and that wasn't done. On-prem that way you steered traffic to this thing called a firewall. But in the cloud, that's not the right architectural way. It it's a choke point. Uh, operationally adds tremendous amount of complexity, which is the whole reason we're going to cloud in the first place is for that agility and the ability to operationally swipe the card and get our developers running to put in these choke points is completely the wrong architecture. So conversations we're having with customers is integrate that security into the fabric of the network. And you get rid of all those, all those operational >>Issues. So explain that how you're not a, a checkpoint, but if you funnel everything into one sort of place >>In the, so we are a networking company, uh, it is uh, cloud networking company. So we, we were born in the cloud cloud native. We, we are not some on-prem networking solution that was jammed in the cloud, uh, wrapped >>In stack wrapped >>In, you know, or like that. No, no, no. And looking for wires, right? That's VM series from Palo. It doesn't even know it's in the cloud. Right. It's looking for wires. Um, and of course multicloud, cuz you know, Larry E said now, could you believe that on stage with sat, Nadela talking about multi-cloud now you really know we've crossed over to this is a, this is a thing, whoever would've thought you'd see that. But anyway, so we're networking. We're cloud networking, of course it's multi-cloud networking and we're gonna integrate these intelligent services into the fabric. And one of those is, is networking. So what happens is you should do security everywhere. So the place to do it is at every single point in the network that you can make a decision and you embed it and actually embed it into the network. So it's that when you're making a decision of does that traffic need to go somewhere or not, you're doing a little bit of security everywhere. And so what, it looks like a giant firewall effectively, but it's actually distributed in software through every single point in a network. >>Can I call it a mesh? >>It's kind of a mesh you can think of. Yeah, it's a fabric. >>Okay. It's >>A, it's a fabric that these advanced services, including security are integrated into that fabric. >>So you've been in networking much of >>Your career career, >>37 years. All your career. Right? So yay. Cisco Palo Alto. Nicera probably missing one or two, but so what do you do with all blue coat? Blue coat? What do you do with all that stuff? That's out there that >>Symantics. >>Yes. <laugh> keep going. >>Yeah, I think that's it. That's >>All I got. Okay. So what do you do with all that stuff? That's that's out there, you rip and replace it. You, >>So in the cloud you mean yeah. >>All this infrastructure that's out there. What is that? Well, you >>Don't have it in the right. And so right now what's happening is people, look, you can't change too many things. If you're a human, you know, they always tell you don't change a job, get married and have a kid or something all in the same year. Like they just, just do one of 'em cuz you it's too much. When people move to the cloud, what they do is they tend to take what they do on Preem and they say, look, I'm gonna change one thing. We're gonna go to the cloud, everything else. I'm gonna keep the same. Cuz I don't wanna change three things. So they kind of lift and shift their same mentality. They take their firewalls, their next gen fire. I want them, they take all the things that they currently do. And they say, I'm gonna try to do that in the cloud. >>It's not really the right way to do it. But sometimes for people that are on-prem people, that's the way to get started and I'll screw it up and not screw it up and, and not change too many things. And look, I'm just used to that. And, and then I'll, then I'll go to change things, to be more cloud native, then I'll realize I can get rid of this and get rid of that and do that. But, but that's where people are. The first thing is bring these things over. We help them do that, right? From a networking perspective, I'll make it easier to bring your old security stuff in. But in parallel to that, we start adding things into the fabric and what's gonna happen is eventually we start adding all these things and things that you can't do separately. We start doing anomaly detection. We start doing behavioral analysis. Why? Because the entire network, we are the data plan. We see everything. And so we can start doing things that a standalone device can't do because not all the traffic steered to them. It can only control what's steered to you. And then eventually what's happening is people look at that device. And then they look at us and then they look at the device and they look at us and they go, why do I have both of this? And we go, I don't know. >>You don't need it. >>Well, can I get rid of that other thing? That's a tool. >>Sure. And there's not a trade off. There's not a trade off. You >>Don't have to. No. Now people rid belts and suspenders. Yeah. Cause it's just, who has, who has enough? Who has too much security buddy? They're gonna, they're gonna do belt suspenders. You know anything they can do. But eventually what will happened is they'll look at what we do and they'll go, that's good enough. That happened to me. When I was at Palo Alto networks, we inserted as a firewall. They kept their existing firewall. They had all these other devices and eventually all those went away and you just had a NextGen >>Firewall just through attrition, >>Through Atian. You're like, you're looking, you go, well, that platform is doing all these functions. Same. Thing's gonna happen to us. The platform of networking's gonna do all your network security devices. So any tool or agent or external, you know, device that you have to steer traffic to ISS gonna go away. You're not gonna need it. >>And, and you talking multi-cloud obviously, >>And then don't wanna do the same thing. Whether man Azure, you know the same. >>Yeah. >>Same, same experie architecture, same experience, same set of services. True. Multi-cloud native. Like you, that's what you want. And oh, by the way, skill, gap, skill shortage is a real thing. And it's getting worse. Cause now with the recession, you think you're gonna be able to add more people. Nope. You're gonna have less people. How do I do this? Any multicloud world with security and all this kind of stuff. You have to put the intelligence in the software, not on your people. Right? >>So speaking of recession. Yep. As a CEO of a well funded company, that's got some momentum. How are you approaching it? Do you have like, did you bring in the war time? Conig I mean, you've been through, you know, downturns before. This is you are you >>I'm on war time already. >>Okay. So yeah. Tell me more about how you you're kind of approaching this >>So recession down. So didn't change what we were doing one bit, because I run it that way from the very beginning. So I've been around 30 years, that's >>Told me he he's like me. You know what he said? >>Yeah. Or maybe >>I'm like, I want be D cuz he said, you know, people talk about, you know, only do things that are absolutely necessary during times like this. I always do things that are only, >>That's all I >>Do necessary. Why would you ever do things that aren't necessary? >><laugh> you'd be surprised. Most companies don't. Yeah. Uh, recession's very good for people like snowflake and for us because we run that way anyway. Mm-hmm <affirmative> um, I, I constantly make decisions that we have to go and dip there's people that aren't right for the business. I move 'em out. Like I don't wait for some like Sequoia stupid rest in peace. The world's ending fire all your people that has no impact on me because I already operated that way. So we, we kind of operate that way and we are, we are like sat Nadel even came out and kind of said, I don't wanna say cloud is recession proof, but it kind of is, is we are so look, our top customer spends 5 million a year. Nothing. We haven't even started yet. David that's minuscule. We're not macro. We're micro 5 million a year for these big enterprises is nothing right. SA Nadel is now starting to count people who do billion dollar agreements with him billion over a period of number of years. Like that's the, the scale we have not even >>Gun billion dollar >>Agreements. We haven't even under begun to understand the scope of what's happening in the cloud. Right. And so yeah, the recession's happening. I don't know. I guess it's impacting somebody. It's not impacting me. It's actually accelerating things because it's a flight to quality and customers go and say, I can't get gear on on-prem anyway, cuz of the, uh, shortage, you know, the, uh, uh, get chips. Um, and that's not the right thing. So guess what the recession says, I'm gonna stop spending more money there and I'm gonna put it into the cloud. >>All right. So you opened up Pandora's box, man. I wanna ask you about your sort of management philosophy. When you come into a company to take, to go lead a company like that. Yeah. How, what, what's your approach to assess the team? Who do you, who do you decide? How do you decide who to keep on the bus? Who to throw off the bus put in the right seats. So how long does that take you? >>Doesn't take long. When I join, we were 30, 30, 8 people. We're now 525. Um, and my view on everything and I I've never met Frank Lubin, but I guarantee you, he has the same philosophy. You have a one year contract me included next year, the board might come to me and say, you were the right CEO for this year. You're not next year. Ben Horowitz taught me that it's a one year contract. There's no multi-year contract. So everybody in the company, including the CEO has a one year >>Contract. So you would say that to the board. Hey, if you can find somebody better, >>If, and, and you know what, I'll be the first one to pull myself, fire myself and say, we're, we're replacing me with somebody better right now. There isn't anybody better. So it's me. So, okay, next year maybe there's somebody better. Or we hit a certain point where I'm not the right guy. I'll I'll, I'll pull myself out as the CEO, but also internally the same thing just because you're the right guy this year. And we hire people for the, what you need to do this year. We're not gonna, we don't hire, oh, like this is the mistake. A lot of companies make, well, we wanna be a billion dollars in sales. So we're gonna go hire some loser from HPE. Who's worked at a company for a billion dollars. And by the way has no idea how they became a billion dollars, right. In revenue or billions of dollars. >>But we're gonna go hire 'em because they must know more than we do. And what every single time you bring them in what you realize, they're idiots. They have no idea how we got to that. And so you, you don't pre-hire for where you want to be. You hire for where you are that year. And then if it's not right, and then if it's not right, you'd be really nice to them. Have great severance packages, be, be respectful for people and be honest with them. I guarantee you Frank, Salman's not, if you're not just have this conversation with a sales guy before I came into here, very straight conversation, Northeast hockey player mentality. We're straight. If you're not working out or I don't think you're doing things right. You're gonna know. And so it's a one year, it's a one year contract. That's what you do. So you don't have time. You don't the luxury of >>Time. So, so that's probably the hardest part of, of any leadership job is, and people don't like confrontation. They like to put it off, but you don't run away from it. It's >>All in a confrontation, right? That's what relationships have built. Why do war buddies hang out with each other? Cuz they've gone through hell, right? It's in the confrontation. And it's, it's actually with customers too, right? If there's an issue, you don't run from it. You actually bring it up in a very straightforward manner and say, Hey, we got a problem, right? They respect you. You respect them, blah, blah, blah. And then you come out of it and go, you know, you have to fight like, look with your wife. You have to fight. If you don't fight, it's not a relationship you've gotta see in that, in that tension is where the relationship's >>Built. See, I should go home and have a fight tonight. You gotta have a fight with your wife. <laugh> you know, you mentioned Satia and Nadella and Larry Ellison. Interesting point. I wanna come back to that. What Oracle did is actually pretty interesting, do we? For their use case? Yeah. You know, it's not your thing. It's like low latency database across clouds. Yeah. Who would ever thought that? But >>We love it. We love it because it drives multi-cloud it drives. Um, and, and, and I actually think we're gonna have multi-cloud applications that are gonna start happening. Um, right now you don't, you have developers that, that, that kind of will use one cloud. But as we start developing and you call it the super cloud, right. When that starts really happening, the infrastructure's gonna allow that networking and network security is that bottom layer that Aviatrix helps once that gets all handled. The app, people are gonna say, so there's no friction. So maybe I can use autonomous database here. I can use this service from GCP. I can use that service and, and put it all into one app. So where's the app run. It's a multicloud app. Doesn't exist today. >>No, that doesn't happen today. >>It's it's happen. It's gonna happen. >>But that's kind of what the vision was. No, seven, eight years ago of what >>It's >>Gonna, that would be, you know, the original premise of hybrid. Right? Right. Um, I think Chuck Hollis, the guy was at EMC at the time he wrote this piece on, he called it private cloud, but he was really describing hybrid cloud application and running in both places that never happened. But it's starting to, I mean, the infrastructure is getting put in place to enable that, I guess is what you're saying. >>Yep. >>Yeah. >>Cool. And multicloud is, is becoming not just four plus one is a lot of enterprises it's becoming plus one, meaning you're gonna have more and more. And then there won't be infrastructure clouds like AWS and so forth, but it's gonna be industry clouds. Right? You've you've talked about that again, back to super clouds. You're gonna have Goldman Sachs creating clouds and you're gonna have AI companies creating clouds. You're gonna have clouds at the edge, you know, for edge computing and all these things all need to be networked with network security integrated. And you mentioned fact >>Aviatrix you mentioned Ben Horowitz, that's mark Andreesen. All, all companies are software companies. All companies are becoming cloud companies. Yeah. Or, or they're missing missing opportunities or they might get disrupted. >>Yeah. Every single company I talk to now, you know, whether you're Heineken, they don't think of themselves as a beer company anymore. We are the most technologically, you know, advanced brewer in the world. Like they all think they're a technology company. Now, whether you're making trucks, whether you're making sneakers, whether you're making beer, you're now a technology company, every single company in >>The world, we are too, we're we're building a media cloud. You're you know, John's, it's a technology company laying that out and yeah. That's we got developers doing that. That's our, that's our future. Yep. You know? Cool. Hey, thanks for coming on, man. Thank you. Great to see you. Thank you for watching. Keep it right there. We'll be back right after this short break. It keeps coverage. AWS reinforced 20, 22 from Boston. Keep it right there. >>You tired? How many interviewed.

(upbeat music) >> Welcome back to Supercloud22, #Supercloud22, this is Dave Vellante. In 2019, Oracle and Microsoft announced a collaboration to bring interoperability between OCI, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure and Azure clouds. It was Oracle's initial foray into so-called multi-cloud and we're joined by Karan Batta, who's the vice president for product management at OCI, and Kris Rice, is the vice president of software development at Oracle database. And we're going to talk about how this technology's evolving and whether it fits our view of what we call, Supercloud. Welcome, gentlemen. Thank you. >> Thanks for having us. >> Thanks for having us. >> So you recently just last month announced the new service. It extends on the initial partnership with Microsoft Oracle Interconnect with Azure, and you refer to this as a secure private link between the two clouds across 11 regions around the world. Under two milliseconds data transmission, sounds pretty cool. It enables customers to run Microsoft applications against data stored in Oracle databases without any loss in efficiency or presumably performance. So we use this term Supercloud to describe a service or sets of services built on hyperscale infrastructure that leverages the core primitives and APIs of an individual cloud platform, but abstracts that underlying complexity to create a continuous experience across more than one cloud. Is that what you've done? >> Absolutely. I think, you know, it starts at the, you know, at the top layer in terms of, you know, just making things very simple for the customer, right. I think at the end of the day we want to enable true workloads running across two different clouds, where you're potentially running maybe the app layer in one and the database layer or the back in another, and the integration I think, starts with, you know, making it ease of use. Right? So you can start with things like, okay can you log into your second or your third cloud with the first cloud provider's credentials? Can you make calls against another cloud using another cloud's APIs? Can you peer the networks together? Can you make it seamless? I think those are all the components that are sort of, they're kind of the ingredients to making a multi-cloud or Supercloud experience successful. >> Oh, thank you for that, Karan. So, I guess as a question for Kris is trying to understand what you're really solving for, what specific customer problems are you focused on? What's the service optimized for presumably its database but maybe you could double click on that. >> Sure. So, I mean, of course it's database so it's a super fast network so that we can split the workload across two different clouds leveraging the best from both, but above the networking, what we had to do is we had to think about what a true multi-cloud or what you're calling Supercloud experience would be. It's more than just making the network bytes flow. So what we did is, we took a look as Karan hinted at, right? Is where is my identity? Where is my observability? How do I connect these things across how it feels native to that other cloud? >> So what kind of engineering do you have to do to make that work? It's not just plugging stuff together. Maybe you could explain in a little bit more detail, the resources that you had to bring to bear and the technology behind the architecture? >> Sure. >> I think, you know, it starts with actually, you know, what our goal was, right? Our goal was to actually provide customers with a fully managed experience. What that means is we had to basically create a brand new service. So, you know, we have obviously an Azure like portal and an experience that allows customers to do this but under the covers, we actually have a fully managed service that manages the networking layer that the physical infrastructure, and it actually calls APIs on both sides of the fence. It actually manages your Azure resources, creates them, but it also interacts with OCI at the same time. And under the covers this service actually takes Azure primitives as inputs, and then it sort of like essentially translates them to OCI action. So, so we actually truly integrated this as a service that's essentially built as a PaaS layer on top of these two clouds. >> So, so the customer doesn't really care, or know, maybe they know, coz they might be coming through, you know, an Azure experience, but you can run work on either Azure and or OCI, and it's a common experience across those clouds, is that correct? >> That's correct. So, like you said, the customer does know that they know there is a relationship with both clouds but thanks to all the things we built there's this thing we invented, we created called a multi-cloud control plane. This control plane does operate against both clouds at the same time to make it as seamless as possible so that maybe they don't notice, you know, the power of the interconnect is extremely fast networking, as fast as what we could see inside a single cloud, if you think about how big a data center might be from edge to edge in that cloud. Going across the interconnect makes it so that that workload is not important that it's spanning two clouds anymore. >> So you say extremely fast networking. I remember I used to, I wrote a piece a long time ago. Hey, Larry Ellison loves InfiniBand. I presume we've moved on from them, but maybe not. What is that interconnect? >> Yeah, so it's funny, you mentioned interconnect, you know, my previous history comes from HPC where we actually inside inside OCI today, we've moved from, you know, InfiniBand as its part of Exadata's core, to what we call RoCEv2. So that's just another RDMA network. We actually use it very successfully, not just for Exadata but we use it for our standard computers, you know, that we provide to, you know, high performance computing customers. >> And the multi-cloud control plane, runs... Where does that live? Does it live on OCI? Does it live on Azure? Yes? >> So it does. It lives on our side. >> Yeah. >> Our side of the house, and it is part of our Oracle OCI control plane. And it is the veneer that makes these two clouds possible so that we can wire them together. So it knows how to take those Azure primitives and the OCI primitives and wire them at the appropriate levels together. >> Now I want to talk about this PaaS layer. Part of Supercloud, we said, to actually make it work you're going to have to have a super PaaS. I know, we're taking this term a little far but it's still, it's instructive in that, what we, what we surmised was, you're probably not going to just use off the shelf, plain old vanilla PaaS, you're actually going to have a purpose built PaaS to solve for the specific problem. So, as an example, if you're solving for ultra low latency, which I think you're doing, you're probably, no offense to my friends at Red Hat, but you're probably not going to develop this on OpenShift, but tell us about that, that PaaS layer or what we call the super PaaS layer. >> Go ahead, Kris. >> Well, so you're right. We weren't going to build it out on OpenShift. So we have Oracle OCI, you know, the standard is Terraform. So the back end of everything we do is based around Terraform. Today, what we've done, is we built that control plane and it will be API drivable. It'll be drivable from the UI and it will let people operate and create primitives across both sides. So you can, you, you mentioned developers developers love automation, right? Because it makes our lives easy. We will be able to automate a multi-cloud workload, from ground up, Config is code these days. So we can Config an entire multi-cloud experience from one place. >> So, double click Kris on that developer experience, you know, what is that like? They're using the same tool set irrespective of, you know, which cloud we're running on is, is it and it's specific to this service or is it more generic across other Oracle services? >> There's two parts to that. So one is the, we've only onboarded a portion. So the database portfolio and other services will be coming into this multi-cloud. For the majority of Oracle cloud the automation, the Config layer is based on Terraform. So using Terraform, anyone can configure everything from a mid tier to an Exadata, all the way soup to nuts from smallest thing possible to the largest. What we've not done yet is is integrated truly with the Azure API, from command line drivable, that is coming in the future. It will be, it is on the roadmap. It is coming, then they could get into one tool but right now they would have half their automation for the multi-cloud Config on the Azure tool set and half on the OCI tool set. >> But we're not crazy saying from a roadmap standpoint that will provide some benefit to developers and is a reasonable direction for the industry generally but Oracle and, and, and Microsoft specifically? >> Absolutely. I'm a developer at heart. And so one of the things we want to make sure is that developers' lives are as easy as possible. >> And, and is there a Metadata management layer or intelligence that you've built in to optimize for performance or low latency or cost across the, the respective clouds? >> Yeah, definitely. I think, you know, latency's going to be an important factor. You know, the, the service that we've initially built isn't going to serve, you know, the sort of the tens of microseconds but most applications that are sort of in, you know, running on top of, the enterprise applications that are running on top of the database are in the several millisecond range. And we've actually done a lot of work on the networking pairing side to make sure that when we launch, when we launch these resources across the two clouds we actually pick the right trial site, we pick the right region, we pick the right availability zone or domain. So we actually do the due diligence under the cover, so the customer doesn't have to do the trial and error and try to find the right latency range, you know, and this is actually one of the big reasons why we only launched this service on the interconnect regions. Even though we have close to, I think, close to 40 regions at this point in OCI, this, this, this service is only built for the regions that we have an interconnect relationship with with Microsoft. >> Okay. So, so you've, you started with Microsoft in 2019 you're going deeper now in that relationship, is there is there any reason that you couldn't, I mean technically what would you have to do to go to other clouds? Would you just, you talked about understanding the primitives and leveraging the primitives of Azure. Presumably if you wanted to do this with AWS or Google or Alibaba, you would have to do similar engineering work, is that correct? Or does what you've developed just kind of pour it over to any cloud? >> Yeah, that's, that's absolutely correct, Dave, I think, you know, Kris talked a lot about kind of the multi-cloud control plane, right? That's essentially the, the, the control plane that goes and does stuff on other clouds. We would have to essentially go and build that level of integration into the other clouds. And I think, you know, as we get more popularity and as as more products come online through these services I think we'll listen to what customers want, whether it's you know, maybe it's the other way around too, Dave maybe it's the fact that they want to use Oracle cloud but they want to use other complimentary services within Oracle cloud. So I think it can go both ways. I think, you know, kind of the market and the customer base will dictate that. >> Yeah. So if I understand that correctly, somebody from another cloud Google cloud could say, "Hey, we actually want to run this service on OCI coz we want to expand our market and..." >> Right. >> And if TK gets together with his old friends and figures that out but we're just, you know, hypothesizing here, but but like you said, it can, can go both ways. And then, and I have another question related to that. So you multi-clouds. Okay, great. Supercloud. How about the edge? Do you ever see a day where that becomes part of the equation? Certainly the, the near edge would, you know, a a home Depot or a Lowe's store or a bank, but what about like the far edge, the tiny edge. Do, do you, can you talk about the edge and and where that fits in your vision? >> Yeah, absolutely. I think edge is a interestingly, it's a, it's a it's getting fuzzier and fuzzier day by day. I think there's the term, you know, we, obviously every cloud has their own sort of philosophy in what edge is, right? We have our own, you know, it starts from, you know, if you if you do want to do far edge, you know, we have devices like red devices, which is our ruggedized servers that that talk back to our, our control plane in OCI you could deploy those things in like, you know, into war zones and things like that underground. But then we also have things like Cloud@Customer where customers can actually deploy components of our infrastructure, like Compute or Exadata into a facility where they only need that certain capability. And then a few years ago we launched, you know, what's now called Dedicated Region. And that actually is a, is a different take on edge in some sense where you get the entire capability of our public commercial region, but within your facility. So imagine if, if, if a customer was to essentially point to, you know, point to, point a finger on a commercial map and say, "Hey, look, that region is just mine." Essentially, that's the capability that we're providing to our customers, where if you have a white space if you have a facility if you're exiting out of your data center space you could essentially place an OCI region within your confines behind your firewall. And then you could interconnect that to a cloud provider if you wanted to. and get the same multi-cloud capability that you get in a commercial region. So we have all the spectrums of possibilities there. >> Guys, super interesting discussion. It's very clear to us that the next 10 years of cloud ain't going to be like the last 10. There's a whole new layer developing. Data is a big key to that. We see industries getting involved. We obviously didn't, didn't get into the Oracle Cerner acquisitions a little too early for that but we we've actually predicted that companies like Cerner and you've seen it with Goldman Sachs and Capital One, they're actually building services on the cloud. So this is a really exciting new area and I really appreciate you guys coming on the Supercloud22 event and sharing your insights. Thanks for your time. >> Thank very much. >> Thank very much. >> Okay. Keep it right there. #Supercloud22. We'll be right back with more great content right after this short break. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> The ascendancy of cloud and SAS has shown new light on how organizations think about, pay for, and value hardware. Once sought after skills for practitioners with expertise in hardware troubleshooting, configuring ports, tuning storage arrays, and maximizing server utilization has been superseded by demand for cloud architects, DevOps pros, developers with expertise in microservices, container, application development, and like. Even a company like Dell, the largest hardware company in enterprise tech touts that it has more software engineers than those working in hardware. Begs the question, is hardware going the way of Coball? Well, not likely. Software has to run on something, but the labor needed to deploy, and troubleshoot, and manage hardware infrastructure is shifting. At the same time, we've seen the value flow also shifting in hardware. Once a world dominated by X86 processors value is flowing to alternatives like Nvidia and arm based designs. Moreover, other componentry like NICs, accelerators, and storage controllers are becoming more advanced, integrated, and increasingly important. The question is, does it matter? And if so, why does it matter and to whom? What does it mean to customers, workloads, OEMs, and the broader society? Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we've organized a special power panel of industry analysts and experts to address the question, does hardware still matter? Allow me to introduce the panel. Bob O'Donnell is president and chief analyst at TECHnalysis Research. Zeus Kerravala is the founder and principal analyst at ZK Research. David Nicholson is a CTO and tech expert. Keith Townson is CEO and founder of CTO Advisor. And Marc Staimer is the chief dragon slayer at Dragon Slayer Consulting and oftentimes a Wikibon contributor. Guys, welcome to theCUBE. Thanks so much for spending some time here. >> Good to be here. >> Thanks. >> Thanks for having us. >> Okay before we get into it, I just want to bring up some data from ETR. This is a survey that ETR does every quarter. It's a survey of about 1200 to 1500 CIOs and IT buyers and I'm showing a subset of the taxonomy here. This XY axis and the vertical axis is something called net score. That's a measure of spending momentum. It's essentially the percentage of customers that are spending more on a particular area than those spending less. You subtract the lesses from the mores and you get a net score. Anything the horizontal axis is pervasion in the data set. Sometimes they call it market share. It's not like IDC market share. It's just the percentage of activity in the data set as a percentage of the total. That red 40% line, anything over that is considered highly elevated. And for the past, I don't know, eight to 12 quarters, the big four have been AI and machine learning, containers, RPA and cloud and cloud of course is very impressive because not only is it elevated in the vertical access, but you know it's very highly pervasive on the horizontal. So what I've done is highlighted in red that historical hardware sector. The server, the storage, the networking, and even PCs despite the work from home are depressed in relative terms. And of course, data center collocation services. Okay so you're seeing obviously hardware is not... People don't have the spending momentum today that they used to. They've got other priorities, et cetera, but I want to start and go kind of around the horn with each of you, what is the number one trend that each of you sees in hardware and why does it matter? Bob O'Donnell, can you please start us off? >> Sure Dave, so look, I mean, hardware is incredibly important and one comment first I'll make on that slide is let's not forget that hardware, even though it may not be growing, the amount of money spent on hardware continues to be very, very high. It's just a little bit more stable. It's not as subject to big jumps as we see certainly in other software areas. But look, the important thing that's happening in hardware is the diversification of the types of chip architectures we're seeing and how and where they're being deployed, right? You refer to this in your opening. We've moved from a world of x86 CPUs from Intel and AMD to things like obviously GPUs, DPUs. We've got VPU for, you know, computer vision processing. We've got AI-dedicated accelerators, we've got all kinds of other network acceleration tools and AI-powered tools. There's an incredible diversification of these chip architectures and that's been happening for a while but now we're seeing them more widely deployed and it's being done that way because workloads are evolving. The kinds of workloads that we're seeing in some of these software areas require different types of compute engines than traditionally we've had. The other thing is (coughs), excuse me, the power requirements based on where geographically that compute happens is also evolving. This whole notion of the edge, which I'm sure we'll get into a little bit more detail later is driven by the fact that where the compute actually sits closer to in theory the edge and where edge devices are, depending on your definition, changes the power requirements. It changes the kind of connectivity that connects the applications to those edge devices and those applications. So all of those things are being impacted by this growing diversity in chip architectures. And that's a very long-term trend that I think we're going to continue to see play out through this decade and well into the 2030s as well. >> Excellent, great, great points. Thank you, Bob. Zeus up next, please. >> Yeah, and I think the other thing when you look at this chart to remember too is, you know, through the pandemic and the work from home period a lot of companies did put their office modernization projects on hold and you heard that echoed, you know, from really all the network manufacturers anyways. They always had projects underway to upgrade networks. They put 'em on hold. Now that people are starting to come back to the office, they're looking at that now. So we might see some change there, but Bob's right. The size of those market are quite a bit different. I think the other big trend here is the hardware companies, at least in the areas that I look at networking are understanding now that it's a combination of hardware and software and silicon that works together that creates that optimum type of performance and experience, right? So some things are best done in silicon. Some like data forwarding and things like that. Historically when you look at the way network devices were built, you did everything in hardware. You configured in hardware, they did all the data for you, and did all the management. And that's been decoupled now. So more and more of the control element has been placed in software. A lot of the high-performance things, encryption, and as I mentioned, data forwarding, packet analysis, stuff like that is still done in hardware, but not everything is done in hardware. And so it's a combination of the two. I think, for the people that work with the equipment as well, there's been more shift to understanding how to work with software. And this is a mistake I think the industry made for a while is we had everybody convinced they had to become a programmer. It's really more a software power user. Can you pull things out of software? Can you through API calls and things like that. But I think the big frame here is, David, it's a combination of hardware, software working together that really make a difference. And you know how much you invest in hardware versus software kind of depends on the performance requirements you have. And I'll talk about that later but that's really the big shift that's happened here. It's the vendors that figured out how to optimize performance by leveraging the best of all of those. >> Excellent. You guys both brought up some really good themes that we can tap into Dave Nicholson, please. >> Yeah, so just kind of picking up where Bob started off. Not only are we seeing the rise of a variety of CPU designs, but I think increasingly the connectivity that's involved from a hardware perspective, from a kind of a server or service design perspective has become increasingly important. I think we'll get a chance to look at this in more depth a little bit later but when you look at what happens on the motherboard, you know we're not in so much a CPU-centric world anymore. Various application environments have various demands and you can meet them by using a variety of components. And it's extremely significant when you start looking down at the component level. It's really important that you optimize around those components. So I guess my summary would be, I think we are moving out of the CPU-centric hardware model into more of a connectivity-centric model. We can talk more about that later. >> Yeah, great. And thank you, David, and Keith Townsend I really interested in your perspectives on this. I mean, for years you worked in a data center surrounded by hardware. Now that we have the software defined data center, please chime in here. >> Well, you know, I'm going to dig deeper into that software-defined data center nature of what's happening with hardware. Hardware is meeting software infrastructure as code is a thing. What does that code look like? We're still trying to figure out but servicing up these capabilities that the previous analysts have brought up, how do I ensure that I can get the level of services needed for the applications that I need? Whether they're legacy, traditional data center, workloads, AI ML, workloads, workloads at the edge. How do I codify that and consume that as a service? And hardware vendors are figuring this out. HPE, the big push into GreenLake as a service. Dale now with Apex taking what we need, these bare bone components, moving it forward with DDR five, six CXL, et cetera, and surfacing that as cold or as services. This is a very tough problem. As we transition from consuming a hardware-based configuration to this infrastructure as cold paradigm shift. >> Yeah, programmable infrastructure, really attacking that sort of labor discussion that we were having earlier, okay. Last but not least Marc Staimer, please. >> Thanks, Dave. My peers raised really good points. I agree with most of them, but I'm going to disagree with the title of this session, which is, does hardware matter? It absolutely matters. You can't run software on the air. You can't run it in an ephemeral cloud, although there's the technical cloud and that's a different issue. The cloud is kind of changed everything. And from a market perspective in the 40 plus years I've been in this business, I've seen this perception that hardware has to go down in price every year. And part of that was driven by Moore's law. And we're coming to, let's say a lag or an end, depending on who you talk to Moore's law. So we're not doubling our transistors every 18 to 24 months in a chip and as a result of that, there's been a higher emphasis on software. From a market perception, there's no penalty. They don't put the same pressure on software from the market to reduce the cost every year that they do on hardware, which kind of bass ackwards when you think about it. Hardware costs are fixed. Software costs tend to be very low. It's kind of a weird thing that we do in the market. And what's changing is we're now starting to treat hardware like software from an OPEX versus CapEx perspective. So yes, hardware matters. And we'll talk about that more in length. >> You know, I want to follow up on that. And I wonder if you guys have a thought on this, Bob O'Donnell, you and I have talked about this a little bit. Marc, you just pointed out that Moore's laws could have waning. Pat Gelsinger recently at their investor meeting said that he promised that Moore's law is alive and well. And the point I made in breaking analysis was okay, great. You know, Pat said, doubling transistors every 18 to 24 months, let's say that Intel can do that. Even though we know it's waning somewhat. Look at the M1 Ultra from Apple (chuckles). In about 15 months increased transistor density on their package by 6X. So to your earlier point, Bob, we have this sort of these alternative processors that are really changing things. And to Dave Nicholson's point, there's a whole lot of supporting components as well. Do you have a comment on that, Bob? >> Yeah, I mean, it's a great point, Dave. And one thing to bear in mind as well, not only are we seeing a diversity of these different chip architectures and different types of components as a number of us have raised the other big point and I think it was Keith that mentioned it. CXL and interconnect on the chip itself is dramatically changing it. And a lot of the more interesting advances that are going to continue to drive Moore's law forward in terms of the way we think about performance, if perhaps not number of transistors per se, is the interconnects that become available. You're seeing the development of chiplets or tiles, people use different names, but the idea is you can have different components being put together eventually in sort of a Lego block style. And what that's also going to allow, not only is that going to give interesting performance possibilities 'cause of the faster interconnect. So you can share, have shared memory between things which for big workloads like AI, huge data sets can make a huge difference in terms of how you talk to memory over a network connection, for example, but not only that you're going to see more diversity in the types of solutions that can be built. So we're going to see even more choices in hardware from a silicon perspective because you'll be able to piece together different elements. And oh, by the way, the other benefit of that is we've reached a point in chip architectures where not everything benefits from being smaller. We've been so focused and so obsessed when it comes to Moore's law, to the size of each individual transistor and yes, for certain architecture types, CPUs and GPUs in particular, that's absolutely true, but we've already hit the point where things like RF for 5g and wifi and other wireless technologies and a whole bunch of other things actually don't get any better with a smaller transistor size. They actually get worse. So the beauty of these chiplet architectures is you could actually combine different chip manufacturing sizes. You know you hear about four nanometer and five nanometer along with 14 nanometer on a single chip, each one optimized for its specific application yet together, they can give you the best of all worlds. And so we're just at the very beginning of that era, which I think is going to drive a ton of innovation. Again, gets back to my comment about different types of devices located geographically different places at the edge, in the data center, you know, in a private cloud versus a public cloud. All of those things are going to be impacted and there'll be a lot more options because of this silicon diversity and this interconnect diversity that we're just starting to see. >> Yeah, David. David Nicholson's got a graphic on that. They're going to show later. Before we do that, I want to introduce some data. I actually want to ask Keith to comment on this before we, you know, go on. This next slide is some data from ETR that shows the percent of customers that cited difficulty procuring hardware. And you can see the red is they had significant issues and it's most pronounced in laptops and networking hardware on the far right-hand side, but virtually all categories, firewalls, peripheral servers, storage are having moderately difficult procurement issues. That's the sort of pinkish or significant challenges. So Keith, I mean, what are you seeing with your customers in the hardware supply chains and bottlenecks? And you know we're seeing it with automobiles and appliances but so it goes beyond IT. The semiconductor, you know, challenges. What's been the impact on the buyer community and society and do you have any sense as to when it will subside? >> You know, I was just asked this question yesterday and I'm feeling the pain. People question, kind of a side project within the CTO advisor, we built a hybrid infrastructure, traditional IT data center that we're walking with the traditional customer and modernizing that data center. So it was, you know, kind of a snapshot of time in 2016, 2017, 10 gigabit, ARISTA switches, some older Dell's 730 XD switches, you know, speeds and feeds. And we said we would modern that with the latest Intel stack and connected to the public cloud and then the pandemic hit and we are experiencing a lot of the same challenges. I thought we'd easily migrate from 10 gig networking to 25 gig networking path that customers are going on. The 10 gig network switches that I bought used are now double the price because you can't get legacy 10 gig network switches because all of the manufacturers are focusing on the more profitable 25 gig for capacity, even the 25 gig switches. And we're focused on networking right now. It's hard to procure. We're talking about nine to 12 months or more lead time. So we're seeing customers adjust by adopting cloud. But if you remember early on in the pandemic, Microsoft Azure kind of gated customers that didn't have a capacity agreement. So customers are keeping an eye on that. There's a desire to abstract away from the underlying vendor to be able to control or provision your IT services in a way that we do with VMware VP or some other virtualization technology where it doesn't matter who can get me the hardware, they can just get me the hardware because it's critically impacting projects and timelines. >> So that's a great setup Zeus for you with Keith mentioned the earlier the software-defined data center with software-defined networking and cloud. Do you see a day where networking hardware is monetized and it's all about the software, or are we there already? >> No, we're not there already. And I don't see that really happening any time in the near future. I do think it's changed though. And just to be clear, I mean, when you look at that data, this is saying customers have had problems procuring the equipment, right? And there's not a network vendor out there. I've talked to Norman Rice at Extreme, and I've talked to the folks at Cisco and ARISTA about this. They all said they could have had blowout quarters had they had the inventory to ship. So it's not like customers aren't buying this anymore. Right? I do think though, when it comes to networking network has certainly changed some because there's a lot more controls as I mentioned before that you can do in software. And I think the customers need to start thinking about the types of hardware they buy and you know, where they're going to use it and, you know, what its purpose is. Because I've talked to customers that have tried to run software and commodity hardware and where the performance requirements are very high and it's bogged down, right? It just doesn't have the horsepower to run it. And, you know, even when you do that, you have to start thinking of the components you use. The NICs you buy. And I've talked to customers that have simply just gone through the process replacing a NIC card and a commodity box and had some performance problems and, you know, things like that. So if agility is more important than performance, then by all means try running software on commodity hardware. I think that works in some cases. If performance though is more important, that's when you need that kind of turnkey hardware system. And I've actually seen more and more customers reverting back to that model. In fact, when you talk to even some startups I think today about when they come to market, they're delivering things more on appliances because that's what customers want. And so there's this kind of app pivot this pendulum of agility and performance. And if performance absolutely matters, that's when you do need to buy these kind of turnkey, prebuilt hardware systems. If agility matters more, that's when you can go more to software, but the underlying hardware still does matter. So I think, you know, will we ever have a day where you can just run it on whatever hardware? Maybe but I'll long be retired by that point. So I don't care. >> Well, you bring up a good point Zeus. And I remember the early days of cloud, the narrative was, oh, the cloud vendors. They don't use EMC storage, they just run on commodity storage. And then of course, low and behold, you know, they've trot out James Hamilton to talk about all the custom hardware that they were building. And you saw Google and Microsoft follow suit. >> Well, (indistinct) been falling for this forever. Right? And I mean, all the way back to the turn of the century, we were calling for the commodity of hardware. And it's never really happened because you can still drive. As long as you can drive innovation into it, customers will always lean towards the innovation cycles 'cause they get more features faster and things. And so the vendors have done a good job of keeping that cycle up but it'll be a long time before. >> Yeah, and that's why you see companies like Pure Storage. A storage company has 69% gross margins. All right. I want to go jump ahead. We're going to bring up the slide four. I want to go back to something that Bob O'Donnell was talking about, the sort of supporting act. The diversity of silicon and we've marched to the cadence of Moore's law for decades. You know, we asked, you know, is Moore's law dead? We say it's moderating. Dave Nicholson. You want to talk about those supporting components. And you shared with us a slide that shift. You call it a shift from a processor-centric world to a connect-centric world. What do you mean by that? And let's bring up slide four and you can talk to that. >> Yeah, yeah. So first, I want to echo this sentiment that the question does hardware matter is sort of the answer is of course it matters. Maybe the real question should be, should you care about it? And the answer to that is it depends who you are. If you're an end user using an application on your mobile device, maybe you don't care how the architecture is put together. You just care that the service is delivered but as you back away from that and you get closer and closer to the source, someone needs to care about the hardware and it should matter. Why? Because essentially what hardware is doing is it's consuming electricity and dollars and the more efficiently you can configure hardware, the more bang you're going to get for your buck. So it's not only a quantitative question in terms of how much can you deliver? But it also ends up being a qualitative change as capabilities allow for things we couldn't do before, because we just didn't have the aggregate horsepower to do it. So this chart actually comes out of some performance tests that were done. So it happens to be Dell servers with Broadcom components. And the point here was to peel back, you know, peel off the top of the server and look at what's in that server, starting with, you know, the PCI interconnect. So PCIE gen three, gen four, moving forward. What are the effects on from an interconnect versus on performance application performance, translating into new orders per minute, processed per dollar, et cetera, et cetera? If you look at the advances in CPU architecture mapped against the advances in interconnect and storage subsystem performance, you can see that CPU architecture is sort of lagging behind in a way. And Bob mentioned this idea of tiling and all of the different ways to get around that. When we do performance testing, we can actually peg CPUs, just running the performance tests without any actual database environments working. So right now we're at this sort of imbalance point where you have to make sure you design things properly to get the most bang per kilowatt hour of power per dollar input. So the key thing here what this is highlighting is just as a very specific example, you take a card that's designed as a gen three PCIE device, and you plug it into a gen four slot. Now the card is the bottleneck. You plug a gen four card into a gen four slot. Now the gen four slot is the bottleneck. So we're constantly chasing these bottlenecks. Someone has to be focused on that from an architectural perspective, it's critically important. So there's no question that it matters. But of course, various people in this food chain won't care where it comes from. I guess a good analogy might be, where does our food come from? If I get a steak, it's a pink thing wrapped in plastic, right? Well, there are a lot of inputs that a lot of people have to care about to get that to me. Do I care about all of those things? No. Are they important? They're critically important. >> So, okay. So all I want to get to the, okay. So what does this all mean to customers? And so what I'm hearing from you is to balance a system it's becoming, you know, more complicated. And I kind of been waiting for this day for a long time, because as we all know the bottleneck was always the spinning disc, the last mechanical. So people who wrote software knew that when they were doing it right, the disc had to go and do stuff. And so they were doing other things in the software. And now with all these new interconnects and flash and things like you could do atomic rights. And so that opens up new software possibilities and combine that with alternative processes. But what's the so what on this to the customer and the application impact? Can anybody address that? >> Yeah, let me address that for a moment. I want to leverage some of the things that Bob said, Keith said, Zeus said, and David said, yeah. So I'm a bit of a contrarian in some of this. For example, on the chip side. As the chips get smaller, 14 nanometer, 10 nanometer, five nanometer, soon three nanometer, we talk about more cores, but the biggest problem on the chip is the interconnect from the chip 'cause the wires get smaller. People don't realize in 2004 the latency on those wires in the chips was 80 picoseconds. Today it's 1300 picoseconds. That's on the chip. This is why they're not getting faster. So we maybe getting a little bit slowing down in Moore's law. But even as we kind of conquer that you still have the interconnect problem and the interconnect problem goes beyond the chip. It goes within the system, composable architectures. It goes to the point where Keith made, ultimately you need a hybrid because what we're seeing, what I'm seeing and I'm talking to customers, the biggest issue they have is moving data. Whether it be in a chip, in a system, in a data center, between data centers, moving data is now the biggest gating item in performance. So if you want to move it from, let's say your transactional database to your machine learning, it's the bottleneck, it's moving the data. And so when you look at it from a distributed environment, now you've got to move the compute to the data. The only way to get around these bottlenecks today is to spend less time in trying to move the data and more time in taking the compute, the software, running on hardware closer to the data. Go ahead. >> So is this what you mean when Nicholson was talking about a shift from a processor centric world to a connectivity centric world? You're talking about moving the bits across all the different components, not having the processor you're saying is essentially becoming the bottleneck or the memory, I guess. >> Well, that's one of them and there's a lot of different bottlenecks, but it's the data movement itself. It's moving away from, wait, why do we need to move the data? Can we move the compute, the processing closer to the data? Because if we keep them separate and this has been a trend now where people are moving processing away from it. It's like the edge. I think it was Zeus or David. You were talking about the edge earlier. As you look at the edge, who defines the edge, right? Is the edge a closet or is it a sensor? If it's a sensor, how do you do AI at the edge? When you don't have enough power, you don't have enough computable. People were inventing chips to do that. To do all that at the edge, to do AI within the sensor, instead of moving the data to a data center or a cloud to do the processing. Because the lag in latency is always limited by speed of light. How fast can you move the electrons? And all this interconnecting, all the processing, and all the improvement we're seeing in the PCIE bus from three, to four, to five, to CXL, to a higher bandwidth on the network. And that's all great but none of that deals with the speed of light latency. And that's an-- Go ahead. >> You know Marc, no, I just want to just because what you're referring to could be looked at at a macro level, which I think is what you're describing. You can also look at it at a more micro level from a systems design perspective, right? I'm going to be the resident knuckle dragging hardware guy on the panel today. But it's exactly right. You moving compute closer to data includes concepts like peripheral cards that have built in intelligence, right? So again, in some of this testing that I'm referring to, we saw dramatic improvements when you basically took the horsepower instead of using the CPU horsepower for the like IO. Now you have essentially offload engines in the form of storage controllers, rate controllers, of course, for ethernet NICs, smart NICs. And so when you can have these sort of offload engines and we've gone through these waves over time. People think, well, wait a minute, raid controller and NVMe? You know, flash storage devices. Does that make sense? It turns out it does. Why? Because you're actually at a micro level doing exactly what you're referring to. You're bringing compute closer to the data. Now, closer to the data meaning closer to the data storage subsystem. It doesn't solve the macro issue that you're referring to but it is important. Again, going back to this idea of system design optimization, always chasing the bottleneck, plugging the holes. Someone needs to do that in this value chain in order to get the best value for every kilowatt hour of power and every dollar. >> Yeah. >> Well this whole drive performance has created some really interesting architectural designs, right? Like Nickelson, the rise of the DPU right? Brings more processing power into systems that already had a lot of processing power. There's also been some really interesting, you know, kind of innovation in the area of systems architecture too. If you look at the way Nvidia goes to market, their drive kit is a prebuilt piece of hardware, you know, optimized for self-driving cars, right? They partnered with Pure Storage and ARISTA to build that AI-ready infrastructure. I remember when I talked to Charlie Giancarlo, the CEO of Pure about when the three companies rolled that out. He said, "Look, if you're going to do AI, "you need good store. "You need fast storage, fast processor and fast network." And so for customers to be able to put that together themselves was very, very difficult. There's a lot of software that needs tuning as well. So the three companies partner together to create a fully integrated turnkey hardware system with a bunch of optimized software that runs on it. And so in that case, in some ways the hardware was leading the software innovation. And so, the variety of different architectures we have today around hardware has really exploded. And I think it, part of the what Bob brought up at the beginning about the different chip design. >> Yeah, Bob talked about that earlier. Bob, I mean, most AI today is modeling, you know, and a lot of that's done in the cloud and it looks from my standpoint anyway that the future is going to be a lot of AI inferencing at the edge. And that's a radically different architecture, Bob, isn't it? >> It is, it's a completely different architecture. And just to follow up on a couple points, excellent conversation guys. Dave talked about system architecture and really this that's what this boils down to, right? But it's looking at architecture at every level. I was talking about the individual different components the new interconnect methods. There's this new thing called UCIE universal connection. I forget what it stands answer for, but it's a mechanism for doing chiplet architectures, but then again, you have to take it up to the system level, 'cause it's all fine and good. If you have this SOC that's tuned and optimized, but it has to talk to the rest of the system. And that's where you see other issues. And you've seen things like CXL and other interconnect standards, you know, and nobody likes to talk about interconnect 'cause it's really wonky and really technical and not that sexy, but at the end of the day it's incredibly important exactly. To the other points that were being raised like mark raised, for example, about getting that compute closer to where the data is and that's where again, a diversity of chip architectures help and exactly to your last comment there Dave, putting that ability in an edge device is really at the cutting edge of what we're seeing on a semiconductor design and the ability to, for example, maybe it's an FPGA, maybe it's a dedicated AI chip. It's another kind of chip architecture that's being created to do that inferencing on the edge. Because again, it's that the cost and the challenges of moving lots of data, whether it be from say a smartphone to a cloud-based application or whether it be from a private network to a cloud or any other kinds of permutations we can think of really matters. And the other thing is we're tackling bigger problems. So architecturally, not even just architecturally within a system, but when we think about DPUs and the sort of the east west data center movement conversation that we hear Nvidia and others talk about, it's about combining multiple sets of these systems to function together more efficiently again with even bigger sets of data. So really is about tackling where the processing is needed, having the interconnect and the ability to get where the data you need to the right place at the right time. And because those needs are diversifying, we're just going to continue to see an explosion of different choices and options, which is going to make hardware even more essential I would argue than it is today. And so I think what we're going to see not only does hardware matter, it's going to matter even more in the future than it does now. >> Great, yeah. Great discussion, guys. I want to bring Keith back into the conversation here. Keith, if your main expertise in tech is provisioning LUNs, you probably you want to look for another job. So maybe clearly hardware matters, but with software defined everything, do people with hardware expertise matter outside of for instance, component manufacturers or cloud companies? I mean, VMware certainly changed the dynamic in servers. Dell just spun off its most profitable asset and VMware. So it obviously thinks hardware can stand alone. How does an enterprise architect view the shift to software defined hyperscale cloud and how do you see the shifting demand for skills in enterprise IT? >> So I love the question and I'll take a different view of it. If you're a data analyst and your primary value add is that you do ETL transformation, talk to a CDO, a chief data officer over midsize bank a little bit ago. He said 80% of his data scientists' time is done on ETL. Super not value ad. He wants his data scientists to do data science work. Chances are if your only value is that you do LUN provisioning, then you probably don't have a job now. The technologies have gotten much more intelligent. As infrastructure pros, we want to give infrastructure pros the opportunities to shine and I think the software defined nature and the automation that we're seeing vendors undertake, whether it's Dell, HP, Lenovo take your pick that Pure Storage, NetApp that are doing the automation and the ML needed so that these practitioners don't spend 80% of their time doing LUN provisioning and focusing on their true expertise, which is ensuring that data is stored. Data is retrievable, data's protected, et cetera. I think the shift is to focus on that part of the job that you're ensuring no matter where the data's at, because as my data is spread across the enterprise hybrid different types, you know, Dave, you talk about the super cloud a lot. If my data is in the super cloud, protecting that data and securing that data becomes much more complicated when than when it was me just procuring or provisioning LUNs. So when you say, where should the shift be, or look be, you know, focusing on the real value, which is making sure that customers can access data, can recover data, can get data at performance levels that they need within the price point. They need to get at those datasets and where they need it. We talked a lot about where they need out. One last point about this interconnecting. I have this vision and I think we all do of composable infrastructure. This idea that scaled out does not solve every problem. The cloud can give me infinite scale out. Sometimes I just need a single OS with 64 terabytes of RAM and 204 GPUs or GPU instances that single OS does not exist today. And the opportunity is to create composable infrastructure so that we solve a lot of these problems that just simply don't scale out. >> You know, wow. So many interesting points there. I had just interviewed Zhamak Dehghani, who's the founder of Data Mesh last week. And she made a really interesting point. She said, "Think about, we have separate stacks. "We have an application stack and we have "a data pipeline stack and the transaction systems, "the transaction database, we extract data from that," to your point, "We ETL it in, you know, it takes forever. "And then we have this separate sort of data stack." If we're going to inject more intelligence and data and AI into applications, those two stacks, her contention is they have to come together. And when you think about, you know, super cloud bringing compute to data, that was what Haduck was supposed to be. It ended up all sort of going into a central location, but it's almost a rhetorical question. I mean, it seems that that necessitates new thinking around hardware architectures as it kind of everything's the edge. And the other point is to your point, Keith, it's really hard to secure that. So when you can think about offloads, right, you've heard the stats, you know, Nvidia talks about it. Broadcom talks about it that, you know, that 30%, 25 to 30% of the CPU cycles are wasted on doing things like storage offloads, or networking or security. It seems like maybe Zeus you have a comment on this. It seems like new architectures need to come other to support, you know, all of that stuff that Keith and I just dispute. >> Yeah, and by the way, I do want to Keith, the question you just asked. Keith, it's the point I made at the beginning too about engineers do need to be more software-centric, right? They do need to have better software skills. In fact, I remember talking to Cisco about this last year when they surveyed their engineer base, only about a third of 'em had ever made an API call, which you know that that kind of shows this big skillset change, you know, that has to come. But on the point of architectures, I think the big change here is edge because it brings in distributed compute models. Historically, when you think about compute, even with multi-cloud, we never really had multi-cloud. We'd use multiple centralized clouds, but compute was always centralized, right? It was in a branch office, in a data center, in a cloud. With edge what we creates is the rise of distributed computing where we'll have an application that actually accesses different resources and at different edge locations. And I think Marc, you were talking about this, like the edge could be in your IoT device. It could be your campus edge. It could be cellular edge, it could be your car, right? And so we need to start thinkin' about how our applications interact with all those different parts of that edge ecosystem, you know, to create a single experience. The consumer apps, a lot of consumer apps largely works that way. If you think of like app like Uber, right? It pulls in information from all kinds of different edge application, edge services. And, you know, it creates pretty cool experience. We're just starting to get to that point in the business world now. There's a lot of security implications and things like that, but I do think it drives more architectural decisions to be made about how I deploy what data where and where I do my processing, where I do my AI and things like that. It actually makes the world more complicated. In some ways we can do so much more with it, but I think it does drive us more towards turnkey systems, at least initially in order to, you know, ensure performance and security. >> Right. Marc, I wanted to go to you. You had indicated to me that you wanted to chat about this a little bit. You've written quite a bit about the integration of hardware and software. You know, we've watched Oracle's move from, you know, buying Sun and then basically using that in a highly differentiated approach. Engineered systems. What's your take on all that? I know you also have some thoughts on the shift from CapEx to OPEX chime in on that. >> Sure. When you look at it, there are advantages to having one vendor who has the software and hardware. They can synergistically make them work together that you can't do in a commodity basis. If you own the software and somebody else has the hardware, I'll give you an example would be Oracle. As you talked about with their exit data platform, they literally are leveraging microcode in the Intel chips. And now in AMD chips and all the way down to Optane, they make basically AMD database servers work with Optane memory PMM in their storage systems, not MVME, SSD PMM. I'm talking about the cards itself. So there are advantages you can take advantage of if you own the stack, as you were putting out earlier, Dave, of both the software and the hardware. Okay, that's great. But on the other side of that, that tends to give you better performance, but it tends to cost a little more. On the commodity side it costs less but you get less performance. What Zeus had said earlier, it depends where you're running your application. How much performance do you need? What kind of performance do you need? One of the things about moving to the edge and I'll get to the OPEX CapEx in a second. One of the issues about moving to the edge is what kind of processing do you need? If you're running in a CCTV camera on top of a traffic light, how much power do you have? How much cooling do you have that you can run this? And more importantly, do you have to take the data you're getting and move it somewhere else and get processed and the information is sent back? I mean, there are companies out there like Brain Chip that have developed AI chips that can run on the sensor without a CPU. Without any additional memory. So, I mean, there's innovation going on to deal with this question of data movement. There's companies out there like Tachyon that are combining GPUs, CPUs, and DPUs in a single chip. Think of it as super composable architecture. They're looking at being able to do more in less. On the OPEX and CapEx issue. >> Hold that thought, hold that thought on the OPEX CapEx, 'cause we're running out of time and maybe you can wrap on that. I just wanted to pick up on something you said about the integrated hardware software. I mean, other than the fact that, you know, Michael Dell unlocked whatever $40 billion for himself and Silverlake, I was always a fan of a spin in with VMware basically become the Oracle of hardware. Now I know it would've been a nightmare for the ecosystem and culturally, they probably would've had a VMware brain drain, but what does anybody have any thoughts on that as a sort of a thought exercise? I was always a fan of that on paper. >> I got to eat a little crow. I did not like the Dale VMware acquisition for the industry in general. And I think it hurt the industry in general, HPE, Cisco walked away a little bit from that VMware relationship. But when I talked to customers, they loved it. You know, I got to be honest. They absolutely loved the integration. The VxRail, VxRack solution exploded. Nutanix became kind of a afterthought when it came to competing. So that spin in, when we talk about the ability to innovate and the ability to create solutions that you just simply can't create because you don't have the full stack. Dell was well positioned to do that with a potential span in of VMware. >> Yeah, we're going to be-- Go ahead please. >> Yeah, in fact, I think you're right, Keith, it was terrible for the industry. Great for Dell. And I remember talking to Chad Sakac when he was running, you know, VCE, which became Rack and Rail, their ability to stay in lockstep with what VMware was doing. What was the number one workload running on hyperconverged forever? It was VMware. So their ability to remain in lockstep with VMware gave them a huge competitive advantage. And Dell came out of nowhere in, you know, the hyper-converged market and just started taking share because of that relationship. So, you know, this sort I guess it's, you know, from a Dell perspective I thought it gave them a pretty big advantage that they didn't really exploit across their other properties, right? Networking and service and things like they could have given the dominance that VMware had. From an industry perspective though, I do think it's better to have them be coupled. So. >> I agree. I mean, they could. I think they could have dominated in super cloud and maybe they would become the next Oracle where everybody hates 'em, but they kick ass. But guys. We got to wrap up here. And so what I'm going to ask you is I'm going to go and reverse the order this time, you know, big takeaways from this conversation today, which guys by the way, I can't thank you enough phenomenal insights, but big takeaways, any final thoughts, any research that you're working on that you want highlight or you know, what you look for in the future? Try to keep it brief. We'll go in reverse order. Maybe Marc, you could start us off please. >> Sure, on the research front, I'm working on a total cost of ownership of an integrated database analytics machine learning versus separate services. On the other aspect that I would wanted to chat about real quickly, OPEX versus CapEx, the cloud changed the market perception of hardware in the sense that you can use hardware or buy hardware like you do software. As you use it, pay for what you use in arrears. The good thing about that is you're only paying for what you use, period. You're not for what you don't use. I mean, it's compute time, everything else. The bad side about that is you have no predictability in your bill. It's elastic, but every user I've talked to says every month it's different. And from a budgeting perspective, it's very hard to set up your budget year to year and it's causing a lot of nightmares. So it's just something to be aware of. From a CapEx perspective, you have no more CapEx if you're using that kind of base system but you lose a certain amount of control as well. So ultimately that's some of the issues. But my biggest point, my biggest takeaway from this is the biggest issue right now that everybody I talk to in some shape or form it comes down to data movement whether it be ETLs that you talked about Keith or other aspects moving it between hybrid locations, moving it within a system, moving it within a chip. All those are key issues. >> Great, thank you. Okay, CTO advisor, give us your final thoughts. >> All right. Really, really great commentary. Again, I'm going to point back to us taking the walk that our customers are taking, which is trying to do this conversion of all primary data center to a hybrid of which I have this hard earned philosophy that enterprise IT is additive. When we add a service, we rarely subtract a service. So the landscape and service area what we support has to grow. So our research focuses on taking that walk. We are taking a monolithic application, decomposing that to containers, and putting that in a public cloud, and connecting that back private data center and telling that story and walking that walk with our customers. This has been a super enlightening panel. >> Yeah, thank you. Real, real different world coming. David Nicholson, please. >> You know, it really hearkens back to the beginning of the conversation. You talked about momentum in the direction of cloud. I'm sort of spending my time under the hood, getting grease under my fingernails, focusing on where still the lions share of spend will be in coming years, which is OnPrem. And then of course, obviously data center infrastructure for cloud but really diving under the covers and helping folks understand the ramifications of movement between generations of CPU architecture. I know we all know Sapphire Rapids pushed into the future. When's the next Intel release coming? Who knows? We think, you know, in 2023. There have been a lot of people standing by from a practitioner's standpoint asking, well, what do I do between now and then? Does it make sense to upgrade bits and pieces of hardware or go from a last generation to a current generation when we know the next generation is coming? And so I've been very, very focused on looking at how these connectivity components like rate controllers and NICs. I know it's not as sexy as talking about cloud but just how these opponents completely change the game and actually can justify movement from say a 14th-generation architecture to a 15th-generation architecture today, even though gen 16 is coming, let's say 12 months from now. So that's where I am. Keep my phone number in the Rolodex. I literally reference Rolodex intentionally because like I said, I'm in there under the hood and it's not as sexy. But yeah, so that's what I'm focused on Dave. >> Well, you know, to paraphrase it, maybe derivative paraphrase of, you know, Larry Ellison's rant on what is cloud? It's operating systems and databases, et cetera. Rate controllers and NICs live inside of clouds. All right. You know, one of the reasons I love working with you guys is 'cause have such a wide observation space and Zeus Kerravala you, of all people, you know you have your fingers in a lot of pies. So give us your final thoughts. >> Yeah, I'm not a propeller heady as my chip counterparts here. (all laugh) So, you know, I look at the world a little differently and a lot of my research I'm doing now is the impact that distributed computing has on customer employee experiences, right? You talk to every business and how the experiences they deliver to their customers is really differentiating how they go to market. And so they're looking at these different ways of feeding up data and analytics and things like that in different places. And I think this is going to have a really profound impact on enterprise IT architecture. We're putting more data, more compute in more places all the way down to like little micro edges and retailers and things like that. And so we need the variety. Historically, if you think back to when I was in IT you know, pre-Y2K, we didn't have a lot of choice in things, right? We had a server that was rack mount or standup, right? And there wasn't a whole lot of, you know, differences in choice. But today we can deploy, you know, these really high-performance compute systems on little blades inside servers or inside, you know, autonomous vehicles and things. I think the world from here gets... You know, just the choice of what we have and the way hardware and software works together is really going to, I think, change the world the way we do things. We're already seeing that, like I said, in the consumer world, right? There's so many things you can do from, you know, smart home perspective, you know, natural language processing, stuff like that. And it's starting to hit businesses now. So just wait and watch the next five years. >> Yeah, totally. The computing power at the edge is just going to be mind blowing. >> It's unbelievable what you can do at the edge. >> Yeah, yeah. Hey Z, I just want to say that we know you're not a propeller head and I for one would like to thank you for having your master's thesis hanging on the wall behind you 'cause we know that you studied basket weaving. >> I was actually a physics math major, so. >> Good man. Another math major. All right, Bob O'Donnell, you're going to bring us home. I mean, we've seen the importance of semiconductors and silicon in our everyday lives, but your last thoughts please. >> Sure and just to clarify, by the way I was a great books major and this was actually for my final paper. And so I was like philosophy and all that kind of stuff and literature but I still somehow got into tech. Look, it's been a great conversation and I want to pick up a little bit on a comment Zeus made, which is this it's the combination of the hardware and the software and coming together and the manner with which that needs to happen, I think is critically important. And the other thing is because of the diversity of the chip architectures and all those different pieces and elements, it's going to be how software tools evolve to adapt to that new world. So I look at things like what Intel's trying to do with oneAPI. You know, what Nvidia has done with CUDA. What other platform companies are trying to create tools that allow them to leverage the hardware, but also embrace the variety of hardware that is there. And so as those software development environments and software development tools evolve to take advantage of these new capabilities, that's going to open up a lot of interesting opportunities that can leverage all these new chip architectures. That can leverage all these new interconnects. That can leverage all these new system architectures and figure out ways to make that all happen, I think is going to be critically important. And then finally, I'll mention the research I'm actually currently working on is on private 5g and how companies are thinking about deploying private 5g and the potential for edge applications for that. So I'm doing a survey of several hundred us companies as we speak and really looking forward to getting that done in the next couple of weeks. >> Yeah, look forward to that. Guys, again, thank you so much. Outstanding conversation. Anybody going to be at Dell tech world in a couple of weeks? Bob's going to be there. Dave Nicholson. Well drinks on me and guys I really can't thank you enough for the insights and your participation today. Really appreciate it. Okay, and thank you for watching this special power panel episode of theCube Insights powered by ETR. Remember we publish each week on Siliconangle.com and wikibon.com. All these episodes they're available as podcasts. DM me or any of these guys. I'm at DVellante. You can email me at David.Vellante@siliconangle.com. Check out etr.ai for all the data. This is Dave Vellante. We'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Once a staid and boring business dominated by IBM, Oracle, and at the time newcomer Microsoft, along with a handful of wannabes, the database business has exploded in the past decade and has become a staple of financial excellence, customer experience, analytic advantage, competitive strategy, growth initiatives, visualizations, not to mention compliance, security, privacy and dozens of other important use cases and initiatives. And on the vendor's side of the house, we've seen the rapid ascendancy of cloud databases. Most notably from Snowflake, whose massive raises leading up to its IPO in late 2020 sparked a spate of interest and VC investment in the separation of compute and storage and all that elastic resource stuff in the cloud. The company joined AWS, Azure and Google to popularize cloud databases, which have become a linchpin of competitive strategies for technology suppliers. And if I get you to put your data in my database and in my cloud, and I keep innovating, I'm going to build a moat and achieve a hugely attractive lifetime customer value in a really amazing marginal economics dynamic that is going to fund my future. And I'll be able to sell other adjacent services, not just compute and storage, but machine learning and inference and training and all kinds of stuff, dozens of lucrative cloud offerings. Meanwhile, the database leader, Oracle has invested massive amounts of money to maintain its lead. It's building on its position as the king of mission critical workloads and making typical Oracle like claims against the competition. Most were recently just yesterday with another announcement around MySQL HeatWave. An extension of MySQL that is compatible with on-premises MySQLs and is setting new standards in price performance. We're seeing a dramatic divergence in strategies across the database spectrum. On the far left, we see Amazon with more than a dozen database offerings each with its own API and primitives. AWS is taking a right tool for the right job approach, often building on open source platforms and creating services that it offers to customers to solve very specific problems for developers. And on the other side of the line, we see Oracle, which is taking the Swiss Army Knife approach, converging database functionality, enabling analytic and transactional workloads to run in the same data store, eliminating the need to ETL, at the same time adding capabilities into its platform like automation and machine learning. Welcome to this database Power Panel. My name is Dave Vellante, and I'm so excited to bring together some of the most respected industry analyst in the community. Today we're going to assess what's happening in the market. We're going to dig into the competitive landscape and explore the future of database and database platforms and decode what it means to customers. Let me take a moment to welcome our guest analyst today. Matt Kimball is a vice president and principal analysts at Moor Insights and Strategy, Matt. He knows products, he knows industry, he's got real world IT expertise, and he's got all the angles 25 plus years of experience in all kinds of great background. Matt, welcome. Thanks very much for coming on theCUBE. Holgar Mueller, friend of theCUBE, vice president and principal analyst at Constellation Research in depth knowledge on applications, application development, knows developers. He's worked at SAP and Oracle. And then Bob Evans is Chief Content Officer and co-founder of the Acceleration Economy, founder and principle of Cloud Wars. Covers all kinds of industry topics and great insights. He's got awesome videos, these three minute hits. If you haven't seen 'em, checking them out, knows cloud companies, his Cloud Wars minutes are fantastic. And then of course, Marc Staimer is the founder of Dragon Slayer Research. A frequent contributor and guest analyst at Wikibon. He's got a wide ranging knowledge across IT products, knows technology really well, can go deep. And then of course, Ron Westfall, Senior Analyst and Director Research Director at Futurum Research, great all around product trends knowledge. Can take, you know, technical dives and really understands competitive angles, knows Redshift, Snowflake, and many others. Gents, thanks so much for taking the time to join us in theCube today. It's great to have you on, good to see you. >> Good to be here, thanks for having us. >> Thanks, Dave. >> All right, let's start with an around the horn and briefly, if each of you would describe, you know, anything I missed in your areas of expertise and then you answer the following question, how would you describe the state of the database, state of platform market today? Matt Kimball, please start. >> Oh, I hate going first, but that it's okay. How would I describe the world today? I would just in one sentence, I would say, I'm glad I'm not in IT anymore, right? So, you know, it is a complex and dangerous world out there. And I don't envy IT folks I'd have to support, you know, these modernization and transformation efforts that are going on within the enterprise. It used to be, you mentioned it, Dave, you would argue about IBM versus Oracle versus this newcomer in the database space called Microsoft. And don't forget Sybase back in the day, but you know, now it's not just, which SQL vendor am I going to go with? It's all of these different, divergent data types that have to be taken, they have to be merged together, synthesized. And somehow I have to do that cleanly and use this to drive strategic decisions for my business. That is not easy. So, you know, you have to look at it from the perspective of the business user. It's great for them because as a DevOps person, or as an analyst, I have so much flexibility and I have this thing called the cloud now where I can go get services immediately. As an IT person or a DBA, I am calling up prevention hotlines 24 hours a day, because I don't know how I'm going to be able to support the business. And as an Oracle or as an Oracle or a Microsoft or some of the cloud providers and cloud databases out there, I'm licking my chops because, you know, my market is expanding and expanding every day. >> Great, thank you for that, Matt. Holgar, how do you see the world these days? You always have a good perspective on things, share with us. >> Well, I think it's the best time to be in IT, I'm not sure what Matt is talking about. (laughing) It's easier than ever, right? The direction is going to cloud. Kubernetes has won, Google has the best AI for now, right? So things are easier than ever before. You made commitments for five plus years on hardware, networking and so on premise, and I got gray hair about worrying it was the wrong decision. No, just kidding. But you kind of both sides, just to be controversial, make it interesting, right. So yeah, no, I think the interesting thing specifically with databases, right? We have this big suite versus best of breed, right? Obviously innovation, like you mentioned with Snowflake and others happening in the cloud, the cloud vendors server, where to save of their databases. And then we have one of the few survivors of the old guard as Evans likes to call them is Oracle who's doing well, both their traditional database. And now, which is really interesting, remarkable from that because Oracle it was always the power of one, have one database, add more to it, make it what I call the universal database. And now this new HeatWave offering is coming and MySQL open source side. So they're getting the second (indistinct) right? So it's interesting that older players, traditional players who still are in the market are diversifying their offerings. Something we don't see so much from the traditional tools from Oracle on the Microsoft side or the IBM side these days. >> Great, thank you Holgar. Bob Evans, you've covered this business for a while. You've worked at, you know, a number of different outlets and companies and you cover the competition, how do you see things? >> Dave, you know, the other angle to look at this from is from the customer side, right? You got now CEOs who are any sort of business across all sorts of industries, and they understand that their future success is going to be dependent on their ability to become a digital company, to understand data, to use it the right way. So as you outline Dave, I think in your intro there, it is a fantastic time to be in the database business. And I think we've got a lot of new buyers and influencers coming in. They don't know all this history about IBM and Microsoft and Oracle and you know, whoever else. So I think they're going to take a long, hard look, Dave, at some of these results and who is able to help these companies not serve up the best technology, but who's going to be able to help their business move into the digital future. So it's a fascinating time now from every perspective. >> Great points, Bob. I mean, digital transformation has gone from buzzword to imperative. Mr. Staimer, how do you see things? >> I see things a little bit differently than my peers here in that I see the database market being segmented. There's all the different kinds of databases that people are looking at for different kinds of data, and then there is databases in the cloud. And so database as cloud service, I view very differently than databases because the traditional way of implementing a database is changing and it's changing rapidly. So one of the premises that you stated earlier on was that you viewed Oracle as a database company. I don't view Oracle as a database company anymore. I view Oracle as a cloud company that happens to have a significant expertise and specialty in databases, and they still sell database software in the traditional way, but ultimately they're a cloud company. So database cloud services from my point of view is a very distinct market from databases. >> Okay, well, you gave us some good meat on the bone to talk about that. Last but not least-- >> Dave did Marc, just say Oracle's a cloud company? >> Yeah. (laughing) Take away the database, it would be interesting to have that discussion, but let's let Ron jump in here. Ron, give us your take. >> That's a great segue. I think it's truly the era of the cloud database, that's something that's rising. And the key trends that come with it include for example, elastic scaling. That is the ability to scale on demand, to right size workloads according to customer requirements. And also I think it's going to increase the prioritization for high availability. That is the player who can provide the highest availability is going to have, I think, a great deal of success in this emerging market. And also I anticipate that there will be more consolidation across platforms in order to enable cost savings for customers, and that's something that's always going to be important. And I think we'll see more of that over the horizon. And then finally security, security will be more important than ever. We've seen a spike (indistinct), we certainly have seen geopolitical originated cybersecurity concerns. And as a result, I see database security becoming all the more important. >> Great, thank you. Okay, let me share some data with you guys. I'm going to throw this at you and see what you think. We have this awesome data partner called Enterprise Technology Research, ETR. They do these quarterly surveys and each period with dozens of industry segments, they track clients spending, customer spending. And this is the database, data warehouse sector okay so it's taxonomy, so it's not perfect, but it's a big kind of chunk. They essentially ask customers within a category and buy a specific vendor, you're spending more or less on the platform? And then they subtract the lesses from the mores and they derive a metric called net score. It's like NPS, it's a measure of spending velocity. It's more complicated and granular than that, but that's the basis and that's the vertical axis. The horizontal axis is what they call market share, it's not like IDC market share, it's just pervasiveness in the data set. And so there are a couple of things that stand out here and that we can use as reference point. The first is the momentum of Snowflake. They've been off the charts for many, many, for over two years now, anything above that dotted red line, that 40%, is considered by ETR to be highly elevated and Snowflake's even way above that. And I think it's probably not sustainable. We're going to see in the next April survey, next month from those guys, when it comes out. And then you see AWS and Microsoft, they're really pervasive on the horizontal axis and highly elevated, Google falls behind them. And then you got a number of well funded players. You got Cockroach Labs, Mongo, Redis, MariaDB, which of course is a fork on MySQL started almost as protest at Oracle when they acquired Sun and they got MySQL and you can see the number of others. Now Oracle who's the leading database player, despite what Marc Staimer says, we know, (laughs) and they're a cloud player (laughing) who happens to be a leading database player. They dominate in the mission critical space, we know that they're the king of that sector, but you can see here that they're kind of legacy, right? They've been around a long time, they get a big install base. So they don't have the spending momentum on the vertical axis. Now remember this is, just really this doesn't capture spending levels, so that understates Oracle but nonetheless. So it's not a complete picture like SAP for instance is not in here, no Hana. I think people are actually buying it, but it doesn't show up here, (laughs) but it does give an indication of momentum and presence. So Bob Evans, I'm going to start with you. You've commented on many of these companies, you know, what does this data tell you? >> Yeah, you know, Dave, I think all these compilations of things like that are interesting, and that folks at ETR do some good work, but I think as you said, it's a snapshot sort of a two-dimensional thing of a rapidly changing, three dimensional world. You know, the incidents at which some of these companies are mentioned versus the volume that happens. I think it's, you know, with Oracle and I'm not going to declare my religious affiliation, either as cloud company or database company, you know, they're all of those things and more, and I think some of our old language of how we classify companies is just not relevant anymore. But I want to ask too something in here, the autonomous database from Oracle, nobody else has done that. So either Oracle is crazy, they've tried out a technology that nobody other than them is interested in, or they're onto something that nobody else can match. So to me, Dave, within Oracle, trying to identify how they're doing there, I would watch autonomous database growth too, because right, it's either going to be a big plan and it breaks through, or it's going to be caught behind. And the Snowflake phenomenon as you mentioned, that is a rare, rare bird who comes up and can grow 100% at a billion dollar revenue level like that. So now they've had a chance to come in, scare the crap out of everybody, rock the market with something totally new, the data cloud. Will the bigger companies be able to catch up and offer a compelling alternative, or is Snowflake going to continue to be this outlier. It's a fascinating time. >> Really, interesting points there. Holgar, I want to ask you, I mean, I've talked to certainly I'm sure you guys have too, the founders of Snowflake that came out of Oracle and they actually, they don't apologize. They say, "Hey, we not going to do all that complicated stuff that Oracle does, we were trying to keep it real simple." But at the same time, you know, they don't do sophisticated workload management. They don't do complex joints. They're kind of relying on the ecosystems. So when you look at the data like this and the various momentums, and we talked about the diverging strategies, what does this say to you? >> Well, it is a great point. And I think Snowflake is an example how the cloud can turbo charge a well understood concept in this case, the data warehouse, right? You move that and you find steroids and you see like for some players who've been big in data warehouse, like Sentara Data, as an example, here in San Diego, what could have been for them right in that part. The interesting thing, the problem though is the cloud hides a lot of complexity too, which you can scale really well as you attract lots of customers to go there. And you don't have to build things like what Bob said, right? One of the fascinating things, right, nobody's answering Oracle on the autonomous database. I don't think is that they cannot, they just have different priorities or the database is not such a priority. I would dare to say that it's for IBM and Microsoft right now at the moment. And the cloud vendors, you just hide that right through scripts and through scale because you support thousands of customers and you can deal with a little more complexity, right? It's not against them. Whereas if you have to run it yourself, very different story, right? You want to have the autonomous parts, you want to have the powerful tools to do things. >> Thank you. And so Matt, I want to go to you, you've set up front, you know, it's just complicated if you're in IT, it's a complicated situation and you've been on the customer side. And if you're a buyer, it's obviously, it's like Holgar said, "Cloud's supposed to make this stuff easier, but the simpler it gets the more complicated gets." So where do you place your bets? Or I guess more importantly, how do you decide where to place your bets? >> Yeah, it's a good question. And to what Bob and Holgar said, you know, the around autonomous database, I think, you know, part of, as I, you know, play kind of armchair psychologist, if you will, corporate psychologists, I look at what Oracle is doing and, you know, databases where they've made their mark and it's kind of, that's their strong position, right? So it makes sense if you're making an entry into this cloud and you really want to kind of build momentum, you go with what you're good at, right? So that's kind of the strength of Oracle. Let's put a lot of focus on that. They do a lot more than database, don't get me wrong, but you know, I'm going to short my strength and then kind of pivot from there. With regards to, you know, what IT looks at and what I would look at you know as an IT director or somebody who is, you know, trying to consume services from these different cloud providers. First and foremost, I go with what I know, right? Let's not forget IT is a conservative group. And when we look at, you know, all the different permutations of database types out there, SQL, NoSQL, all the different types of NoSQL, those are largely being deployed by business users that are looking for agility or businesses that are looking for agility. You know, the reason why MongoDB is so popular is because of DevOps, right? It's a great platform to develop on and that's where it kind of gained its traction. But as an IT person, I want to go with what I know, where my muscle memory is, and that's my first position. And so as I evaluate different cloud service providers and cloud databases, I look for, you know, what I know and what I've invested in and where my muscle memory is. Is there enough there and do I have enough belief that that company or that service is going to be able to take me to, you know, where I see my organization in five years from a data management perspective, from a business perspective, are they going to be there? And if they are, then I'm a little bit more willing to make that investment, but it is, you know, if I'm kind of going in this blind or if I'm cloud native, you know, that's where the Snowflakes of the world become very attractive to me. >> Thank you. So Marc, I asked Andy Jackson in theCube one time, you have all these, you know, data stores and different APIs and primitives and you know, very granular, what's the strategy there? And he said, "Hey, that allows us as the market changes, it allows us to be more flexible. If we start building abstractions layers, it's harder for us." I think also it was not a good time to market advantage, but let me ask you, I described earlier on that spectrum from AWS to Oracle. We just saw yesterday, Oracle announced, I think the third major enhancement in like 15 months to MySQL HeatWave, what do you make of that announcement? How do you think it impacts the competitive landscape, particularly as it relates to, you know, converging transaction and analytics, eliminating ELT, I know you have some thoughts on this. >> So let me back up for a second and defend my cloud statement about Oracle for a moment. (laughing) AWS did a great job in developing the cloud market in general and everything in the cloud market. I mean, I give them lots of kudos on that. And a lot of what they did is they took open source software and they rent it to people who use their cloud. So I give 'em lots of credit, they dominate the market. Oracle was late to the cloud market. In fact, they actually poo-pooed it initially, if you look at some of Larry Ellison's statements, they said, "Oh, it's never going to take off." And then they did 180 turn, and they said, "Oh, we're going to embrace the cloud." And they really have, but when you're late to a market, you've got to be compelling. And this ties into the announcement yesterday, but let's deal with this compelling. To be compelling from a user point of view, you got to be twice as fast, offer twice as much functionality, at half the cost. That's generally what compelling is that you're going to capture market share from the leaders who established the market. It's very difficult to capture market share in a new market for yourself. And you're right. I mean, Bob was correct on this and Holgar and Matt in which you look at Oracle, and they did a great job of leveraging their database to move into this market, give 'em lots of kudos for that too. But yesterday they announced, as you said, the third innovation release and the pace is just amazing of what they're doing on these releases on HeatWave that ties together initially MySQL with an integrated builtin analytics engine, so a data warehouse built in. And then they added automation with autopilot, and now they've added machine learning to it, and it's all in the same service. It's not something you can buy and put on your premise unless you buy their cloud customers stuff. But generally it's a cloud offering, so it's compellingly better as far as the integration. You don't buy multiple services, you buy one and it's lower cost than any of the other services, but more importantly, it's faster, which again, give 'em credit for, they have more integration of a product. They can tie things together in a way that nobody else does. There's no additional services, ETL services like Glue and AWS. So from that perspective, they're getting better performance, fewer services, lower cost. Hmm, they're aiming at the compelling side again. So from a customer point of view it's compelling. Matt, you wanted to say something there. >> Yeah, I want to kind of, on what you just said there Marc, and this is something I've found really interesting, you know. The traditional way that you look at software and, you know, purchasing software and IT is, you look at either best of breed solutions and you have to work on the backend to integrate them all and make them all work well. And generally, you know, the big hit against the, you know, we have one integrated offering is that, you lose capability or you lose depth of features, right. And to what you were saying, you know, that's the thing I found interesting about what Oracle is doing is they're building in depth as they kind of, you know, build that service. It's not like you're losing a lot of capabilities, because you're going to one integrated service versus having to use A versus B versus C, and I love that idea. >> You're right. Yeah, not only you're not losing, but you're gaining functionality that you can't get by integrating a lot of these. I mean, I can take Snowflake and integrate it in with machine learning, but I also have to integrate in with a transactional database. So I've got to have connectors between all of this, which means I'm adding time. And what it comes down to at the end of the day is expertise, effort, time, and cost. And so what I see the difference from the Oracle announcements is they're aiming at reducing all of that by increasing performance as well. Correct me if I'm wrong on that but that's what I saw at the announcement yesterday. >> You know, Marc, one thing though Marc, it's funny you say that because I started out saying, you know, I'm glad I'm not 19 anymore. And the reason is because of exactly what you said, it's almost like there's a pseudo level of witchcraft that's required to support the modern data environment right in the enterprise. And I need simpler faster, better. That's what I need, you know, I am no longer wearing pocket protectors. I have turned from, you know, break, fix kind of person, to you know, business consultant. And I need that point and click simplicity, but I can't sacrifice, you know, a depth of features of functionality on the backend as I play that consultancy role. >> So, Ron, I want to bring in Ron, you know, it's funny. So Matt, you mentioned Mongo, I often and say, if Oracle mentions you, you're on the map. We saw them yesterday Ron, (laughing) they hammered RedShifts auto ML, they took swipes at Snowflake, a little bit of BigQuery. What were your thoughts on that? Do you agree with what these guys are saying in terms of HeatWaves capabilities? >> Yes, Dave, I think that's an excellent question. And fundamentally I do agree. And the question is why, and I think it's important to know that all of the Oracle data is backed by the fact that they're using benchmarks. For example, all of the ML and all of the TPC benchmarks, including all the scripts, all the configs and all the detail are posted on GitHub. So anybody can look at these results and they're fully transparent and replicate themselves. If you don't agree with this data, then by all means challenge it. And we have not really seen that in all of the new updates in HeatWave over the last 15 months. And as a result, when it comes to these, you know, fundamentals in looking at the competitive landscape, which I think gives validity to outcomes such as Oracle being able to deliver 4.8 times better price performance than Redshift. As well as for example, 14.4 better price performance than Snowflake, and also 12.9 better price performance than BigQuery. And so that is, you know, looking at the quantitative side of things. But again, I think, you know, to Marc's point and to Matt's point, there are also qualitative aspects that clearly differentiate the Oracle proposition, from my perspective. For example now the MySQL HeatWave ML capabilities are native, they're built in, and they also support things such as completion criteria. And as a result, that enables them to show that hey, when you're using Redshift ML for example, you're having to also use their SageMaker tool and it's running on a meter. And so, you know, nobody really wants to be running on a meter when, you know, executing these incredibly complex tasks. And likewise, when it comes to Snowflake, they have to use a third party capability. They don't have the built in, it's not native. So the user, to the point that he's having to spend more time and it increases complexity to use auto ML capabilities across the Snowflake platform. And also, I think it also applies to other important features such as data sampling, for example, with the HeatWave ML, it's intelligent sampling that's being implemented. Whereas in contrast, we're seeing Redshift using random sampling. And again, Snowflake, you're having to use a third party library in order to achieve the same capabilities. So I think the differentiation is crystal clear. I think it definitely is refreshing. It's showing that this is where true value can be assigned. And if you don't agree with it, by all means challenge the data. >> Yeah, I want to come to the benchmarks in a minute. By the way, you know, the gentleman who's the Oracle's architect, he did a great job on the call yesterday explaining what you have to do. I thought that was quite impressive. But Bob, I know you follow the financials pretty closely and on the earnings call earlier this month, Ellison said that, "We're going to see HeatWave on AWS." And the skeptic in me said, oh, they must not be getting people to come to OCI. And then they, you remember this chart they showed yesterday that showed the growth of HeatWave on OCI. But of course there was no data on there, it was just sort of, you know, lines up and to the right. So what do you guys think of that? (Marc laughs) Does it signal Bob, desperation by Oracle that they can't get traction on OCI, or is it just really a smart tame expansion move? What do you think? >> Yeah, Dave, that's a great question. You know, along the way there, and you know, just inside of that was something that said Ellison said on earnings call that spoke to a different sort of philosophy or mindset, almost Marc, where he said, "We're going to make this multicloud," right? With a lot of their other cloud stuff, if you wanted to use any of Oracle's cloud software, you had to use Oracle's infrastructure, OCI, there was no other way out of it. But this one, but I thought it was a classic Ellison line. He said, "Well, we're making this available on AWS. We're making this available, you know, on Snowflake because we're going after those users. And once they see what can be done here." So he's looking at it, I guess you could say, it's a concession to customers because they want multi-cloud. The other way to look at it, it's a hunting expedition and it's one of those uniquely I think Oracle ways. He said up front, right, he doesn't say, "Well, there's a big market, there's a lot for everybody, we just want on our slice." Said, "No, we are going after Amazon, we're going after Redshift, we're going after Aurora. We're going after these users of Snowflake and so on." And I think it's really fairly refreshing these days to hear somebody say that, because now if I'm a buyer, I can look at that and say, you know, to Marc's point, "Do they measure up, do they crack that threshold ceiling? Or is this just going to be more pain than a few dollars savings is worth?" But you look at those numbers that Ron pointed out and that we all saw in that chart. I've never seen Dave, anything like that. In a substantive market, a new player coming in here, and being able to establish differences that are four, seven, eight, 10, 12 times better than competition. And as new buyers look at that, they're going to say, "What the hell are we doing paying, you know, five times more to get a poor result? What's going on here?" So I think this is going to rattle people and force a harder, closer look at what these alternatives are. >> I wonder if the guy, thank you. Let's just skip ahead of the benchmarks guys, bring up the next slide, let's skip ahead a little bit here, which talks to the benchmarks and the benchmarking if we can. You know, David Floyer, the sort of semiretired, you know, Wikibon analyst said, "Dave, this is going to force Amazon and others, Snowflake," he said, "To rethink actually how they architect databases." And this is kind of a compilation of some of the data that they shared. They went after Redshift mostly, (laughs) but also, you know, as I say, Snowflake, BigQuery. And, like I said, you can always tell which companies are doing well, 'cause Oracle will come after you, but they're on the radar here. (laughing) Holgar should we take this stuff seriously? I mean, or is it, you know, a grain salt? What are your thoughts here? >> I think you have to take it seriously. I mean, that's a great question, great point on that. Because like Ron said, "If there's a flaw in a benchmark, we know this database traditionally, right?" If anybody came up that, everybody will be, "Oh, you put the wrong benchmark, it wasn't audited right, let us do it again," and so on. We don't see this happening, right? So kudos to Oracle to be aggressive, differentiated, and seem to having impeccable benchmarks. But what we really see, I think in my view is that the classic and we can talk about this in 100 years, right? Is the suite versus best of breed, right? And the key question of the suite, because the suite's always slower, right? No matter at which level of the stack, you have the suite, then the best of breed that will come up with something new, use a cloud, put the data warehouse on steroids and so on. The important thing is that you have to assess as a buyer what is the speed of my suite vendor. And that's what you guys mentioned before as well, right? Marc said that and so on, "Like, this is a third release in one year of the HeatWave team, right?" So everybody in the database open source Marc, and there's so many MySQL spinoffs to certain point is put on shine on the speed of (indistinct) team, putting out fundamental changes. And the beauty of that is right, is so inherent to the Oracle value proposition. Larry's vision of building the IBM of the 21st century, right from the Silicon, from the chip all the way across the seven stacks to the click of the user. And that what makes the database what Rob was saying, "Tied to the OCI infrastructure," because designed for that, it runs uniquely better for that, that's why we see the cross connect to Microsoft. HeatWave so it's different, right? Because HeatWave runs on cheap hardware, right? Which is the breadth and butter 886 scale of any cloud provider, right? So Oracle probably needs it to scale OCI in a different category, not the expensive side, but also allow us to do what we said before, the multicloud capability, which ultimately CIOs really want, because data gravity is real, you want to operate where that is. If you have a fast, innovative offering, which gives you more functionality and the R and D speed is really impressive for the space, puts away bad results, then it's a good bet to look at. >> Yeah, so you're saying, that we versus best of breed. I just want to sort of play back then Marc a comment. That suite versus best of breed, there's always been that trade off. If I understand you Holgar you're saying that somehow Oracle has magically cut through that trade off and they're giving you the best of both. >> It's the developing velocity, right? The provision of important features, which matter to buyers of the suite vendor, eclipses the best of breed vendor, then the best of breed vendor is in the hell of a potential job. >> Yeah, go ahead Marc. >> Yeah and I want to add on what Holgar just said there. I mean the worst job in the data center is data movement, moving the data sucks. I don't care who you are, nobody likes it. You never get any kudos for doing it well, and you always get the ah craps, when things go wrong. So it's in- >> In the data center Marc all the time across data centers, across cloud. That's where the bleeding comes. >> It's right, you get beat up all the time. So nobody likes to move data, ever. So what you're looking at with what they announce with HeatWave and what I love about HeatWave is it doesn't matter when you started with it, you get all the additional features they announce it's part of the service, all the time. But they don't have to move any of the data. You want to analyze the data that's in your transactional, MySQL database, it's there. You want to do machine learning models, it's there, there's no data movement. The data movement is the key thing, and they just eliminate that, in so many ways. And the other thing I wanted to talk about is on the benchmarks. As great as those benchmarks are, they're really conservative 'cause they're underestimating the cost of that data movement. The ETLs, the other services, everything's left out. It's just comparing HeatWave, MySQL cloud service with HeatWave versus Redshift, not Redshift and Aurora and Glue, Redshift and Redshift ML and SageMaker, it's just Redshift. >> Yeah, so what you're saying is what Oracle's doing is saying, "Okay, we're going to run MySQL HeatWave benchmarks on analytics against Redshift, and then we're going to run 'em in transaction against Aurora." >> Right. >> But if you really had to look at what you would have to do with the ETL, you'd have to buy two different data stores and all the infrastructure around that, and that goes away so. >> Due to the nature of the competition, they're running narrow best of breed benchmarks. There is no suite level benchmark (Dave laughs) because they created something new. >> Well that's you're the earlier point they're beating best of breed with a suite. So that's, I guess to Floyer's earlier point, "That's going to shake things up." But I want to come back to Bob Evans, 'cause I want to tap your Cloud Wars mojo before we wrap. And line up the horses, you got AWS, you got Microsoft, Google and Oracle. Now they all own their own cloud. Snowflake, Mongo, Couchbase, Redis, Cockroach by the way they're all doing very well. They run in the cloud as do many others. I think you guys all saw the Andreessen, you know, commentary from Sarah Wang and company, to talk about the cost of goods sold impact of cloud. So owning your own cloud has to be an advantage because other guys like Snowflake have to pay cloud vendors and negotiate down versus having the whole enchilada, Safra Catz's dream. Bob, how do you think this is going to impact the market long term? >> Well, Dave, that's a great question about, you know, how this is all going to play out. If I could mention three things, one, Frank Slootman has done a fantastic job with Snowflake. Really good company before he got there, but since he's been there, the growth mindset, the discipline, the rigor and the phenomenon of what Snowflake has done has forced all these bigger companies to really accelerate what they're doing. And again, it's an example of how this intense competition makes all the different cloud vendors better and it provides enormous value to customers. Second thing I wanted to mention here was look at the Adam Selipsky effect at AWS, took over in the middle of May, and in Q2, Q3, Q4, AWS's growth rate accelerated. And in each of those three quotas, they grew faster than Microsoft's cloud, which has not happened in two or three years, so they're closing the gap on Microsoft. The third thing, Dave, in this, you know, incredibly intense competitive nature here, look at Larry Ellison, right? He's got his, you know, the product that for the last two or three years, he said, "It's going to help determine the future of the company, autonomous database." You would think he's the last person in the world who's going to bring in, you know, in some ways another database to think about there, but he has put, you know, his whole effort and energy behind this. The investments Oracle's made, he's riding this horse really hard. So it's not just a technology achievement, but it's also an investment priority for Oracle going forward. And I think it's going to form a lot of how they position themselves to this new breed of buyer with a new type of need and expectations from IT. So I just think the next two or three years are going to be fantastic for people who are lucky enough to get to do the sorts of things that we do. >> You know, it's a great point you made about AWS. Back in 2018 Q3, they were doing about 7.4 billion a quarter and they were growing in the mid forties. They dropped down to like 29% Q4, 2020, I'm looking at the data now. They popped back up last quarter, last reported quarter to 40%, that is 17.8 billion, so they more doubled and they accelerated their growth rate. (laughs) So maybe that pretends, people are concerned about Snowflake right now decelerating growth. You know, maybe that's going to be different. By the way, I think Snowflake has a different strategy, the whole data cloud thing, data sharing. They're not trying to necessarily take Oracle head on, which is going to make this next 10 years, really interesting. All right, we got to go, last question. 30 seconds or less, what can we expect from the future of data platforms? Matt, please start. >> I have to go first again? You're killing me, Dave. (laughing) In the next few years, I think you're going to see the major players continue to meet customers where they are, right. Every organization, every environment is, you know, kind of, we use these words bespoke in Snowflake, pardon the pun, but Snowflakes, right. But you know, they're all opinionated and unique and what's great as an IT person is, you know, there is a service for me regardless of where I am on my journey, in my data management journey. I think you're going to continue to see with regards specifically to Oracle, I think you're going to see the company continue along this path of being all things to all people, if you will, or all organizations without sacrificing, you know, kind of richness of features and sacrificing who they are, right. Look, they are the data kings, right? I mean, they've been a database leader for an awful long time. I don't see that going away any time soon and I love the innovative spirit they've brought in with HeatWave. >> All right, great thank you. Okay, 30 seconds, Holgar go. >> Yeah, I mean, the interesting thing that we see is really that trend to autonomous as Oracle calls or self-driving software, right? So the database will have to do more things than just store the data and support the DVA. It will have to show it can wide insights, the whole upside, it will be able to show to one machine learning. We haven't really talked about that. How in just exciting what kind of use case we can get of machine learning running real time on data as it changes, right? So, which is part of the E5 announcement, right? So we'll see more of that self-driving nature in the database space. And because you said we can promote it, right. Check out my report about HeatWave latest release where I post in oracle.com. >> Great, thank you for that. And Bob Evans, please. You're great at quick hits, hit us. >> Dave, thanks. I really enjoyed getting to hear everybody's opinion here today and I think what's going to happen too. I think there's a new generation of buyers, a new set of CXO influencers in here. And I think what Oracle's done with this, MySQL HeatWave, those benchmarks that Ron talked about so eloquently here that is going to become something that forces other companies, not just try to get incrementally better. I think we're going to see a massive new wave of innovation to try to play catch up. So I really take my hat off to Oracle's achievement from going to, push everybody to be better. >> Excellent. Marc Staimer, what do you say? >> Sure, I'm going to leverage off of something Matt said earlier, "Those companies that are going to develop faster, cheaper, simpler products that are going to solve customer problems, IT problems are the ones that are going to succeed, or the ones who are going to grow. The one who are just focused on the technology are going to fall by the wayside." So those who can solve more problems, do it more elegantly and do it for less money are going to do great. So Oracle's going down that path today, Snowflake's going down that path. They're trying to do more integration with third party, but as a result, aiming at that simpler, faster, cheaper mentality is where you're going to continue to see this market go. >> Amen brother Marc. >> Thank you, Ron Westfall, we'll give you the last word, bring us home. >> Well, thank you. And I'm loving it. I see a wave of innovation across the entire cloud database ecosystem and Oracle is fueling it. We are seeing it, with the native integration of auto ML capabilities, elastic scaling, lower entry price points, et cetera. And this is just going to be great news for buyers, but also developers and increased use of open APIs. And so I think that is really the key takeaways. Just we're going to see a lot of great innovation on the horizon here. >> Guys, fantastic insights, one of the best power panel as I've ever done. Love to have you back. Thanks so much for coming on today. >> Great job, Dave, thank you. >> All right, and thank you for watching. This is Dave Vellante for theCube and we'll see you next time. (soft music)

(upbeat music) >> When Oracle acquired Sun in 2009, it paid $5.6 billion net of Sun's cash and debt. Now I argued at the time that Oracle got one of the best deals in the history of enterprise tech, and I got a lot of grief for saying that because Sun had a declining business, it was losing money, and its revenue was under serious pressure as it tried to hang on for dear life. But Safra Catz understood that Oracle could pay Sun's lower profit and lagging businesses, like its low index 86 product lines, and even if Sun's revenue was cut in half, because Oracle has such a high revenue multiple as a software company, it could almost instantly generate $25 to $30 billion in shareholder value on paper. In addition, it was a catalyst for Oracle to initiate its highly differentiated engineering systems business, and was actually the precursor to Oracle's Cloud. Oracle saw that it could capture high margin dollars that used to go to partners like HP, it's original exit data partner, and get paid for the full stack across infrastructure, middleware, database, and application software, when eventually got really serious about cloud. Now there was also a major technology angle to this story. Remember Sun's tagline, "the network is the computer"? Well, they should have just called it cloud. Through the Sun acquisition. Oracle also got a couple of key technologies, Java, the number one programming language in the world, and MySQL, a key ingredient of the LAMP stack, that's Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP, Perl or Python, on which the internet is basically built, and is used by many cloud services like Facebook, Twitter, WordPress, Flicker, Amazon, Aurora, and many other examples, including, by the way, Maria DB, which is a fork of MySQL created by MySQL's creator, basically in protest to Oracle's acquisition; the drama is Oscar worthy. It gets even better. In 2020, Oracle began introducing a new version of MySQL called MySQL HeatWave, and since late 2020 it's been in sort of a super cycle rolling, out three new releases in less than a year and a half in an attempt to expand its Tam and compete in new markets. Now we covered the release of MySQL Autopilot, which uses machine learning to automate management functions. And we also covered the bench marketing that Oracle produced against Snowflake, AWS, Azure, and Google. And Oracle's at it again with HeatWave, adding machine learning into its database capabilities, along with previously available integrations of OLAP and OLTP. This, of course, is in line with Oracle's converged database philosophy, which, as we've reported, is different from other cloud database providers, most notably Amazon, which takes the right tool for the right job approach and chooses database specialization over a one size fits all strategy. Now we've asked Oracle to come on theCUBE and explain these moves, and I'm pleased to welcome back Nipun Agarwal, who's the senior vice president for MySQL Database and HeatWave at Oracle. And today, in this video exclusive, we'll discuss machine learning, other new capabilities around elasticity and compression, and then any benchmark data that Nipun wants to share. Nipun's been a leading advocate of the HeatWave program. He's led engineering in that team for over 10 years, and he has over 185 patents in database technologies. Welcome back to the show Nipun. Great to see you again. Thanks for coming on. >> Thank you, Dave. Very happy to be back. >> Yeah, now for those who may not have kept up with the news, maybe to kick things off you could give us an overview of what MySQL HeatWave actually is so that we're all on the same page. >> Sure, Dave, MySQL HeatWave is a fully managed MySQL database service from Oracle, and it has a builtin query accelerator called HeatWave, and that's the part which is unique. So with MySQL HeatWave, customers of MySQL get a single database which they can use for transactional processing, for analytics, and for mixed workloads because traditionally MySQL has been designed and optimized for transaction processing. So in the past, when customers had to run analytics with the MySQL based service, they would need to move the data out of MySQL into some other database for running analytics. So they would end up with two different databases and it would take some time to move the data out of MySQL into this other system. With MySQL HeatWave, we have solved this problem and customers now have a single MySQL database for all their applications, and they can get the good performance of analytics without any changes to their MySQL application. >> Now it's no secret that a lot of times, you know, queries are not, you know, most efficiently written, and critics of MySQL HeatWave will claim that this product is very memory and cluster intensive, it has a heavy footprint that adds to cost. How do you answer that, Nipun? >> Right, so for offering any database service in the cloud there are two dimensions, performance and cost, and we have been very cognizant of both of them. So it is indeed the case that HeatWave is a, in-memory query accelerator, which is why we get very good performance, but it is also the case that we have optimized HeatWave for commodity cloud services. So for instance, we use the least expensive compute. We use the least expensive storage. So what I would suggest is for the customers who kind of would like to know what is the price performance advantage of HeatWave compared to any database we have benchmark against, Redshift, Snowflake, Google BigQuery, Azure Synapse, HeatWave is significantly faster and significantly lower price on a multitude of workloads. So not only is it in-memory database and optimized for that, but we have also optimized it for commodity cloud services, which makes it much lower price than the competition. >> Well, at the end of the day, it's customers that sort of decide what the truth is. So to date, what's been the customer reaction? Are they moving from other clouds from on-prem environments? Both why, you know, what are you seeing? >> Right, so we are definitely a whole bunch of migrations of customers who are running MySQL on-premise to the cloud, to MySQL HeatWave. That's definitely happening. What is also very interesting is we are seeing that a very large percentage of customers, more than half the customers who are coming to MySQL HeatWave, are migrating from other clouds. We have a lot of migrations coming from AWS Aurora, migrations from RedShift, migrations from RDS MySQL, TerriData, SAP HANA, right. So we are seeing migrations from a whole bunch of other databases and other cloud services to MySQL HeatWave. And the main reason we are told why customers are migrating from other databases to MySQL HeatWave are lower cost, better performance, and no change to their application because many of these services, like AWS Aurora are ETL compatible with MySQL. So when customers try MySQL HeatWave, not only do they get better performance at a lower cost, but they find that they can migrate their application without any changes, and that's a big incentive for them. >> Great, thank you, Nipun. So can you give us some names? Are there some real world examples of these customers that have migrated to MySQL HeatWave that you can share? >> Oh, absolutely, I'll give you a few names. Stutor.com, this is an educational SaaS provider raised out of Brazil. They were using Google BigQuery, and when they migrated to MySQL HeatWave, they found a 300X, right, 300 times improvement in performance, and it lowered their cost by 85 (audio cut out). Another example is Neovera. They offer cybersecurity solutions and they were running their application on an on-premise version of MySQL when they migrated to MySQL HeatWave, their application improved in performance by 300 times and their cost reduced by 80%, right. So by going from on-premise to MySQL HeatWave, they reduced the cost by 80%, improved performance by 300 times. We are Glass, another customer based out of Brazil. They were running on AWS EC2, and when they migrated, within hours they found that there was a significant improvement, like, you know, over 5X improvement in database performance, and they were able to accommodate a very large virtual event, which had more than a million visitors. Another example, Genius Senority. They are a game designer in Japan, and when they moved to MySQL HeatWave, they found a 90 times percent improvement in performance. And there many, many more like a lot of migrations, again, from like, you know, Aurora, RedShift and many other databases as well. And consistently what we hear is (audio cut out) getting much better performance at a much lower cost without any change to their application. >> Great, thank you. You know, when I ask that question, a lot of times I get, "Well, I can't name the customer name," but I got to give Oracle credit, a lot of times you guys have at your fingertips. So you're not the only one, but it's somewhat rare in this industry. So, okay, so you got some good feedback from those customers that did migrate to MySQL HeatWave. What else did they tell you that they wanted? Did they, you know, kind of share a wishlist and some of the white space that you guys should be working on? What'd they tell you? >> Right, so as customers are moving more data into MySQL HeatWave, as they're consolidating more data into MySQL HeatWave, customers want to run other kinds of processing with this data. A very popular one is (audio cut out) So we have had multiple customers who told us that they wanted to run machine learning with data which is stored in MySQL HeatWave, and for that they have to extract the data out of MySQL (audio cut out). So that was the first feedback we got. Second thing is MySQL HeatWave is a highly scalable system. What that means is that as you add more nodes to a HeatWave cluster, the performance of the system improves almost linearly. But currently customers need to perform some manual steps to add most to a cluster or to reduce the cluster size. So that was other feedback we got that people wanted this thing to be automated. Third thing is that we have shown in the previous results, that HeatWave is significantly faster and significantly lower price compared to competitive services. So we got feedback from customers that can we trade off some performance to get even lower cost, and that's what we have looked at. And then finally, like we have some results on various data sizes with TPC-H. Customers wanted to see if we can offer some more data points as to how does HeatWave perform on other kinds of workloads. And that's what we've been working on for the several months. >> Okay, Nipun, we're going to get into some of that, but, so how did you go about addressing these requirements? >> Right, so the first thing is we are announcing support for in-database machine learning, meaning that customers who have their data inside MySQL HeatWave can now run training, inference, and prediction all inside the database without the data or the model ever having to leave the database. So that's how we address the first one. Second thing is we are offering support for real time elasticity, meaning that customers can scale up or scale down to any number of nodes. This requires no manual intervention on part of the user, and for the entire duration of the resize operation, the system is fully available. The third, in terms of the costs, we have double the amount of data that can be processed per node. So if you look at a HeatWave cluster, the size of the cluster determines the cost. So by doubling the amount of data that can be processed per node, we have effectively reduced the cluster size which is required for planning a given workload to have, which means it reduces the cost to the customer by half. And finally, we have also run the TPC-DS workload on HeatWave and compared it with other vendors. So now customers can have another data point in terms of the performance and the cost comparison of HeatWave with other services. >> All right, and I promise, I'm going to ask you about the benchmarks, but I want to come back and drill into these a bit. How is HeatWave ML different from competitive offerings? Take for instance, Redshift ML, for example. >> Sure, okay, so this is a good comparison. Let's start with, let's say RedShift ML, like there are some systems like, you know, Snowflake, which don't even offer any, like, processing of machine learning inside the database, and they expect customers to write a whole bunch of code, in say Python or Java, to do machine learning. RedShift ML does have integration with SQL. That's a good start. However, when customers of Redshift need to run machine learning, and they invoke Redshift ML, it makes a call to another service, SageMaker, right, where so the data needs to be exported to a different service. The model is generated, and the model is also outside RedShift. With HeatWave ML, the data resides always inside the MySQL database service. We are able to generate models. We are able to train the models, run inference, run explanations, all inside the MySQL HeatWave service. So the data, or the model, never have to leave the database, which means that both the data and the models can now be secured by the same access control mechanisms as the rest of the data. So that's the first part, that there is no need for any ETL. The second aspect is the automation. Training is a very important part of machine learning, right, and it impacts the quality of the predictions and such. So traditionally, customers would employ data scientists to influence the training process so that it's done right. And even in the case of Redshift ML, the users are expected to provide a lot of parameters to the training process. So the second thing which we have worked on with HeatWave ML is that it is fully automated. There is absolutely no user intervention required for training. Third is in terms of performance. So one of the things we are very, very sensitive to is performance because performance determines the eventual cost to the customer. So again, in some benchmarks, which we have published, and these are all available on GitHub, we are showing how HeatWave ML is 25 times faster than Redshift ML, and here's the kicker, at 1% of the cost. So four benefits, the data all remain secure inside the database service, it's fully automated, much faster, much lower cost than the competition. >> All right, thank you Nipun. Now, so there's a lot of talk these days about explainability and AI. You know, the system can very accurately tell you that it's a cat, you know, or for you Silicon Valley fans, it's a hot dog or not a hot dog, but they can't tell you how the system got there. So what is explainability, and why should people care about it? >> Right, so when we were talking to customers about what they would like from a machine learning based solution, one of the feedbacks we got is that enterprise is a little slow or averse to uptaking machine learning, because it seems to be, you know, like magic, right? And enterprises have the obligation to be able to explain, or to provide a answer to their customers as to why did the database make a certain choice. With a rule based solution it's simple, it's a rule based thing, and you know what the logic was. So the reason explanations are important is because customers want to know why did the system make a certain prediction? One of the important characteristics of HeatWave ML is that any model which is generated by HeatWave ML can be explained, and we can do both global explanations or model explanations as well as we can also do local explanations. So when the system makes a specific prediction using HeatWave ML, the user can find out why did the system make such a prediction? So for instance, if someone is being denied a loan, the user can figure out what were the attribute, what were the features which led to that decision? So this ensures, like, you know, fairness, and many of the times there is also like a need for regulatory compliance where users have a right to know. So we feel that explanations are very important for enterprise workload, and that's why every model which is generated by HeatWave ML can be explained. >> Now I got to give Snowflakes some props, you know, this whole idea of separating compute from storage, but also bringing the database to the cloud and driving elasticity. So that's been a key enabler and has solved a lot of problems, in particular the snake swallowing the basketball problem, as I often say. But what about elasticity and elasticity in real time? How is your version, and there's a lot of companies chasing this, how is your approach to an elastic cloud database service different from what others are promoting these days? >> Right, so a couple of characteristics. One is that we have now fully automated the process of elasticity, meaning that if a user wants to scale up or scale down, the only thing they need to specify is the eventual size of the cluster and the system completely takes care of it transparently. But then there are a few characteristics which are very unique. So for instance, we can scale up or scale down to any number of nodes. Whereas in the case of Snowflake, the number of nodes someone can scale up or scale down to are the powers of two. So if a user needs 70 CPUs, well, their choice is either 64 or 128. So by providing this flexibly with MySQL HeatWave, customers get a custom fit. So they can get a cluster which is optimized for their specific portal. So that's the first thing, flexibility of scaling up or down to any number of nodes. The second thing is that after the operation is completed, the system is fully balanced, meaning the data across the various nodes is fully balanced. That is not the case with many solutions. So for instance, in the case of Redshift, after the resize operation is done, the user is expected to manually balance the data, which can be very cumbersome. And the third aspect is that while the resize operation is going on, the HeatWave cluster is completely available for queries, for DMLS, for loading more data. That is, again, not the case with Redshift. Redshift, suppose the operation takes 10 to 15 minutes, during that window of time, the system is not available for writes, and for a big part of that chunk of time, the system is not even available for queries, which is very limiting. So the advantages we have are fully flexible, the system is in a balanced state, and the system is completely available for the entire duration operation. >> Yeah, I guess you got that hypergranularity, which, you know, sometimes they say, "Well, t-shirt sizes are good enough," but then I think of myself, some t-shirts fit me better than others, so. Okay, I saw on the announcement that you have this lower price point for customers. How did you actually achieve this? Could you give us some details around that please? >> Sure, so there are two things for announcing this service, which lower the cost for the customers. The first thing is that we have doubled the amount of data that can be processed by a HeatWave node. So if we have doubled the amount of data, which can be a process by a node, the cluster size which is required by customers reduces to half, and that's why the cost drops to half. The way we have managed to do this is by two things. One is support for Bloom filters, which reduces the amount of intermediate memory. And second is we compress the base data. So these are the two techniques we have used to process more data per node. The second way by which we are lowering the cost for the customers is by supporting pause and resume of HeatWave. And many times you find customers of like HeatWave and other services that they want to run some other queries or some other workloads for some duration of time, but then they don't need the cluster for a few hours. Now with the support for pause and resume, customers can pause the cluster and the HeatWave cluster instantaneously stops. And when they resume, not only do we fetch the data, in a very, like, you know, a quick pace from the object store, but we also preserve all the statistics, which are used by Autopilot. So both the data and the metadata are fetched, extremely fast from the object store. So with these two capabilities we feel that it'll drive down the cost to our customers even more. >> Got it, thank you. Okay, I promised I was going to get to the benchmarks. Let's have it. How do you compare with others but specifically cloud databases? I mean, and how do we know these benchmarks are real? My friends at EMC, they were back in the day, they were brilliant at doing benchmarks. They would produce these beautiful PowerPoints charts, but it was kind of opaque, but what do you say to that? >> Right, so there are multiple things I would say. The first thing is that this time we have published two benchmarks, one is for machine learning and other is for SQL analytics. All the benchmarks, including the scripts which we have used are available on GitHub. So we have full transparency, and we invite and encourage customers or other service providers to download the scripts, to download the benchmarks and see if they get any different results, right. So what we are seeing, we have published it for other people to try and validate. That's the first part. Now for machine learning, there hasn't been a precedence for enterprise benchmarks so we talk about aiding open data sets and we have published benchmarks for those, right? So both for classification, as well as for aggression, we have run the training times, and that's where we find that HeatWave MLS is 25 times faster than RedShift ML at one percent of the cost. So fully transparent, available. For SQL analytics, in the past we have shown comparisons with TPC-H. So we would show TPC-H across various databases, across various data sizes. This time we decided to use TPC-DS. the advantage of TPC-DS over TPC-H is that it has more number of queries, the queries are more complex, the schema is more complex, and there is a lot more data skew. So it represents a different class of workloads, and which is very interesting. So these are queries derived from the TPC-DS benchmark. So the numbers we have are published this time are for 10 terabyte TPC-DS, and we are comparing with all the four majors services, Redshift, Snowflake, Google BigQuery, Azure Synapse. And in all the cases, HeatWave is significantly faster and significantly lower priced. Now one of the things I want to point out is that when we are doing the cost comparison with other vendors, we are being overly fair. For instance, the cost of HeatWave includes the cost of both the MySQL node as well as the HeatWave node, and with this setup, customers can run transaction processing analytics as well as machine learning. So the price captures all of it. Whereas with the other vendors, the comparison is only for the analytic queries, right? So if customers wanted to run RDP, you would need to add the cost of that database. Or if customers wanted to run machine learning, you would need to add the cost of that service. Furthermore, with the case of HeatWave, we are quoting pay as you go price, whereas for other vendors like, you know, RedShift, and like, you know, where applicable, we are quoting one year, fully paid upfront cost rate. So it's like, you know, very fair comparison. So in terms of the numbers though, price performance for TPC-DS, we are about 4.8 times better price performance compared to RedShift We are 14.4 times better price performance compared to Snowflake, 13 times better than Google BigQuery, and 15 times better than Synapse. So across the board, we are significantly faster and significantly lower price. And as I said, all of these scripts are available in GitHub for people to drive for themselves. >> Okay, all right, I get it. So I think what you're saying is, you could have said this is what it's going to cost for you to do both analytics and transaction processing on a competitive platform versus what it takes to do that on Oracle MySQL HeatWave, but you're not doing that. You're saying, let's take them head on in their sweet spot of analytics, or OLTP separately and you're saying you still beat them. Okay, so you got this one database service in your cloud that supports transactions and analytics and machine learning. How much do you estimate your saving companies with this integrated approach versus the alternative of kind of what I called upfront, the right tool for the right job, and admittedly having to ETL tools. How can you quantify that? >> Right, so, okay. The numbers I call it, right, at the end of the day in a cloud service price performance is the metric which gives a sense as to how much the customers are going to save. So for instance, for like a TPC-DS workload, if we are 14 times better price performance than Snowflake, it means that our cost is going to be 1/14th for what customers would pay for Snowflake. Now, in addition, in other costs, in terms of migrating the data, having to manage two different databases, having to pay for other service for like, you know, machine learning, that's all extra and that depends upon what tools customers are using or what other services they're using for transaction processing or for machine learning. But these numbers themselves, right, like they're very, very compelling. If we are 1/5th the cost of Redshift, right, or 1/14th of Snowflake, these numbers, like, themselves are very, very compelling. And that's the reason we are seeing so many of these migrations from these databases to MySQL HeatWave. >> Okay, great, thank you. Our last question, in the Q3 earnings call for fiscal 22, Larry Ellison said that "MySQL HeatWave is coming soon on AWS," and that caught a lot of people's attention. That's not like Oracle. I mean, people might say maybe that's an indication that you're not having success moving customers to OCI. So you got to go to other clouds, which by the way I applaud, but any comments on that? >> Yep, this is very much like Oracle. So if you look at one of the big reasons for success of the Oracle database and why Oracle database is the most popular database is because Oracle database runs on all the platforms, and that has been the case from day one. So very akin to that, the idea is that there's a lot of value in MySQL HeatWave, and we want to make sure that we can offer same value to the customers of MySQL running on any cloud, whether it's OCI, whether it's the AWS, or any other cloud. So this shows how confident we are in our offering, and we believe that in other clouds as well, customers will find significant advantage by having a single database, which is much faster and much lower price then what alternatives they currently have. So this shows how confident we are about our products and services. >> Well, that's great, I mean, obviously for you, you're in MySQL group. You love that, right? The more places you can run, the better it is for you, of course, and your customers. Okay, Nipun, we got to leave it there. As always it's great to have you on theCUBE, really appreciate your time. Thanks for coming on and sharing the new innovations. Congratulations on all the progress you're making here. You're doing a great job. >> Thank you, Dave, and thank you for the opportunity. >> All right, and thank you for watching this CUBE conversation with Dave Vellante for theCUBE, your leader in enterprise tech coverage. We'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from the cube in ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> On Friday, December 10th, Oracle announced a strong earnings beat and raise, on the strength of its licensed business, and slightly better than expected cloud performance. The stock was up sharply on the day and closed up nearly 16% surpassing 280 billion in market value. Oracle's success is due largely to its execution, of a highly differentiated strategy, that has really evolved over the past decade or more, deeply integrating its hardware and software, heavily investing in next generation cloud, creating a homogeneous experience across its application portfolio, and becoming the number one platform. Number one for the world's most mission critical applications. Now, while investors piled into the stock, skeptics will point to the beat being weighed toward licensed revenue and likely keep one finger on the sell button until they're convinced Oracle's cloud momentum, is more consistent and predictable. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibond CUBE insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we'll review Oracle's most recent quarter, and pull in some ETR survey data, to frame the company's cloud business, the momentum of fusion ERP, where the company is winning and some gaps and opportunities that we see. The numbers this quarter was strong, particularly top line growth. Here are a few highlights. Oracle's revenues that grew 6% year on year that's in constant currency, surpassed $10 billion for the quarter. Oracle's non-gap operating margins, were an impressive 47%. Safra Catz has always said cloud is more profitable business and it's really starting to show in the income statement. Operating cash and free cash flow were 10.3 billion and 7.1 billion respectively, for the past four quarters, and would have been higher, if not for charges largely related to litigation expenses tied to the hiring of Mark Hurd, which the company said would not repeat in the future quarters. And you can see in this chart how Oracle breaks down its business, which is kind of a mishmash of items they lump into so-called the cloud. The largest piece of the revenue pie is cloud services, and licensed support, which in reading 10Ks, you'll find statements like the following; licensed support revenues are our largest revenue stream and include product upgrades, and maintenance releases and patches, as well as technical support assistance and statements like the following; cloud and licensed revenue, include the sale of cloud services, cloud licenses and on-premises licenses, which typically represent perpetual software licenses purchased by customers, for use in both cloud, and on-premises, IT environments. And cloud license and on-prem license revenues primarily represent amounts earned from granting customers perpetual licenses to use our database middleware application in industry specific products, which our customers use for cloud-based, on-premise and other IT environments. So you tell me, "is that cloud? I don't know." In the early days of Oracle cloud, the company used to break out, IaaS, PaaS and SaaS revenue separately, but it changed its mind, which really makes it difficult to determine what's happening in true cloud. Look I have no problem including same same hardware software control plane, et cetera. The hybrid if it's on-prem in a true hybrid environment like exadata cloud@customer or AWS outposts. But you have to question what's really cloud in these numbers. And Larry in the earnings call mentioned that Salesforce licenses the Oracle database, to run its cloud and Oracle doesn't count that in its cloud number, rather it counts it in license revenue, but as you can see it varies that into a line item that starts with the word cloud. So I guess I would say that Oracle's reporting is maybe somewhat better than IBM's cloud reporting, which is the worst, but I can't really say what is and isn't cloud, in these numbers. Nonetheless, Oracle is getting it done for investors. Here's a chart comparing the five-year performance of Oracle to some of its legacy peers. We excluded Microsoft because it skews the numbers. Microsoft would really crush all these names including Oracle. But look at Oracle. It's wedged in between the performance of the NASDAQ and the S&P 500, it's up over 160% in that five-year timeframe, well ahead of SAP which is up 59% in that time, and way ahead of the dismal -22% performance of IBM. Well, it's a shame. The tech tide is rising, it's lifting all boats but, IBM has unfortunately not been able to capitalize. That's a story for another day. As a market watcher, you can't help but love Larry Ellison. I only met him once at an IDC conference in Paris where I got to interview Scott McNealy, CEO at the time. Ellison is great for analysts because, he's not afraid to talk about the competition. He'll brag, he'll insult, he'll explain, and he'll pitch his stories. Now on the earnings call last night, he went off. Educating the analyst community, on the upside in the fusion ERP business, making the case that because only a thousand of the 7,500 legacy on-prem ERP customers from Oracle, JD Edwards and PeopleSoft have moved Oracle's fusion cloud ERP, and he predicted that Oracle's cloud ERP business will surpass 20 billion in five years. In fact, he said it's going to bigger than that. He slammed the hybrid cloud washing. You can see one of the quotes here in this chart, that's going on when companies have customers running in the cloud and they claim whatever they have on premise hybrid, he called that ridiculous. I would agree. And then he took an opportunity to slam the hyperscale cloud vendors, citing a telco customer that said Oracle's cloud never goes down, and of course, he chose the same week, that AWS had a major outage. And so to these points, I would say that Oracle really was the first tech company, to announce a true hybrid cloud strategy, where you have an entirely identical experience on prem and in the cloud. This was announced with cloud@customer, two years, before AWS announced outposts. Now it probably took Oracle two years to get it working as advertised, but they were first. And to the second point, this is where Oracle differentiates itself. Oracle is number one for mission critical applications. No other vendor really can come close to Oracle in this regard. And I would say that Oracle is recent quarterly performance to a large extent, is due to this differentiated approach. Over the past 10 years, we've talked to hundreds literally. Hundreds and hundreds of Oracle customers. And while they may not always like the tactics and licensing policies of Oracle in their contracting, they will tell you, that business case for investing and staying with Oracle are very strong. And yes, a big part of that is lock-in but R&D investments innovation and a keen sense of market direction, are just as important to these customers. When you're chairman and founder is a technologist and also the CTO, and has the cash on hand to invest, the results are a highly competitive story. Now that's not to say Oracle is not without its challenges. That's not to say Oracle is without its challenges. Those who follow this program know that when it comes to ETR survey data, the story is not always pretty for Oracle. So let's take a look. This chart shows the breakdown of ETR is net score methodology, Net score measures spending momentum and works ETR. Each quarter asks customers, are you adding in the platform, That's the lime green. Increasing spend by 6% or more, that's the fourth green. Is you're spending E+ or minus 5%, that's the gray. You're spending climbing by 6%, that's the pinkish. Or are you leaving the platform, that's the bright red retiring. You subtract the reds from the greens, and that yields a net score, which an Oracle's overall case, is an uninspiring -4%. This is one of the anomalies in the ETR dataset. The net score doesn't track absolute actual levels, of spending the dollars. Remember, as the leader in mission critical workloads, Oracle commands a premium price. And so what happens here is the gray, is still spending a large amount of money, enough to offset the declines, and the greens are spending more than they would on other platforms because Oracle could command higher prices. And so that's how Oracle is able to grow its overall revenue by 6% for example, whereas the ETR methodology, doesn't capture that trend. So you have to dig into the data a bit deeper. We're not going to go too deep today, but let's take a look at how some of Oracle's businesses are performing relative to its competitors. This is a popular view that we like to share. It shows net score or spending momentum on the vertical axis, and market share. Market share is a measure of pervasiveness in the survey. Think of it as mentioned share. That's on the x-axis. And we've broken down and circled Oracle overall, Oracle on prem, which is declining on the vertical axis, Oracle fusion and NetSuite, which are much higher than Oracle overall. And in the case of fusion, much closer to that 40% magic red horizontal line, remember anything above that line, we consider to be elevated. Now we've added SAP overall which has, momentum comparable to fusion in the survey, using this methodology and IBM, which is in between fusion and Oracle, overall on the y-axis. Oracle as you can see on the horizontal axis, has a larger presence than any of these firms that are below the 40% line. Now, above that 40% line, you see companies with a smaller presence in the survey like Workday, salesforce.com, pretty big presence still, Google cloud also, and Snowflake. Smaller presence but much much higher net score than anybody else on this chart. And AWS and Microsoft overall with both a strong presence, and impressive momentum, especially for their respective sizes. Now that view that we just showed you excluded on purpose Oracle specific cloud offering. So let's now take a look at that relative to other cloud providers. This chart shows the same XY view, but it cuts the data by cloud only. And you can see Oracle while still well below the 40% line, has a net score of +15 compared to a -4 overall that we showed you earlier. So here we see two key points. One, despite the convoluted reporting that we talked about earlier, the ETR data supports that Oracle's cloud business has significantly more momentum than Oracle's overall average momentum. And two, while Oracle is smaller and doesn't have the growth of the hyperscale giants, it's cloud is performing noticeably better than IBM's within the ETR survey data. Now a key point Ellison emphasized on the earnings call, was the importance of ERP, and the work that Oracle has done in this space. It lives by this notion of a cloud first mentality. It builds stuff for the cloud and then, would bring it on-prem. And it's been attracting new customers according to the company. He said Oracle has 8,500 fusion ERP customers, and 28,000 NetSuite customers in the cloud. And unlike Microsoft, it hasn't migrated its on-prem install base, to the cloud yet. Meaning these are largely new customers. Now this chart isolates fusion and NetSuite, within a sector ETR calls GPP. The very giant, public and private companies. And this is a bellwether of spending in the ETR dataset. They've gone back and it correlates to performance. So think large public companies, the biggest ones, and also privates big privates like Mars or Cargo or Fidelity. The chart shows the net score breakdown over time for fusion and NetSuite going back to 2019. And you can see, a big uptick as shown in the blue line from the October, 2020 survey. So Oracle has done a good job building and now marketing its cloud ERP to these important customers. Now, the last thing we want to show you is Oracle's performance within industry sectors. On the earnings call, Oracle said that it had a very strong momentum for fusion in financial services and healthcare. And this chart shows the net score for fusion, across each industry sector that ETR tracks, for three survey points. October, 2020, that's the gray bars, July 21, that's the blue bars and October, 2021, the yellow bars. So look it confirms Oracles assertions across the board that they're seeing fusion perform very well including the two verticals that are called out healthcare and banking slash financial services. Now the big question is where does Oracle go from here? Oracle has had a history of looking like it's going to break out, only to hit some bumps in the road. And so investors are likely going to remain a bit cautious and take profits off the table along the way. But since the Barron's article came out, we reported on that earlier this year in February, declaring Oracle a cloud giant, the stock is up more than 50% of course. 16 of those points were from Friday's move upward, but still, Oracle's highly differentiated strategy of integrating hardware and software together, investing in a modern cloud platform and selectively offering services that cater to the hardcore mission critical buyer, these have served the company, its customers and investors as well. From a cloud standpoint, we'd like to see Oracle be more inclusive, and aggressively expand its marketplace and its ecosystem. This would provide both greater optionality for customers, and further establish Oracle as a major cloud player. Indeed, one of the hallmarks of both AWS and Azure is the momentum being created, by their respective ecosystems. As well, we'd like to see more clear confirmation that Oracle's performance is being driven by its investments in technology IE cloud, same same hybrid, and industry features these modern investments, versus a legacy licensed cycles. We are generally encouraged and are reminded, of years ago when Sam Palmisano, he was retiring and leaving as the CEO of IBM. At the time, HP under the direction ironically of Mark Hurd, was the now company, Palmisano was asked, "do you worry about HP?" And he said in fact, "I don't worry about HP. I worry about Oracle because Oracle invests in R&D." And that statement has proven present. What do you think? Has Oracle hit the next inflection point? Let me know. Don't forget these episodes they're all available as podcasts wherever you listen, all you do is search it. Breaking Analysis podcast, check out ETR website at etr.plus. We also publish a full report every week on wikibon.com and siliconANGLE.com. You can get in touch with me on email David.vellante@siliconangle.com, you can DM me @dvellante on Twitter or, comment on our LinkedIn posts. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights. Powered by ETR. Have a great week everybody. Stay safe, be well, and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>> Announcer: From the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas, it's theCUBE, covering UiPath FORWARD IV brought to you by UiPath. >> Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE. We are wrapping up day two of our coverage of UiPath FORWARD IV. Lisa Martin here with Dave Vellante. We've had an amazing event talking with customers, partners, and users, and UiPath folks themselves. And who better to wrap up the show with than Daniel Dines the founder and CEO of UiPath. Welcome, Daniel, great to have you back on theCUBE. >> Oh, thank you so much for having me. I'm becoming a regular at theCUBE. >> Yeah, it's good to see you again. >> You are, this is your fifth... >> Fifth time on theCUBE. >> Fifth time, yes. >> Fifth time, but as you said before we went live, first time since the IPO. Congratulations. >> Thank you. >> UiPath has been a rocket ship for a very long time. I'm sure a tremendous amount of acceleration has occurred since the IPO. We can all see the numbers. You're a public company now, ARR of 726 million. You've got over 9,000 customers. We got the chance to speak with a few of them here today. We know how important the voice of the customer is to UiPath and how very symbiotic it is. But I want to talk about the culture of the company. How is that going? How is it being maintained especially since the big splashy IPO just about six months ago? >> Well, I always believe that in order to build a durable company, culture is maybe the most important thing. I think long lasting companies have very foundational culture. So we've built it, and we invested a lot in the last 5-6 years because in the beginning when it's just a bunch of people, they don't have a culture. It's maybe like a vibe of a group of friends. But then when you go and try to dial in your culture, I think it's important that you look at your roots and who are you? What defines you? So we ended up of this really core values, which is to be humble. To me, it's one of quintessential value of every human being. And all of us want to work with humble people much more inclined to listen, to change their mind. And then we say, you have to be humble, but you have to be bold in the same time. This rocket ship need a bold crew onboard. So you need to be fast because the fastest company will always win. And you need to be immersed because my theory with life and jobs is in whatever you do, you have to be immersed. I don't believe necessarily in life-work balance. I believe in life-work cycles, in life-work immersion. So when you are with family, you are immersed. When you work, you are immersed. That will bring the best of you and the best of productivity. So we try so much to keep our culture alive, to hire people that add to the culture, that nicely fit into the culture. And recently we took a veteran of UiPath and we appointed her as Chief Culture Officer. So I'm very happy of this move. So I think we are one of the few companies that really have a Chief Culture Officer reporting directly to the CEO. So we're really serious of building our culture along the way. And as I said yesterday in my keynote, I think our values are universal values. I think they have the value of the new way of working. All of us would like to work in a company, in an environment that fosters these values. >> I certainly think the events of the last 18 months have forced many more people to be humble and embrace humility. Because everybody on video conferencing, your dog walks in, your kids walk in, you're exposed. They have to be more humble because that's just how they were getting work done. I've seen and heard a lot of humility from your folks and a lot of bold statements from customers as well. We had the CIO of Coca-Cola on talking about how UiPath is fundamental in their transformation. I think that the fact that you are doing an event here in person, whereas as Dave was saying earlier this week, your competitors are on webcams is a great example of the boldness of this company and its culture. >> Well, thank you. I think that we've made a really good decision to do this event in person. Maybe on Zoom over the last 18 months, we kind of lost a bit how important is to connect with people. It's not only about the message, it's about the trust. And I think we are deeply embedded into the critical systems of our customers. They need to trust us. They need to work with the company that they look in their eyes and say, "Yes, we are here for you." And you cannot do it over Zoom. Even I really like Zoom and Eric Yuan is a friend of mine, but a combination I think, and going into this hybrid world, I think it's actually extremely beneficial for all of us. Meeting in person a few times a year, then continuing the relationship over Zoom in time, I think it's awesome. >> Yeah, and the fact that you were able to get so many customers here, I think that's, Lisa, why a lot of companies don't have physical events 'cause they can't get their customers here. You got 2000 customers here, customers and partners, but a lot of customers. I've spoken to dozens and they're easy to find. So I think that's one point I want the audience to know. You've always been on the culture train. And enduring companies, CEOs of great enduring companies, always come back to culture. So that's important. And of course, product. You said today, you're a product guy. That's when you get excited. You've changed the industry. And I think, I've never bought into the narrative about replacing jobs. I'd never been a fan of protecting the past from the future. It's inevitable, but I think the way you've changed the market, I wonder if you could comment is... You had legacy RPA tools that were expensive and cumbersome. And so people had to get the ROI and it took a long time. So that was an obvious way to get it is to reduce headcount. You came in and said, short money you can actually try it even a free version. You compressed that ROI and the light bulb went off, and so people then said, "Oh, wow, this isn't about replacing jobs, but making my life better." And you've always said that. And that's I think one way in which you've changed the market quite dramatically, and now you have a lot of people following that path. >> That was always kind of our biggest competitive advantage. We showed our customers and our partners, this is a technology that gives you the faster time to value and actually faster time to value translate into much higher return on investment. In a typical automation project, the license cost is maybe 5% of the project cost. So the moment you shrink the development time, the implementation time, you increase exponentially the return on investment. So this is why speaking about our roadmap, and we always start with this high level, how can we reduce the development time? So how can we reduce the friction? How can we expand the use cases? Because these are essential themes for us, always thinking customer first, customer value and that serves us pretty well really. We win a lot in all the contests where we go side by side with other competitors. It was a very simple strategy for us. Asking customers, "Just go and test it side-by-side and see," and they see. We implement the same process in halftime, half of resources involved. It's an easy math multiplied by a thousand processes and it's done. >> When theCUBE started Daniel in 2010. It was our first year. And so it coincided with big data movement. And we said at the time that the companies who can figure out how to apply big data are going to make a lot of money, more than the big data vendors. And I think in a way now the problem with big data was too complicated, right? There were only a few big internet giants who could figure out Hadoop and all that stuff. Automation, I think is even bigger in a way, 'cause it involves data. It involves AI, it's transformative. And so we're saying the same thing here. The companies that are applying automation, and we've seen a lot of them here, Coca-Cola, Merck, Applied Materials, on and on and on, are actually the ones that are going to not only survive but thrive, incumbents that don't have to invent AI necessarily or invent their own automation. But coming back to you 'cause I think your company can make a lot of money. You've set the TAM at 60 billion. I think it actually could be well over 100 billion, but we don't have to have that conversation here. It's just convergence of all these markets that guys like IDC and Gartner, they count in stove pipes. So anyway, big, no shortage of opportunity. My question to you is feels like you have the potential to build a next great software company and with the founder as the CEO, and there aren't a lot of them left. Michael Dell is not a software company, but his name is still, Larry Ellison is still there, Marc Benioff. How do you think about the endurance, the enduring UiPath? Are you envisioning building the next great software company, may take 20 years? >> People were asking me for a long time. Did you envision that you'd get here from the beginning? And I always tell them, no. Otherwise I would have been considered mad. (Lisa and Dave laughing) So you build the vision over time. I don't believe in people that start a small SaaS company and they say, "We are going to change the world." This is not how the world works. Really, you build and you understand the customer and you build more. But at some point I realized we change so much how people work, we get the best out of them. It's something major here. And if you look in history, we are in this trap that started with agriculture. This is the trap of manual, repetitive, low value tasks that we have to do. And it took the humanity of us. And I talked to Tom Montag about with this book "Sapiens". It's interesting and that book comes with the theory that our biggest quality is our ability to collaborate. Well, our technology gives people the ability to collaborate more. So, in this way, I think it's truly transformative. And yes, I believe now that we can build the next generation of software company. >> How do you like... That's the wrong question. How are you doing with the 90-day shot clock as Michael Dell calls it? It's a new world for you, right? You've never been a CEO of a public company, the street's getting to know you like, "Who is this guy?" I'll give you another cute story. There were three companies in the early CUBE days, Tableau, Splunk, and ServiceNow that had the kind of customer passion that you have. I think ServiceNow could be one of the next great software companies. Tableau now part of Salesforce. I think Splunk was under capitalized, but we see the same kind of passion here. So now you're the CEO of a public company, except the street's getting to know you a little bit. They're like, "Hmm, how do we read the guy?" All that stuff. That'll sort itself out. But so what's life like on the public markets? >> Well, I don't think anyone prepares you for the life of a public company. (Dave laughing) I thought it's going to be easier, but it's not, because we were used to deal with private investors and it's much easier because I think private investors have access to a lot more data. They look into your books. So they understand your business model. With public investors, they have access only to like a spreadsheet of numbers. So they need to figure out a business model, the trajectory from just a split. It's way more difficult. I've come to appreciate their job. It's much more difficult. So they have to get all the cues from how I dress, how do I say this word? They watch the FED announcements. What do they mean to say by this? And I and the shim we are first time in a job as a public company CEO, public company CFO. So of course it's a lot of learning for us and like in any learning environment, initial learning curve is tough, but you progress quite a lot. So I believe that over the next few quarters, we will be in the position to build trust with the street and they will understand better our business model, and they see that we are building everything for creating durable growth. >> It's a marathon, it's not a sprint. I know it's a cliche, but it really does apply here. >> You've certainly built a tremendous amount of trust within your 9,000 strong customer base. I think I was reading that your 70% of your revenue comes from existing customers. I think this is a great use case for how to do land and expand really well. So, the DNA I think is there at UiPath to be able to build that trust with the street. >> Yeah, absolutely. Our 9,000 plus customers, it's our wealth. This is our IP in a way. It's even better than in our pro. It's our customers. We have one of the best net retention rate in the industry of 144%. So that speaks volume. >> Lisa: It does. >> Automation for good. I know you've read some of the stuff I've written. I've covered you guys pretty extensively over the years. And that theme sounds like a lot of motherhood and apple pie, but one of the things that I wrote is that you look at the productivity decline and particularly in Western countries over the last two decades. Now I know with the pandemic and especially in 2021, productivity is going up for reasons that I think are understood, but the trend is clear. So when you think about big problems, climate change, diversity, income inequality, health of populations, overpopulation, on and on and on and on. You're not going to solve those problems by throwing labor at them. It has to be automation. So that to me is the tie to automation for good. And a lot of people might roll their eyes at it. But does that resonate with you? >> It totally resonates with me. Look at US. US population is not growing at the rates that we were used to. It's going to plateau at some point. It's just obvious. Like it plateaued in Japan, in Japan it's decreasing. US will see a decrease at some point. How do you increase the GDP? If your population is declining, productivity is declining. How do you increase GDP? Because the moment we stop increasing GDP, everything will collapse. The modern world is built on the idea of continuous economical growth. The moment growth stops, the world stops. We'll go back to our case and restart the engine. So, automation is hugely important in continuous GDP growth, which is the engine of our life. >> Which by the way is important because the chasm between the haves and the have-nots, that's how growth allows the people at the bottom to rise up to the middle and the middle to the top. So that's how you deal with that problem. You asked Tom Montag about crypto. So I have to ask you about crypto. What are your thoughts? Are you a fan? Are you not a fan? Do you have any wisdom? >> I have to admit, I never really understood the use cases of crypto. Technology behind crypto, blockchain is fascinating technology, but crypto in itself, I was never a fan. Tom Montag today gave me one of the best explanation of the very same. Look, Daniel, from Americans perspective we have the dollars, and this is the global currency. Crypto doesn't have so much sense, but think about a country like Columbia or Venezuela, countries where there people don't have so much trust in their currency, and where different political system can seize your assets from you. You need to be able to be capable of putting them into something else that is outside government context. I believe this is a good use case but I still don't believe that crypto is that type of asset that you know will survive the test of time. I think it's really too much... To me the difference between gold and Bitcoin is that it's too... You cannot replicate gold whatever you... It's impossible, unless you are God you cannot create gold two, right? It's impossible, but you can create Bitcoin 2. And at some point the fashion will move from Bitcoin 2 to Bitcoin 3. So I don't think the value that you can build in one particular crypto currency right now will stay over time. But it's just me. I was the wrong so many times in my life. >> You've been busy. You haven't had time to study crypto. >> I agree, totally agree. (Lisa and Dave laughing) >> What's been some of the feedback from the customers that are here. We saw yesterday a standing room only keynote. I'm sure it was great for you to be on stage again actually interacting with your customers and your partners. What's been some of the feedback as we've seen really this shift from an RPA point solution to an enterprise automation platform? >> Well, first of all, it was really great to be on stage. I don't know, I'm not a good presenter, really. But going there in front of people felt me with energy. Suddenly I felt a lot of comfort. So, I was capable of being myself with the people, which is really awesome. And the transition to a platform, from a product to a platform was really very well received by our customers because even in our competitive situations, when we are capable of explaining to them, what is the value of having an independent automation platform that is not tied to any big silos that application providers creates, we win and we win by default somehow. You've seen them now. So I think even the next evolution of semantic automation, this one is very well with our customers. >> Well, Daniel, it's been fantastic having you on. We have a good cadence here, and I hope we can continue it. On theCUBE, we love to identify early stage companies. Although as I wrote, you had a long, strange path to IPO because you took a long, long time and I think did it the right way to get product market fit. >> Absolutely. >> And that's not necessarily the way Silicon Valley works, double, double, triple, triple, and that you got product market fit, you got loyal customer base, and I think that's a key part of your success and you can see it and so congratulations, but many more years to come and we're really watching. >> Thank you so much. I'm looking forward to meeting you guys again. Thank you, that was awesome really. Great discussion. >> Exactly, good. Great to have you here in person and thanks for having us here in person as well. We look forward to FORWARD V. >> You will be invited forever. Thank you, guys, really. >> Forever, did you hear that? All right, for Daniel Dines and Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin. This is theCUBE's coverage of UiPath FORWARD IV day two. Thanks for watching. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> From the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas, It's theCUBE. Covering UiPath FORWARD IV. Brought to you by UiPath. >> Welcome back to theCUBE's coverage of UiPath FORWARD IV. Live from the Bellagio, in Las Vegas. I'm Lisa Martin with Dave Vellante. We're here all day today and tomorrow. We're going to talk about process mining next. We've got two guests here. Mike Engel is here, intelligent automation and process intelligence leader at PWC. And Ryan McMahon, the SVP of growth at UiPath. Gentlemen, welcome to the program. >> Thank you, Lisa. >> Thank you. >> So Ryan, I'm going to start with you. Talk to us about process mining. How does UiPath do it differently and what are some of the things being unveiled at this event? >> So look, I would tell you it's actually more than process mining and hopefully, not only you but others saw this this morning with Param. It's really about the full capabilities of that discovery suite. In which, obviously, process mining is part of. But it starts with task capture. So, going out and actually working with subject matter experts on a process. Accounts payable, accounts receivable, order to cash, digitally capturing that process or how they believe it should work or execute across one's environment. Right Mike? And then from there, actually validating or verifying with things or capabilities like process mining. Giving you a full digital x-ray of actually how that process is being executed in the enterprise. Showing you process bottlenecks. For things like accounts payable, showing you days outstanding, maverick buying, so you can actually pin point and do a few things. Fix your process, right? Where process should be fixed. Fix your application because it's probably not doing what you think it is, and then third, and where the value comes, is in our platform of which process mining is a capability, our PA platform. Really moving directly to automations, right? And then, having the ability with even task mining to drill into a specific bottleneck. Capturing keystrokes, clicks, and then moving to, with both of those, process mining and task mining, into Automation Hub, as part of our discovery platform as well. Being able to crowdsource, prioritize, all of those potential, if you will, just capabilities of automations, and saying, "Okay, let's go and prioritize these. These deliver to the greatest value," and executing across them. So, as much as it is about process mining, it's actually the whole entire discovery suite of capabilities that differentiates UiPath from other RPA vendors, as the only RPA vendor that delivers process mining, task mining and this discovery suite as part of our enterprise automation platform. >> Such a critical point, Ryan. I mean, it's multi-dimensional. It's not just one component. It's not just process mining or task mining, it's the combination that's really impactful. Agree with you a hundred percent. >> So, one of the things that people who watch our shows know, I'm like a broken record on this, the early days of RPA, I called it paving the cow path. And that was good because somebody knew the process, they just repeat it. But the problem was, the process wasn't necessarily the best process. As you just described. So, when you guys made the acquisition of ProcessGold, I said, "Okay, now I'm starting to connect the dots," and now a couple years on, we're starting to see that come together. This is what I think is most misunderstood about UiPath, and I wonder, from a practitioner's perspective, if you can sort of fill in some of those gaps. It's that, it's different from a point tool, it's different from a productivity tool. Like Power Automate, I'll just say it, that's running in Azure Cloud, that's cool or a vertically integrated part of some ERP Stack. This is a horizontal play that is end to end. Which is a bigger automation agenda, it's bold but it's potentially huge. $60 billion dollar TAM, I think that's understated. Maybe you could, from a practitioner's perspective, share with us the old way, >> Yeah. >> And kind of, the new way. >> Well obviously, we all made a lot of investments in this space, early on, to determine what should we be automating in the first place? We even went so far as, we have platforms that will transcribe these kind of surveys and discussions that we're having with our clients, right. But at the end of the day all we're learning is what they know about the process. What they as individuals know about the process. And that's problematic. Once we get into the next phase of actually developing something, we miss something, right? Because we're trying to do this rapidly. So, I think what we have now is really this opportunity to have data driven insights and our clients are really grabbing onto that idea, that it's good to have a sense of what they think they do but it's more important to have a sense of what they actually do. >> Are you seeing, in the last year in a half we've seen the acceleration of a lot of things, there's some silver linings but we've also seen the acceleration in automation as a mandate. Where is it? In terms of a priority, that you're seeing with customers, and are there any industries that you're seeing that are really leading the edge here? >> Well I do see it as a priority and of course, in the role that I have, obviously everybody I talk to, it's a priority for them. But I think it's kind of changing. People are understanding that it's not just a sense of, as Ryan was pointing out, it's not just a sense of getting an understanding of what we do today, it's really driving it to that next step of actually getting something impactful out the other end. Clients are starting to understand that. I like to categorize them, there's three types of clients, there's starters, there's stall-ers and those that want to scale. >> Right? So we're seeing a lot more on the other ends of this now, where clients are really getting started and they're getting a good sense that this is important for them because they know that identifying the opportunities in the first place is the most difficult part of automation. That's what's stalling the programs. Then on the other end of the spectrum, we've got these clients that are saying, "Hey, I want to do this really at scale, can you help us do that?" >> (Ryan) Right. >> And it's quite a challenge. >> How do I build a pipeline of automations? So I've had success in finance and accounting, fantastic. How do I take this to operations? How do I take this this to supply chain? How do I take this to HR? And when I do that, it all starts with, as Wendy Batchelder, Chief Data Officer at VMware, would say and as a customer, "It starts with data but more importantly, process." So focusing on process and where we can actually deliver automation. So it's not just about those insights, it's about moving from insights to actionable next steps. >> Right. >> And that is where we're seeing this convergence, if you will, take place. As we've seen it many times before. I mentioned I worked at Cisco in the past, we saw this with Voice Over IP converging on the network. We saw this at VMware, who I know you guys have spoken to multiple times. When a move from a hypervisor to including NSX with the network, to including cloud management and also VSAN for storage, and converging in software. We're seeing it too with process, really. Instead of kids and clipboards, as they used to call it, and many Six Sigma and Lean workshops, with whiteboards and sticky papers, to actually showing people within, really, days how a process is being executed within their organization. And then, suggesting here's where there's automation capabilities, go execute against them. >> So Ryan, this is why sometimes I scoff at the TAM analysis. I get you've got to do the TAM analysis, you've got to communicate to Wall Street. But basically what you do is you pull out IDC or Gartner data, which is very stovepipe, and you kind of say, "Okay we're in this market." It's the convergence of these markets. It's cloud, it's containers, it's IS, it's PaaS, it's Saas, it's blockchain, it's automation. They're all coming together to form this, it sound like a buzzword but this digital matrix, if you will. And it's how well you leverage that digital matrix, which defines your digital business. So, talk about the role that automation, generally, RPA specifically, process mining specifically, play in a digital business. >> Do you want to take that Mike or do you want me to take it? >> We can both do it? How about that? >> Yeah, perfect. >> So I'll start with it. I mean all this is about convergence at this point, right? There are a number of platform providers out there, including UiPath, that are kind of teaching us that. Often times led by the software vendors in terms of how we think of it but what we know is that there's no one solution. We went down the RPA path, lots of clients and got a lot of excitement and a lot of impact but if you really want to drive it broader, what clients are looking at now, is what is the ecosystem of tools that we need to have in place to make that happen? And from our perspective, it's got to start with really, process intelligence. >> What I would say too, if you look at digital transformation, it was usually driven from an application. Right? Really. And what I think customers found was that, "Hey," I'm going to name some folks here, "Put everything in SAP and we'll solve all your problems." Larry Ellison will tell you, "Put everything into Oracle and we'll solve all your problems." Salesforce, now, I'm a salesperson, I've never used an out of the box Salesforce dashboard in my life, to run my business because I want to run it the way I want to run it. Having said that though, they would say the same thing, "Put everything into our platform and we'll make sure that we can access it and you can use it everywhere and we'll solve all of your problems." I think what customers found is that that's not the case. So they said, "Okay, where are there other ways. Yes, I've got my application doing what it's doing, I've improved my process but hang on. There's things that are repeatable here that I can remove to actually focus on higher level orders." And that's where UiPath comes in. We've kind of had a bottom up swell but I would tell you that as we deliver ROI within days or weeks, versus potentially years and with a heavy, heavy investment up front. We're able to do it. We're able to then work with our partners like PWC, to then demonstrate with business process modeling, the ability to do it across all those, as I call, Silo's of excellence in an organization, to deliver true value, in a timeline, with integrated services from our partner, to execute and deliver on ROI. >> You mentioned some of the great software companies that have been created over the years. One you didn't mention but I want you to comment on it is Service Now. Because essentially McDermott's trying to create the platform of platforms. All about workflow and service management. They bought an RPA company, "Hey we got this too." But it's still a walled garden. It's still the same concept is put everything in here. My question is, how are you different? Yeah look, we're going to integrate with customers who want to integrate because we're an open platform and that's the right approach. We believe there will be some overlap and there'll be some choices to be made. Instead of that top down different approach, which may be a little bit heavy and a large investment up front, with varied results, as far as what that looks like, ours is really a bottoms up. I would tell you too, if you look at our community, which is a million and a half, I believe, strong now and growing, it's really about that practitioner and those people that have embraced it from the bottom up that really change how it gets implemented. And you don't have what I used to call the white blood cells, pushing back when you're trying to say, "Hey, let's take it from this finance and accounting to HR, to the supply chain, to the other sides of the organization," saying, "Hey look, be part of this," instead of, "No, you will do." >> Yeah, there's no, at least that I know of, there's no SAP or Salesforce freemium. You can't try it before you buy. And the entry price is way higher. I mean generally. I guess Salesforce not necessarily but I could taste automation for well under $100,000. I could get in for, I bet you most of your customers started at 25 of $50,000 departmental deployments. >> It's a bottoms up ground swell, that's exactly right. And it's really that approach. Which is much more like an Atlassian, I will tell you and it's really getting to the point where we obviously, and I'm saying this, I work at UiPath, we make really good software. And so, out of the box, it's getting easier and easier to use. It all integrates. Which makes it seamless. The reason people move to RPA first was because they got tired of bouncing between applications to do a task. Now we deliver this enterprise automation platform where you can go from process discovery to crowd sourcing and prioritizing your automations with your pipeline of automations, into Studio, into creating those automations, into testing them and back again, right? We give you the opportunity not to leave the platform and extract the most value out of our, what we call enterprise automation platform. Inclusive of process mining. Inclusive of testing and all those capabilities, document understanding, which is also mine, and it's fantastic. It's very differentiated from others that are out there. >> Well it's about having the right framework in place. >> That's it. From an automation perspective. I think that's a little bit different from what you would expect from the SAP's of the world. Mike, where are you seeing, in the large organizations that you work with, we think of what you describe as the automation pipeline, where are some of the key priorities that you're finding in large organizations? What's in that pipeline and in what order? >> It's interesting because every time we have a conversation whether it's internal or with our clients, we come up with another use case for this type of technology. Obviously, when we're having the initial conversations, what we're talking about is really automation. How do we stuff that pipe with automation. But you know, we have clients that are saying, "Hey listen, I'm trying to carve out of a parent company and what I need to do is document all of my processes in a meaningful way, that I can, at some point, take action on, so there's meaningful outcomes." Whether it be a shared services organization that's looking to outsource, all different types of use cases. So, prioritizing is, I think, it's about impact and the quickest way to impact seems to be automation. >> Is it fair to say, can I look at you UiPath as automation infrastructure? Is that okay or do you guys want to say, "Oh, we're an application." The reason I ask, so then you can answer, is if you look at the great infrastructure plays, they all had a role. The DBA, the CCIE from Cisco, the Cloud Architect, the VMware admin, you've been at all of them, Ryan. So, is there a role emerging here and if it's not plumbing or infrastructure, I know, okay that's cool but course correct me on the infrastructure comment and then, is there a role emerging? >> You know, I think the difference between UiPath and some of the infrastructure companies is, it used to take, Dave, years to give an ROI, really. You'd invest in infrastructure and it's like, if we build it they will come. In fact, we've seen this with Cloud, where we kind of started doing some of that on prem, right? We can do this but then you had Amazon, Azure and others kind of take it and say, "Look, we can do it better, faster and cheaper." It's that simple. So, I would say that we are an application and that we reference it as an enterprise automation platform. It's more than infrastructure. Now, are we going to, as I mentioned, integrate to an open platform, to other capabilities? Absolutely. I think, as you see with our investments and as we continue to build this out, starting in core RPA, buying ProcessGold and getting into our discovery suite of capabilities I covered, getting into, what I see next is, as you start launching many bots into your organization, you're touching multiple applications, so you got to test it. Any time you would launch an application you're going to test it before you go live, right? We see another convergence with testing and I know you had Garrett on and Matt, earlier, with testing, application testing, which has been a legacy, kind of dinosaur market, converging with RPA, where you can deliver automations to do it better, faster and cheaper. >> Thank you for that clarification but now Mike, is that role, I know roles are emerging in RPA and automation but is there, I mean, we're seeing centers of excellence pop up, is there an analogy there or sort of a similar- >> Yeah, I think the new role, if you will, it's not super new but it's really that sense of an automation solution architect. It's a whole different thing. We're talking about now more about recombinant innovation. >> Mike: Yeah. >> Than we are about build it from scratch. Because of the convergence of these low-code, no-code types of solutions. It's a different skill set. >> And we see it at PWC. You have somebody who is potentially a process expert but then also somebody who understands automations. It's the convergences of those two, as well, that's a different skill set. It really is. And it's actually bringing those together to get the most value. And we see this across multiple organizations. It starts with a COE. We've done great with our community, so we have that upswell going and then people are saying, "Hang on, I understand process but I also understand automations. let me put the two together," and that's where we get our true value. >> Bringing in the education and training. >> No question. >> That's a huge thing. >> The traditional components of it still need to exist but I think there are new roles that are emerging, for sure. >> It's a big cultural shift. >> Oh absolutely, yeah. >> How do you guys, how does PWC and UiPath, and maybe you each can answer this in the last minute or so, how do you help facilitate that cultural shift in a business that's growing at warp speed, in a market that is very tumultuous? How do you do that? >> Want to go first or I can go? >> I'll go ahead and go first. It's working with great partners like Mike because they see it and they're converging two different practices within their organization to actually bring this value to customers and also that executive relevance. But even on our side, when we're meeting with customers, just in general, we're actually talking about, how do we deal with, there's what? 13 and a half million job openings, I guess, right now and there's 8500 people that are unemployed, is the last number that I heard. We couldn't even fill all of those jobs if we wanted to. So it's like, okay, what is it that we could potentially automate so maybe we don't need all those jobs. And that's not a negative, it's just saying, we couldn't fill them anyway. So let's focus on where we can and where, there again, can extract the most value in working with our partners but create this new domain that's not networking or virtualization but it's actually, potentially, process and automation. It's testing and automation. It might even be security and automation. Which, I will tell you, is probably coming next, having come out of the security space. You know, I sit there and listen to all these threats and I see these people chasing, really, automated threats. It's like, guys a threat hunter that's really good goes through the same 15 steps that they would when they're chasing a false positive, as if a bot would do that for them. >> I mean, I've written about the productivity declines over the past several decades in western countries, it's not universal around the world and maybe we have a productivity boost because of Covid but it's like this perpetual workday now. That's not sustainable. So we're not going to be able to solve the worlds great problems. Whether it's climate change, diversity, massive deaths, on and on and on, unless we deal with that labor gap. >> That's right. >> And the only way to do that is automation. It's so clear to me that that's the answer. Part of the answer. >> It is part of the answer and I think, to your point Lisa, it's a cultural shift that's going to happen whether we want it to or not. When you think about people that are coming into the work force, it's an expectation now. So if you want to retain or you know, attract and retain the right people, you'd better be prepared for it as an organization. >> Yeah, remember the old, proficient in Word and Excel. Makes it almost trivial. It's trivial compared to that. I think if you don't have automation chops, going forward, it's going to be an issue. Hey, we have whatever, 5000 bots running at our company, how could you help? Huh? What's a bot? >> That's right. You're right. We see this too. I'll give you an example at Cisco. One of their financial analysts, junior starter, he says, "Part of our training program, is creating automations. Why? Because it's not just about finance anymore. It's about what can I automate in my role to actually focus on higher level orders and this for me, is just amazing." And you know, it's Rajiv Ramaswamy's son who's over there at Cisco now as a financial analyst. I was sitting on my couch on a Saturday, no kidding, right Dave? And I get a text from Rajiv, who's now CEO at Nutanix, and he says, "I can't believe I just created a bot." And I said, "I'm at the right place." Really. >> That's cool, I mean hey, you're right too. You want to work for Amazon, you got to know how to provision a EC2 instance or you don't get the job. >> Yeah. >> You got to train for that. And these are the types of skills that are expected- >> That's right. >> For the future. >> Awesome. Guys- >> I'm glad I'm older. >> Are you no longer proficient in Word is the question. >> Guys, thanks for joining us, talking about what you guys are doing together, how you're really facilitating this massive growth trajectory. It's great to be back in person and we look forward to hearing from some of your customers later today. >> Terrific. >> Great. >> Thank you for the opportunity. >> Thank you for having us. >> Thank you guys. >> Our pleasure. For Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin, you're watching theCUBE live from the Bellagio in Las Vegas, at UiPath FORWARD IV. Stick around. We'll be back after a short break. (upbeat music)

(bright upbeat music) >> Hello everyone, and welcome to the special exclusive CUBE Conversation, where we continue our coverage of the trends of the database market. With me is Nipun Agarwal, who's the vice president, MySQL HeatWave in advanced development at Oracle. Nipun, welcome. >> Thank you Dave. >> I love to have technical people on the Cube to educate, debate, inform, and we've extensively covered this market. We were all over the Snowflake IPO and at that time I remember, I challenged organizations bring your best people. Because I want to better understand what's happening at Database. After Oracle kind of won the Database wars 20 years ago, Database kind of got boring. And then it got really exciting with the big data movement, and all the, not only SQL stuff coming out, and Hadoop and blah, blah, blah. And now it's just exploding. You're seeing huge investments from many of your competitors, VCs are trying to get into the action. Meanwhile, as I've said many, many times, your chairman and head of technology, CTO, Larry Ellison, continues to invest to keep Oracle relevant. So it's really been fun to watch and I really appreciate you coming on. >> Sure thing. >> We have written extensively, we talked to a lot of Oracle customers. You get the leading mission critical database in the world. Everybody from Fortune 100, we evaluated what Gardner said about the operational databases. I think there's not a lot of question there. And we've written about that on WikiBound about you're converged databases, and the strategy there, and we're going to get into that. We've covered Autonomous Data Warehouse Exadata Cloud at Customer, and then we just want to really try to get into your area, which has been, kind of caught our attention recently. And I'm talking about the MySQL Database Service with HeatWave. I love the name, I laugh. It was an unveiled, I don't know, a few months ago. So Nipun, let's start the discussion today. Maybe you can update our viewers on what is HeatWave? What's the overall focus with Oracle? And how does it fit into the Cloud Database Service? >> Sure Dave. So HeatWave is a in-memory query accelerator for the MySQL Database Service for speeding up analytic queries as well as long running complex OLTP queries. And this is all done in the context of a single database which is the MySQL Database Service. Also, all existing MySQL applications or MySQL compatible tools and applications continue to work as is. So there is no change. And with this HeatWave, Oracle is delivering the only MySQL service which provides customers with a single unified platform for both analytic as well as transaction processing workloads. >> Okay, so, we've seen open source databases in the cloud growing very rapidly. I mentioned Snowflake, I think Google's BigQuery, get some mention, we'll talk, we'll maybe talk more about Redshift later on, but what I'm wondering, well let's talk about now, how does MySQL HeatWave service, how does that compare to MySQL-based services from other cloud vendors? I can get MySQL from others. In fact, I think we do. I think we run WikiBound on the LAMP stack. I think it's running on Amazon, but so how does your service compare? >> No other vendor, like, no other vendor offers this differentiated solution with an open source database namely, having a single database, which is optimized both for transactional processing and analytics, right? So the example is like MySQL. A lot of other cloud vendors provide MySQL service but MySQL has been optimized for transaction processing so when customs need to run analytics they need to move the data out of MySQL into some other database for any analytics, right? So we are the only vendor which is now offering this unified solution for both transactional processing analytics. That's the first point. Second thing is, most of the vendors out there have taken open source databases and they're basically hosting it in the cloud. Whereas HeatWave, has been designed from the ground up for the cloud, and it is a 100% compatible with MySQL applications. And the fact that we have designed it from the ground up for the cloud, maybe I'll spend 100s of person years of research and engineering means that we have a solution, which is very, very scalable, it's very optimized in terms of performance, and it is very inexpensive in terms of the cost. >> Are you saying, well, wait, are you saying that you essentially rewrote MySQL to create HeatWave but at the same time maintained compatibility with existing applications? >> Right. So we enhanced MySQL significantly and we wrote a whole bunch of new code which is brand new code optimized for the cloud in such a manner that yes, it is 100% compatible with all existing MySQL applications. >> What does it mean? And if I'm to optimize for the cloud, I mean, I hear that and I say, okay, it's taking advantage of cloud-native. I hear kind of the buzzwords, cloud-first, cloud-native. What does it specifically mean from a technical standpoint? >> Right. So first, let's talk about performance. What we have done is that we have looked at two aspects. We have worked with shapes like for instance, like, the compute shapes which provide the best performance for dollar, per dollar. So I'll give you a couple of examples. We have optimized for certain shifts. So, HeatWave is in-memory query accelerator. So the cost of the system is dominated by the cost. So we are working with chips which provide the cheapest cost per terabyte of memory. Secondly, we are using commodity cloud services in such a manner that it's in-optimized for both performance as well as performance per dollar. So, example is, we are not using any locally-attached SSDs. We use ObjectStore because it's very inexpensive. And then I guess at some point I will get into the details of the architecture. The system has been really, really designed for massive scalability. So as you add more compute, as you add more service, the system continues to scale almost perfectly linearly. So this is what I mean in terms of being optimized for the cloud. >> All right, great. >> And furthermore, (indistinct). >> Thank you. No, carry on. >> Over the next few months, you will see a bunch of other announcements where we're adding a whole bunch of machine learning and data driven-based automation which we believe is critical for the cloud. So optimized for performance, optimized for the cloud, and machine learning-based automation which we believe is critical for any good cloud-based service. >> All right, I want to come back and ask you more about the architecture, but you mentioned some of the others taking open source databases and shoving them into the cloud. Let's take the example of AWS. They have a series of specialized data stores and, for different workloads, Aurora is for OLTP I actually think it's based on MySQL Redshift which is based on ParAccel. And so, and I've asked Amazon about this, and their response is, actually kind of made sense to me. Look, we want the right tool for the right job, we want access to the primitives because when the market changes we can change faster as opposed to, if we put, if we start building bigger and bigger databases with more functionality, it's, we're not as agile. So that kind of made sense to me. I know we, again, we use a lot, we use, I think I said MySQL in Amazon we're using DynamoDB, works, that's cool. We're not huge. And I, we fully admit and we've researched this, when you start to get big that starts to get maybe expensive. But what do you think about that approach and why is your approach better? >> Right, we believe that there are multiple drawbacks of having different databases or different services, one, optimized for transactional processing and one for analytics and having to ETL between these different services. First of all, it's expensive because you have to manage different databases. Secondly, it's complex. From an application standpoint, applications need, now need to understand the semantics of two different databases. It's inefficient because you have to transfer data at some PRPC from one database to the other one. It's not secure because there is security aspects involved when your transferring data and also the identity of users in the two different databases is different. So it's, the approach which has been taken by Amazons and such, we believe, is more costly, complex, inefficient and not secure. Whereas with HeatWave, all the data resides in one database which is MySQL and it can run both transaction processing and analytics. So in addition to all the benefits I talked about, customers can also make their decisions in real time because there is no need to move the data. All the data resides in a single database. So as soon as you make any changes, those changes are visible to customers for queries right away, which is not the case when you have different siloed specialized databases. >> Okay, that, a lot of ways to skin a cat and that what you just said makes sense. By the way, we were saying before, companies have taken off the shelf or open source database has shoved them in the cloud. I have to give Amazon some props. They actually have done engineering to Aurora and Redshift. And they've got the engineering capabilities to do that. But you can see, for example, in Redshift the way they handle separating compute from storage it's maybe not as elegant as some of the other players like a Snowflake, for example, but they get there and they, maybe it's a little bit more brute force but so I don't want to just make it sound like they're just hosting off the shelf in the cloud. But is it fair to say that there's like a crossover point? So in other words, if I'm smaller and I'm not, like doing a bunch of big, like us, I mean, it's fine. It's easy, I spin it up. It's cheaper than having to host my own servers. So there's, presumably there's a sweet spot for that approach and a sweet spot for your approach. Is that fair or do you feel like you can cover a wider spectrum? >> We feel we can cover the entire spectrum, not wider, the entire spectrum. And we have benchmarks published which are actually available on GitHub for anyone to try. You will see that this approach you have taken with the MySQL Database Service in HeatWave, we are faster, we are cheaper without having to move the data. And the mileage or the amount of improvement you will get, surely vary. So if you have less data the amount of improvement you will get, maybe like say 100 times, right, or 500 times, but smaller data sizes. If you get to lots of data sizes this improvement amplifies to 1000 times or 10,000 times. And similarly for the cost, if the data size is smaller, the cost advantage you will have is less, maybe MySQL HeatWave is one third the cost. If the data size is larger, the cost advantage amplifies. So to your point, MySQL Database Service in HeatWave is going to be better for all sizes but the amount of mileage or the amount of benefit you will get increases as the size of the data increases. >> Okay, so you're saying you got better performance, better cost, better price performance. Let me just push back a little bit on this because I, having been around for awhile, I often see these performance and price comparisons. And what often happens is a vendor will take the latest and greatest, the one they just announced and they'll compare it to an N-1 or an N-2, running on old hardware. So, is, you're normalizing for that, is that the game you're playing here? I mean, how can you, give us confidence that this is easier kind of legitimate benchmarks in your GitHub repo. >> Absolutely. I'll give you a bunch of like, information. But let me preface this by saying that all of our scripts are available in the open source in the GitHub repo for anyone to try and we would welcome feedback otherwise. So we have taken, yes, the latest version of MySQL Database Service in HeatWave, we have optimized it, and we have run multiple benchmarks. For instance, TBC-H, TPC-DS, right? Because the amount of improvement a query will get depends upon the specific query, depends upon the predicates, it depends on the selectivity so we just wanted to use standard benchmarks. So it's not the case that if you're using certain classes of query, excuse me, benefit, get them more. So, standard benchmarks. Similarly, for the other vendors or other services like Redshift, we have run benchmarks on the latest shapes of Redshift the most optimized configuration which they recommend, running their scripts. So this is not something that, hey, we're just running out of the box. We have optimized Aurora, we have optimized (indistinct) to the best and possible extent we can based on their guidelines, based on their latest release, and that's what you're talking about in terms of the numbers. >> All right. Please continue. >> Now, for some other vendors, if we get to the benchmark section, we'll talk about, we are comparing with other services, let's say Snowflake. Well there, there are issues in terms of you can't legally run Snowflake numbers, right? So there, we have looked at some reports published by Gigaom report. and we are taking the numbers published by the Gigaom report for Snowflake, Google BigQuery and as you'll see maps numbers, right? So those, we have not won ourselves. But for AWS Redshift, as well as AWS Aurora, we have run the numbers and I believe these are the best numbers anyone can get. >> I saw that Gigaom report and I got to say, Gigaom, sometimes I'm like, eh, but I got to say that, I forget the guy's name, he knew what he was talking about. He did a good job, I thought. I was curious as to the workload. I always say, well, what's the workload. And, but I thought that report was pretty detailed. And Snowflake did not look great in that report. Oftentimes, and they've been marketing the heck out of it. I forget who sponsored it. It is, it was sponsored content. But, I did, I remember seeing that and thinking, hmm. So, I think maybe for Snowflake that sweet spot is not, maybe not that performance, maybe it's the simplicity and I think that's where they're making their mark. And most of their databases are small and a lot of read-only stuff. And so they've found a market there. But I want to come back to the architecture and really sort of understand how you've able, you've been able to get this range of both performance and cost you talked about. I thought I heard that you're optimizing the chips, you're using ObjectStore. You're, you've got an architecture that's not using SSD, it's using ObjectStore. So this, is their cashing there? I wonder if you could just give us some details of the architecture and tell us how you got to where you are. >> Right, so let me start off saying like, what are the kind of numbers we are talking about just to kind of be clear, like what the improvements are. So if you take the MySQL Database Service in HeatWave in Oracle Cloud and compare it with MySQL service in any other cloud, and if you look at smaller data sizes, say data sizes which are about half a terabyte or so, HeatWave is 400 times faster, 400 times faster. And as you get to... >> Sorry. Sorry to interrupt. What are you measuring there? Faster in terms of what? >> Latency. So we take TCP-H 22 queries, we run them on HeatWave, and we run the same queries on MySQL service on any other cloud, half a terabyte and the performance in terms of latency is 400 times faster in HeatWave. >> Thank you. Okay. >> If you go to a lot of other data sites, then the other data point of view, we're looking at say something like, 4 TB, there, we did two comparisons. One is with AWS Aurora, which is, as you said, they have taken MySQL. They have done a bunch of innovations over there and we are offering it as a premier service. So on 4 TB TPC-H, MySQL Database Service with HeatWave is 1100 times faster than Aurora. It is three times faster than the fastest shape of Redshift. So Redshift comes in different flavors some talking about dense compute too, right? And again, looking at the most recommended configuration from Redshift. So 1100 times faster that Aurora, three times faster than Redshift and at one third, the cost. So this where I just really want to point out that it is much faster and much cheaper. One third the cost. And then going back to the Gigaom report, there was a comparison done with Snowflake, Google BigQuery, Redshift, Azure Synapse. I wouldn't go into the numbers here but HeatWave was faster on both TPC-H as well as TPC-DS across all these products and cheaper compared to any of these products. So faster, cheaper on both the benchmarks across all these products. Now let's come to, like, what is the technology underneath? >> Great. >> So, basically there are three parts which you're going to see. One is, improve performance, very good scale, and improve a lower cost. So the first thing is that HeatWave has been optimized and, for the cloud. And when I say that, we talked about this a bit earlier. One is we are using the cheapest shapes which are available. We're using the cheapest services which are available without having to compromise the performance and then there is this machine learning-based automation. Now, underneath, in terms of the architecture of HeatWave there are basically, I would say, four key things. First is, HeatWave is an in-memory engine that a presentation which we have in memory is a hybrid columnar representation which is optimized for vector process. That's the first thing. And that's pretty table stakes these days for anyone who wants to do in-memory analytics except that it's hybrid columnar which is optimized for vector processing. So that's the first thing. The second thing which starts getting to be novel is that HeatWave has a massively parallel architecture which is enabled by a massively partitioned architecture. So we take the data, we read the data from MySQL into the memory of the HeatWave and we massively partition this data. So as we're reading the data, we're partitioning the data based on the workload, the sizes of these partitions is such that it fits in the cache of the underlying processor and then we're able to consume these partitions really, really fast. So that's the second bit which is like, massively parallel architecture enabled by massively partitioned architecture. Then the third thing is, that we have developed new state-of-art algorithms for distributed query processing. So for many of the workloads, we find that joints are the long pole in terms of the amount of time it takes. So we at Oracle have developed new algorithms for distributed joint processing and similarly for many other operators. And this is how we're being able to consume this data or process this data, which is in-memory really, really fast. And finally, and what we have, is that we have an eye for scalability and we have designed algorithms such that there's a lot of overlap between compute and communication, which means that as you're sending data across various nodes and there could be like, dozens of of nodes or 100s of nodes that they're able to overlap the computation time with the communication time and this is what gives us massive scalability in the cloud. >> Yeah, so, some hard core database techniques that you've brought to HeatWave, that's impressive. Thank you for that description. Let me ask you, just to go to quicker side. So, MySQL is open source, HeatWave is what? Is it like, open core? Is it open source? >> No, so, HeatWave is something which has been designed and optimized for the cloud. So it can't be open source. So any, it's not open service. >> It is a service. >> It is a service. That's correct. >> So it's a managed service that I pay Oracle to host for me. Okay. Got it. >> That's right. >> Okay, I wonder if you could talk about some of the use cases that you're seeing for HeatWave, any patterns that you're seeing with customers? >> Sure, so we've had the service, we had the HeatWave service in limited availability for almost 15 months and it's been about five months since we have gone G. And there's a very interesting trend of our customers we're seeing. The first one is, we are seeing many migrations from AWS specifically from Aurora. Similarly, we are seeing many migrations from Azure MySQL we're migrations from Google. And the number one reason customers are coming is because of ease of use. Because they have their databases currently siloed. As you were talking about some for optimized for transactional processing, some for analytics. Here, what customers find is that in a single database, they're able to get very good performance, they don't need to move the data around, they don't need to manage multiple databaes. So we are seeing many migrations from these services. And the number one reason is reduce complexity of ease of use. And the second one is, much better performance and reduced costs, right? So that's the first thing. We are very excited and delighted to see the number of migrations we're getting. The second thing which we're seeing is, initially, when we had the service announced, we were like, targeting really towards analytics. But now what are finding is, many of these customers, for instance, who have be running on Aurora, when they are moving from MySQL in HeatWave, they are finding that many of the OLTP queries as well, are seeing significant acceleration with the HeatWave. So now customers are moving their entire applications or, to HeatWave. So that's the second trend we're seeing. The third thing, and I think I kind of missed mentioning this earlier, one of the very key and unique value propositions we provide with the MySQL Database Service in HeatWave, is that we provide a mechanism where if customers have their data stored on premise they can still leverage the HeatWave service by enabling MySQL replication. So they can have their data on premise, they can replicate this data in the Oracle Cloud and then they can run analytics. So this deployment which we are calling the hybrid deployment is turning out to be very, very popular because there are customers, there are some customers who for various reasons, compliance or regulatory reasons cannot move the entire data to the cloud or migrate the data to the cloud completely. So this provides them a very good setup where they can continue to run their existing database and when it comes to getting benefits of HeatWave for query acceleration, they can set up this replication. >> And I can run that on anyone, any available server capacity or is there an appliance to facilitate that? >> No, this is just standard MySQL replication. So if a customer is running MySQL on premise they can just turn off this application. We have obviously enhanced it to support this inbound replication between on-premise and Oracle Cloud with something which can be enabled as long as the source and destination are both MySQL. >> Okay, so I want to come back to this sort of idea of the architecture a little bit. I mean, it's hard for me to go toe to toe with the, I'm not an engineer, but I'm going to try anyway. So you've talked about OLTP queries. I thought, I always thought HeatWave was optimized for analytics. But so, I want to push on this notion because people think of this the converged database, and what you're talking about here with HeatWave is sort of the Swiss army knife which is great 'cause you got a screwdriver and you got Phillips and a flathead and some scissors, maybe they're not as good. They're not as good necessarily as the purpose-built tool. But you're arguing that this is best of breed for OLTP and best of breed for analytics, both in terms of performance and cost. Am I getting that right or is this really a Swiss army knife where that flathead is really not as good as the big, long screwdriver that I have in my bag? >> Yes, so, you're getting it right but I did want to make a clarification. That HeatWave is definitely the accelerator for all your queries, all analytic queries and also for the long running complex transaction processing inquiries. So yes, HeatWave the uber query accelerator engine. However, when it comes to transaction processing in terms of your insert statements, delete statements, those are still all done and served by the MySQL database. So all, the transactions are still sent to the MySQL database and they're persistent there, it's the queries for which HeatWave is the accelerator. So what you said is correct. For all query acceleration, HeatWave is the engine. >> Makes sense. Okay, so if I'm a MySQL customer and I want to use HeatWave, what do I have to do? Do I have to make changes to my existing applications? You applied earlier that, no, it's just sort of plugs right in. But can you clarify that. >> Yes, there are absolutely no changes, which any MySQL or MySQL compatible application needs to make to take advantage of HeatWave. HeatWave is an in-memory accelerator and it's completely transparent to the application. So we have like, dozens and dozens of like, applications which have migrated to HeatWave, and they are seeing the same thing, similarly tools. So if you look at various tools which work for analytics like, Tableau, Looker, Oracle Analytics Cloud, all of them will work just seamlessly. And this is one of the reasons we had to do a lot of heavy lifting in the MySQL database itself. So the MySQL database engineering team was, has been very actively working on this. And one of the reasons is because we did the heavy lifting and we meet enhancements to the MySQL optimizer in the MySQL storage layer to do the integration of HeatWave in such a seamless manner. So there is absolutely no change which an application needs to make in order to leverage or benefit from HeatWave. >> You said earlier, Nipun, that you're seeing migrations from, I think you said Aurora and Google BigQuery, you might've said Redshift as well. Do you, what kind of tooling do you have to facilitate migrations? >> Right, now, there are multiple ways in which customers may want to do this, right? So the first tooling which we have is that customers, as I was talking about the replication or the inbound replication mechanism, customers can set up heat HeatWave in the Oracle Cloud and they can send the data, they can set up replication within their instances in their cloud and HeatWave. Second thing is we have various kinds of tools to like, facilitate the data migration in terms of like, fast ingestion sites. So there are a lot of such customers we are seeing who are kind of migrating and we have a plethora of like, tools and applications, in addition to like, setting up this inbound application, which is the most seamless way of getting customers started with HeatWave. >> So, I think you mentioned before, I have my notes, machine intelligence and machine learning. We've seen that with autonomous database it's a big, big deal obviously. How does HeatWave take advantage of machine intelligence and machine learning? >> Yeah, and I'm probably going to be talking more about this in the future, but what we have already is that HeatWave uses machine learning to intelligently automate many operations. So we know that when there's a service being offered in the cloud, our customers expect automation. And there're a lot of vendors and a lot of services which do a good job in automation. One of the places where we're going to be very unique is that HeatWave uses machine learning to automate many of these operations. And I'll give you one such example which is provisioning. Right now with HeatWave, when a customer wants to determine how many nodes are needed for running their workload, they don't need to make a guess. They invoke a provisioning advisor and this advisor uses machine learning to sample a very small percentage of the data. We're talking about, like, 0.1% sampling and it's able to predict the amount of memory with 95% accuracy, which this data is going to take. And based on that, it's able to make a prediction of how many servers are needed. So just a simple operation, the first step of provisioning, this is something which is done manually across, on any of the service, whereas at HeatWave, we have machine learning-based advisor. So this is an example of what we're doing. And in the future, we'll be offering many such innovations as a part of the MySQL Database and the HeatWave service. >> Well, I've got to say I was skeptic but I really appreciate it, you're, answering my questions. And, a lot of people when you made the acquisition and inherited MySQL, thought you were going to kill it because they thought it would be competitive to Oracle Database. I'm happy to see that you've invested and figured out a way to, hey, we can serve our community and continue to be the steward of MySQL. So Nipun, thanks very much for coming to the CUBE. Appreciate your time. >> Sure. Thank you so much for the time, Dave. I appreciate it. >> And thank you for watching everybody. This is Dave Vellante with another CUBE Conversation. We'll see you next time. (bright upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> On February 19th of this year, Barron's dropped an article declaring Oracle, a cloud giant and the article explained why the stock was a buy. Investors took notice and the stock ran up 18% over the next nine trading days and it peaked on March 9th, the day before Oracle announced its latest earnings. The company beat consensus earnings on both top-line and EPS last quarter, but investors, they did not like Oracle's tepid guidance and the stock pulled back. But it's still, as you can see, well above its pre-Barron's article price. What does all this mean? Is Oracle a cloud giant? What are its growth prospects? Now many parts of Oracle's business are growing including Fusion ERP, Fusion HCM, NetSuite, we're talking deep into the double digits, 20 plus percent growth. It's OnPrem legacy licensed business however, continues to decline and that moderates, the overall company growth because that OnPrem business is so large. So the overall Oracle's growing in the low single digits. Now what stands out about Oracle is it's recurring revenue model. That figure, the company says now it represents 73% of its revenue and that's going to continue to grow. Now two other things stood out on the earnings call to us. First, Oracle plans on increasing its CapEX by 50% in the coming quarter, that's a lot. Now it's still far less than AWS Google or Microsoft Spend on capital but it's a meaningful data point. Second Oracle's consumption revenue for Autonomous Database and Cloud Infrastructure, OCI or Oracle Cloud Infrastructure grew at 64% and 139% respectively and these two factors combined with the CapEX Spend suggest that the company has real momentum. I mean look, it's possible that the CapEx announcements maybe just optics in they're front loading, some spend to show the street that it's a player in cloud but I don't think so. Oracle's Safra Catz's usually pretty disciplined when it comes to it's spending. Now today on March 17th, Oracle announced updates towards Autonomous Data Warehouse and with me is David Floyer who has extensively researched Oracle over the years and today we're going to unpack the Oracle Autonomous Data Warehouse, ADW announcement. What it means to customers but we also want to dig into Oracle's strategy. We want to compare it to some other prominent database vendors specifically, AWS and Snowflake. David Floyer, Welcome back to The Cube, thanks for making some time for me. >> Thank you Vellante, great pleasure to be here. >> All right, I want to get into the news but I want to start with this idea of the autonomous database which Oracle's announcement today is building on. Oracle uses the analogy of a self-driving car. It's obviously powerful metaphor as they call it the self-driving database and my takeaway is that, this means that the system automatically provisions, it upgrades, it does all the patching for you, it tunes itself. Oracle claims that all reduces labor costs or admin costs by 90%. So I ask you, is this the right interpretation of what Oracle means by autonomous database? And is it real? >> Is that the right interpretation? It's a nice analogy. It's a test to that analogy, isn't it? I would put it as the first stage of the Autonomous Data Warehouse was to do the things that you talked about, which was the tuning, the provisioning, all of that sort of thing. The second stage is actually, I think more interesting in that what they're focusing on is making it easy to use for the end user. Eliminating the requirement for IT, staff to be there to help in the actual using of it and that is a very big step for them but an absolutely vital step because all of the competition focusing on ease of use, ease of use, ease of use and cheapness of being able to manage and deploy. But, so I think that is the really important area that Oracle has focused on and it seemed to have done so very well. >> So in your view, is this, I mean you don't really hear a lot of other companies talking about this analogy of the self-driving database, is this unique? Is it differentiable for Oracle? If so, why, or maybe you could help us understand that a little bit better. >> Well, the whole strategy is unique in its breadth. It has really brought together a whole number of things together and made it of its type the best. So it has a single, whole number of data sources and database types. So it's got a very broad range of different ways that you can look at the data and the second thing that is also excellent is it's a platform. It is fully self provisioned and its functionality is very, very broad indeed. The quality of the original SQL and the query languages, etc, is very, very good indeed and it's a better agent to do joints for example, is excellent. So all of the building blocks are there and together with it's sharing of the same data with OLTP and inference and in memory data paces as well. All together the breadth of what they have is unique and very, very powerful. >> I want to come back to this but let's get into the news a little bit and the announcement. I mean, it seems like what's new in the autonomous data warehouse piece for Oracle's new tooling around four areas that so Andy Mendelsohn, the head of this group instead of the guy who releases his baby, he talked about four things. My takeaway, faster simpler loads, simplified transforms, autonomous machine learning models which are facilitating, What do you call it? Citizen data science and then faster time to insights. So tooling to make those four things happen. What's your take and takeaways on the news? >> I think those are all correct. I would add the ease of use in terms of being able to drag and drop, the user interface has been dramatically improved. Again, I think those, strategically are actually more important that the others are all useful and good components of it but strategically, I think is more important. There's ease of use, the use of apex for example, are more important. And, >> Why are they more important strategically? >> Because they focus on the end users capability. For example, one of other things that they've started to introduce is Python together with their spatial databases, for example. That is really important that you reach out to the developer as they are and what tools they want to use. So those type of ease of use things, those types of things are respecting what the end users use. For example, they haven't come out with anything like click or Tableau. They've left that there for that marketplace for the end user to use what they like best. >> Do you mean, they're not trying to compete with those two tools. They indeed had a laundry list of stuff that they supported, Talend, Tableau, Looker, click, Informatica, IBM, I had IBM there. So their claim was, hey, we're open. But so that's smart. That's just, hey, they realized that people use these tools. >> I'm trying to exclude other people, be a platform and be an ecosystem for the end users. >> Okay, so Mendelsohn who made the announcement said that Oracle's the smartphone of databases and I think, I actually think Alison kind of used that or maybe that was us planing to have, I thought he did like the iPhone of when he announced the exit data way back when the integrated hardware and software but is that how you see it, is Oracle, the smartphone of databases? >> It is, I mean, they are trying to own the complete stack, the hardware with the exit data all the way up to the databases at the data warehouses and the OLTP databases, the inference databases. They're trying to own the complete stack from top to bottom and that's what makes autonomy process possible. You can make it autonomous when you control all of that. Take away all of the requirements for IT in the business itself. So it's democratizing the use of data warehouses. It is pushing it out to the lines of business and it's simplifying it and making it possible to push out so that they can own their own data. They can manage their own data and they do not need an IT person from headquarters to help them. >> Let's stay in this a little bit more and then I want to go into some of the competitive stuff because Mendelsohn mentioned AWS several times. One of the things that struck me, he said, hey, we're basically one API 'cause we're doing analytics in the cloud, we're doing data in the cloud, we're doing integration in the cloud and that's sort of a big part of the value proposition. He made some comparisons to Redshift. Of course, I would say, if you can't find a workload where you beat your big competitor then you shouldn't be in this business. So I take those things with a grain of salt but one of the other things that caught me is that migrating from OnPrem to Oracle, Oracle Cloud was very simple and I think he might've made some comparisons to other platforms. And this to me is important because he also brought in that Gartner data. We looked at that Gardner data when they came out with it in the operational database class, Oracle smoked everybody. They were like way ahead and the reason why I think that's important is because let's face it, the Mission Critical Workloads, when you look at what's moving into AWS, the Mission Critical Workloads, the high performance, high criticality OLTP stuff. That's not moving in droves and you've made the point often that companies with their own cloud particularly, Oracle you've mentioned this about IBM for certain, DB2 for instance, customers are going to, there should be a lower risk environment moving from OnPrem to their cloud, because you could do, I don't think you could get Oracle RAC on AWS. For example, I don't think EXIF data is running in AWS data centers and so that like component is going to facilitate migration. What's your take on all that spiel? >> I think that's absolutely right. You all crown Jewels, the most expensive and the most valuable applications, the mission-critical applications. The ones that have got to take a beating, keep on taking. So those types of applications are where Oracle really shines. They own a very large high percentage of those Mission Critical Workloads and you have the choice if you're going to AWS, for example of either migrating to Oracle on AWS and that is frankly not a good fit at all. There're a lot of constraints to running large systems on AWS, large mission critical systems. So that's not an option and then the option, of course, that AWS will push is move to a Roller, change your way of writing applications, make them tiny little pieces and stitch them all together with microservices and that's okay if you're a small organization but that has got a lot of problems in its own, right? Because then you, the user have to stitch all those pieces together and you're responsible for testing it and you're responsible for looking after it. And that as you grow becomes a bigger and bigger overhead. So AWS, in my opinion needs to have a move towards a tier-one database of it's own and it's not in that position at the moment. >> Interesting, okay. So, let's talk about the competitive landscape and the choices that customers have. As I said, Mendelssohn mentioned AWS many times, Larry on the calls often take shy, it's a compliment to me. When Larry Ellison calls you out, that means you've made it, you're doing well. We've seen it over the years, whether it's IBM or Workday or Salesforce, even though Salesforce's big Oracle customer 'cause AWS, as we know are Oracle customer as well, even though AWS tells us they've off called when you peel the onion >> Five years should be great, some of the workers >> Well, as I said, I believe they're still using Oracle in certain workloads. Way, way, we digress. So AWS though, they take a different approach and I want to push on this a little bit with database. It's got more than a dozen, I think purpose-built databases. They take this kind of right tool for the right job approach was Oracle there converging all this function into a single database. SQL JSON graph databases, machine learning, blockchain. I'd love to talk about more about blockchain if we have time but seems to me that the right tool for the right job purpose-built, very granular down to the primitives and APIs. That seems to me to be a pretty viable approach versus kind of a Swiss Army approach. How do you compare the two? >> Yes, and it is to many initial programmers who are very interested for example, in graph databases or in time series databases. They are looking for a cheap database that will do the job for a particular project and that makes, for the program or for that individual piece of work is making a very sensible way of doing it and they pay for ads on it's clear cloud dynamics. The challenge as you have more and more data and as you're building up your data warehouse in your data lakes is that you do not want to have to move data from one place to another place. So for example, if you've got a Roller,, you have to move the database and it's a pretty complicated thing to do it, to move it to Redshift. It's a five or six steps to do that and each of those costs money and each of those take time. More importantly, they take time. The Oracle approach is a single database in terms of all the pieces that obviously you have multiple databases you have different OLTP databases and data warehouse databases but as a single architecture and a single design which means that all of the work in terms of moving stuff from one place to another place is within Oracle itself. It's Oracle that's doing that work for you and as you grow, that becomes very, very important. To me, very, very important, cost saving. The overhead of all those different ones and the databases themselves originate with all as open source and they've done very well with it and then there's a large revenue stream behind the, >> The AWS, you mean? >> Yes, the original database is in AWS and they've done a lot of work in terms of making it set with the panels, etc. But if a larger organization, especially very large ones and certainly if they want to combine, for example data warehouse with the OLTP and the inference which is in my opinion, a very good thing that they should be trying to do then that is incredibly difficult to do with AWS and in my opinion, AWS has to invest enormously in to make the whole ecosystem much better. >> Okay, so innovation required there maybe is part of the TAM expansion strategy but just to sort of digress for a second. So it seems like, and by the way, there are others that are doing, they're taking this converged approach. It seems like that is a trend. I mean, you certainly see it with single store. I mean, the name sort of implies that formerly MemSQL I think Monte Zweben of splice machine is probably headed in a similar direction, embedding AI in Microsoft's, kind of interesting. It seems like Microsoft is willing to build this abstraction layer that hides that complexity of the different tooling. AWS thus far has not taken that approach and then sort of looking at Snowflake, Snowflake's got a completely different, I think Snowflake's trying to do something completely different. I don't think they're necessarily trying to take Oracle head-on. I mean, they're certainly trying to just, I guess, let's talk about this. Snowflake simplified EDW, that's clear. Zero to snowflake in 90 minutes. It's got this data cloud vision. So you sign on to this Snowflake, speaking of layers they're abstracting the complexity of the underlying cloud. That's what the data cloud vision is all about. They, talk about this Global Mesh but they've not done a good job of explaining what the heck it is. We've been pushing them on that, but we got, >> Aspiration of moment >> Well, I guess, yeah, it seems that way. And so, but conceptually, it's I think very powerful but in reality, what snowflake is doing with data sharing, a lot of reading it's probably mostly read-only and I say, mostly read-only, oh, there you go. You'll get better but it's mostly read and so you're able to share the data, it's governed. I mean, it's exactly, quite genius how they've implemented this with its simplicity. It is a caching architecture. We've talked about that, we can geek out about that. There's good, there's bad, there's ugly but generally speaking, I guess my premise here I would love your thoughts. Is snowflakes trying to do something different? It's trying to be not just another data warehouse. It's not just trying to compete with data lakes. It's trying to create this data cloud to facilitate data sharing, put data in the hands of business owners in terms of a product build, data product builders. That's a different vision than anything I've seen thus far, your thoughts. >> I agree and even more going further, being a place where people can sell data. Put it up and make it available to whoever needs it and making it so simple that it can be shared across the country and across the world. I think it's a very powerful vision indeed. The challenge they have is that the pieces at the moment are very, very easy to use but the quality in terms of the, for example, joints, I mentioned, the joints were very powerful in Oracle. They don't try and do joints. They, they say >> They being Snowflake, snowflake. Yeah, they don't even write it. They would say use another Postgres >> Yeah. >> Database to do that. >> Yeah, so then they have a long way to go. >> Complex joints anyway, maybe simple joints, yeah. >> Complex joints, so they have a long way to go in terms of the functionality of their product and also in my opinion, they sure be going to have more types of databases inside it, including OLTP and they can do that. They have obviously got a great market gap and they can do that by acquisition as well as they can >> They've started. I think, I think they support JSON, right. >> Do they support JSON? And graph, I think there's a graph database that's either coming or it's there, I can't keep all that stuff in my head but there's no reason they can't go in that direction. I mean, in speaking to the founders in Snowflake they were like, look, we're kind of new. We would focus on simple. A lot of them came from Oracle so they know all database and they know how hard it is to do things like facilitate complex joints and do complex workload management and so they said, let's just simplify, we'll put it in the cloud and it will spin up a separate data warehouse. It's a virtual data warehouse every time you want one to. So that's how they handle those things. So different philosophy but again, coming back to some of the mission critical work and some of the larger Oracle customers, they said they have a thousand autonomous database customers. I think it was autonomous database, not ADW but anyway, a few stood out AON, lift, I think Deloitte stood out and as obviously, hundreds more. So we have people who misunderstand Oracle, I think. They got a big install base. They invest in R and D and they talk about lock-in sure but the CIO that I talked to and you talked to David, they're looking for business value. I would say that 75 to 80% of them will gravitate toward business value over the fear of lock-in and I think at the end of the day, they feel like, you know what? If our business is performing, it's a better business decision, it's a better business case. >> I fully agree, they've been very difficult to do business with in the past. Everybody's in dread of the >> The audit. >> The knock on the door from the auditor. >> Right. >> And that from a purchasing point of view has been really bad experience for many, many customers. The users of the database itself are very happy indeed. I mean, you talk to them and they understand why, what they're paying for. They understand the value and in terms of availability and all of the tools for complex multi-dimensional types of applications. It's pretty well, the only game in town. It's only DB2 and SQL that had any hope of doing >> Doing Microsoft, Microsoft SQL, right. >> Okay, SQL >> Which, okay, yeah, definitely competitive for sure. DB2, no IBM look, IBM lost its dominant position in database. They kind of seeded that. Oracle had to fight hard to win it. It wasn't obvious in the 80s who was going to be the database King and all had to fight. And to me, I always tell people the difference is that the chairman of Oracle is also the CTO. They spend money on R and D and they throw off a ton of cash. I want to say something about, >> I was just going to make one extra point. The simplicity and the capability of their cloud versions of all of this is incredibly good. They are better in terms of spending what you need or what you use much better than AWS, for example or anybody else. So they have really come full circle in terms of attractiveness in a cloud environment. >> You mean charging you for what you consume. Yeah, Mendelsohn talked about that. He made a big point about the granularity, you pay for only what you need. If you need 33 CPUs or the other databases you've got to shape, if you need 33, you've got to go to 64. I know that's true for everyone. I'm not sure if that's true too for snowflake. It may be, I got to dig into that a little bit, but maybe >> Yes, Snowflake has got a front end to hiding behind. >> Right, but I didn't want to push it that a little bit because I want to go look at their pricing strategies because I still think they make you buy, I may be wrong. I thought they make you still do a one-year or two-year or three-year term. I don't know if you can just turn it off at any time. They might allow, I should hold off. I'll do some more research on that but I wanted to make a point about the audits, you mentioned audits before. A big mistake that a lot of Oracle customers have made many times and we've written about this, negotiating with Oracle, you've got to bring your best and your brightest when you negotiate with Oracle. Some of the things that people didn't pay attention to and I think they've sort of caught onto this is that Oracle's SOW is adjudicate over the MSA, a lot of legal departments and procurement department. Oh, do we have an MSA? With all, Yes, you do, okay, great and because they think the MSA, they then can run. If they have an MSA, they can rubber stamp it but the SOW really dictateS and Oracle's gotcha there and they're really smart about that. So you got to bring your best and the brightest and you've got to really negotiate hard with Oracle, you get trouble. >> Sure. >> So it is what it is but coming back to Oracle, let's sort of wrap on this. Dominant position in mission critical, we saw that from the Gartner research, especially for operational, giant customer base, there's cloud-first notion, there's investing in R and D, open, we'll put a question Mark around that but hey, they're doing some cool stuff with Michael stuff. >> Ecosystem, I put that, ecosystem they're promoting their ecosystem. >> Yeah, and look, I mean, for a lot of their customers, we've talked to many, they say, look, there's actually, a tail at the tail way, this saves us money and we don't have to migrate. >> Yeah. So interesting, so I'll give you the last word. We started sort of focusing on the announcement. So what do you want to leave us with? >> My last word is that there are platforms with a certain key application or key parts of the infrastructure, which I think can differentiate themselves from the Azures or the AWS. and Oracle owns one of those, SAP might be another one but there are certain platforms which are big enough and important enough that they will, in my opinion will succeed in that cloud strategy for this. >> Great, David, thanks so much, appreciate your insights. >> Good to be here. Thank you for watching everybody, this is Dave Vellante for The Cube. We'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto, in Boston bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> SaaS companies have been some of the strongest performers in this COVID era. They finally took a bit of a breather this month, but they remain generally well-positioned for the next several years with their predictable models and cloud platforms. Meanwhile, the demise of on-prem legacy players from COVID shock, seems to have been overstated, in part because of the return of the laptop and in the case of Oracle with some see as a cloud play, Hmm. Then there's Bitcoin which is seeing public companies use their balance sheet liquidity to invest in the cryptocurrency. (chuckles) Wow. What does that all mean? I'll leave that for another day. Hello everyone and welcome to this week on Cube insights powered by ETR. On this breaking analysis, we'll pick out some of the more recent themes from this month and share our thoughts in some major enterprise software players, the future of on-prem, a review of our take on cloud and what cloud will look like in the 2020s. Wow. It's true, trees really don't grow to the moon. As predicted, the stock market has been a little bit crazy this month. February saw some leading SaaS names like Workday, Salesforce, and ServiceNow take a bit of a breather in the second half of the month. Workday and Salesforce announced earnings on the 25th. Workday had its first billion dollar subscription revenue quarter at 16% revenue growth a revenue and earnings beat. And of course the stock closed down Friday, more than 2%. Salesforce had a nearly $6 billion revenue quarter 20% growth, a revenue and earnings beat. And the day after it announced earnings the stock was down more than 6%. The market is worried about rising interest rates, and maybe concerned that an inflation fears are going to kill the stimulus bill. And so any whiff of caution by company managements is met with dampened enthusiasm. Meanwhile, it's looking like some of the big on-prem legacy firms, notably Dell, HPQ and HPE are making it through COVID, and might even come out in the other side stronger maybe. Dell handily beat expectations on the 25th on the strength of 17% growth in its client business. That's PCs. It's the gift that keeps on giving. HPQ had a strong beat as well, and we're anticipating a solid quarter from HPE next week on March 2nd. And then there's Oracle. Barron's had a big article on February 19th, entitled, "Oracle is turning into a cloud giant and why it's stock is a buy". It moved the market. And many investors rotated out of growth stocks, tech growth tech stocks into Oracle, others who had owned Oracle for a while scooped up some profits. Is Oracle a cloud giant? Hmm. We'll discuss that in a moment. And then there's all this Bitcoin mania. You know, our interest there is much more beyond the price fluctuations rather we're interested in the innovations in crypto. Look, we're going to table this for another day, but it's an interesting side note of this February madness. Let's take a look closer look at the February chill for SaaS companies. Here's a chart showing the relative performance of some of the big SaaS names in the latter half of this month. Now despite the strong earnings for Workday and Salesforce you can see the market's negative response on the 26th. Snowflake and ServiceNow they had epic runs last year, and they've been softening although on Friday morning ServiceNow shut down quickly on the open on sympathy with Workday and ServiceNow and then investors, you know, came back in. Very weird action in the market these days, again, not surprising. And look at the reaction investors had to the Barron's article on the 19th. They anointed Oracle as a cloud giant. Kudos to the Oracle PR team for that one. Now, let's take a look at these companies and put them in context. Even though they're not direct competitors it's instructive to model some of the top enterprise software players in positions, and line them up against each other. This chart here shows two dimensions from the ETR data. On the vertical axis is net score or customer spending momentum. And the horizontal axis is market share or pervasiveness in the survey. The table inset shows the net score measurement in the shared end. That's the metric that plots the dots. In both cases bigger is better. Note, that red dotted-line there is the 40% line. 40% to us is the magic number. Anything above that line is considered elevated. So we have ServiceNow and Salesforce they're up to the right. They're both big companies. They have significant market presence amongst the CIO and both have elevated spending velocity in the 50% range. And I've said for years, these two companies are on a collision course and I stand by that. It started happening and McDermott Bill McDermott, new CEO he's going to accelerate that in our view. We put a cloud around Snowflake tongue in cheek, because they are literally in the clouds on this chart. They stand alone, with a solid market presence that continues to grow in an off the charts net score of 83.3% now. For context you can see Oracle Fusion, NetSuite and Taleo. In addition, we put Slack and Coupa on the graphic, two names that have been on the radar lately and SAP, which continues to show decent spending momentum despite its challenges. All right, let me make a few comments on some of these companies. Snowflake, we've talked about a lot. I said earlier that their IPO, that if you really wanted to own it and couldn't wait for a better price, which I thought you'd get. And by the way you did, but then if you really wanted to own it on day one hold your nose and buy it and then wait a few years. So, you know, good luck. And I think you'll, it'll turn out okay for you. Now, the data really continues to show strong demand for Snowflake. There's no signs of them slowing down. So they announced earnings on March 3rd. We didn't have more data there. So we would expect confirmation of our analysis but you never know. Now Workday, here's our take. In our view the market is catching up to Workday. They had about a three-year lead at least in human capital management and the cloud and that whole model. And they had the best product. It was really simple and it was quite disruptive. But now you got Oracle, ADP, Ceridian they're catching up. Workday's expansion into financial management has been much more challenging and as it gets bigger, things get tougher. It's still though an enduring name. Salesforce, we see a bit differently. Salesforce is so big now, it's really hard for it to move the needle. And so it's been on an acquisition binge, and to grow that's likely going to continue. It could work well for the company. I mean, similar to the ways in which Oracle consolidated software names and picked up a lot of customers. Salesforce is a great name, and we think is going to continue to grow. ServiceNow is interesting. It's entering a new chapter under CEO, Bill McDermott, new CEO. He wants to double the company's revenue. And I think he's got a reasonable chance at that through a combination of great go-to-market and expanding the platform and in McDermott style doing acquisitions. SAP's market value tripled under his watch, and he knows the customers. And he's a magnet for attracting talent. Now ServiceNow is not without its challenges. Its customers often complain that ServiceNow is pricing is really high and it's becoming the Oracle of service management. But as McDermott aims more at SAP and Oracle customers, they create a nice umbrella for ServiceNow to work with. And technically, we think ServiceNow has other challenges around its multi-instance. We call it, if you can't fix it feature it architecture. That may present some issues down the road at scale. We don't have time to go into that in detail but suffice it to say that ServiceNow runs on its own cloud. So it's not running on a hyper scale cloud. Yeah. Good news it doesn't have to pay it through that. The bad news is, has got to manage all that infrastructure. It's basically be a cloud supply supplier but it doesn't do multi-tenant which means fundamentally, it has a more expensive cost structure. Okay. Let's turn our attention to what's happening on-prem with some of the big legacy names. Here's the same X Y chart with some of the big names that have a presence on-prem. First you can see VMware and Cisco, Oracle, Dell, IBM and HP. Look at them on the horizontal scale. They've got a large market share of presence in the ETR dataset. Unlike the larger SaaS companies however, none is above that magic 40% net scoreline. Pure, Dell's laptop business, Red Hat, OpenShift. They're above the line with Nutanix just about there at the line. The other major laptop players, Lenovo and HPQ showing momentum from the whole remote work trend. And for context, we put in NetApp so you can get a sense of where they're at. Pure beat its earnings last week but only grew 2% last quarter. Now remember the ETR survey, this is a forward-looking survey. So this potentially bodes well for the companies that are above that 40% line. Okay. So most so sorry of the companies on this chart only IBM and Oracle, those two own a public cloud. And we'll dig further into that in a moment, but virtually every name shown here, even Oracle has a mandate to redefine cloud. Meaning it has to put forth in our view in North star vision and execute on it. That will unify the experience between on-prem, hybrid cloud, public clouds, cross clouds and the edge. Now I say even Oracle, because in my view, Oracle is in a stronger position than the others, because of it's more coherent software architecture. Now the other companies on this chart, they have to architect a platform that abstracts the underlying complexity of clouds, leverage cloud native tooling in the respective public clouds. Connect on-prem infrastructure and build a layer, that stretches out and accommodates edge workloads. I think Oracle will follow suit and is actually ahead of most in a narrower context, i.e hybrid. But it doesn't have to race toward this vision. It can sit back as it often does, watch everyone else fumble around and make mistakes. And then Oracle will keep investing in R&D, watch the market, you know make its own experimental mistakes, and then enter the market and act like we invented it. Now, Cisco will come at this from a strong networking and security perspective. And it has a nice story on programmable infrastructure with Cisco DevNet. But unfortunately it does not own VMware as does Dell, but Dell is in the middle of a fairly remarkable journey. And it will be interesting to see what happens with the VMware spin-out and the cozy commercial relationship that Dell is structuring with VMware as you know, and as we've reported, Dell has used VMware's cash for a lot of this restructuring. And so we'll see, as it exits the current phase and enters a new phase, how it will be able to pursue that vision. It's going to be, whatever it does it's going to be much different than that vertically integrated Oracle approach, which of course brings me to IBM. Potentially Red Hat with OpenShift is the most powerful card in the deck right now. OpenShift I mean, it's open it's everywhere. It has momentum as we showed. And I like their position. My concern is IBM, IBM is still unwinding and restructuring its business. And it's taking a long time as we've seen, with its outsourcing business. And now the Watson health assets, Irvine is continuing that downsizing trend that we saw under Ginny, shedding non-strategic businesses that don't fit, Irvine has a lot to deal with. And I want to point out that this idea of an abstraction layer across clouds is not trivial. First, all of these companies have to stop being so defensive about the public cloud. To a large extent, VMware and Red Hat have found a happy place. But in my view, they all should be thanking AWS, Azure, and Google for building out this great global distributed system, that they can leverage and build on top of. And second, this is going to be expensive. And Cisco, Dell VMware, IBM, they're all really stretched thin from an R&D perspective. They a lot of mouths to feed across the portfolio. So is HPE stretched thin, and it doesn't have the R&D budget at less than $2 billion annually. So my concern is that we're going to have lots of complexity across these obstructions layers by vendor. Now maybe the good news for companies. This may be good news for companies like Hashi or specialists with a vision to do this within a domain like a clumial, or a vast data, but this is big, and they are small. So it's going to take the better part of a decade to play out. Now, let's take a quick look at the cloud players. OMG when I saw that article in Barron's last weekend my mouth dropped. What a headline and it had this illustration of a stout Larry Ellison rising above the clouds. Here's a picture of the ETR data for the cloud players. It's the same X, Y plotting or net score and market share. If you follow this program, you know we believe there are four and only four hyper scale cloud players, with the resources to compete and differentiate as horizontal infrastructure players, which really is how we view the origination of modern cloud computing. AWS created it with S3 and EC2 with 2006. Those four are AWS and Azure, which have a large lead over the pack. Google cloud and Alibaba. And you can see we've circled the on-prem pack which comprises Oracle and IBM along with Dell VMware. And we snuck Google just stuck them at the edge of that circle because the differentiate they're cozying up to companies with strong enterprise sales teams and Google's, they're smart, they're patient. And so we, by no means, count them out. They're spending like mad and they have a lot of cash. They've done some really interesting open source things with containers. And so, you know, no doubt they're a player, but they are behind. Now in that on-prem pack, IBM and Oracle they actually own their own public clouds. IBM, they acquired soft layer which was a bare metal hosting company at the time to get IBM into the game. They retooled the platform over several years. Now here's the thing, try and unpack IBM's cloud business looking at its financial or in earnings reports. It's just a mess. I hope Irvine cuts the nonsense and actually develops and reports a set of metrics that are meaningful to cloud observers and IBM observers, because the way IBM reports its cloud business today is opaque and it's nonsense. It's frankly embarrassing to the company. It needs to end sooner rather than later is fundamentally meaningless to any observers. Now observers of cloud. If you care about the big chunk of whatever then maybe it has meaning. Now Oracle for its part, they announced the public cloud years ago, its version of one datto cloud was crap. And the company, they hired a bunch of really smart cloud engineers and they spent a lot of money to fix that. Now neither IBM nor Oracle have the CapEx resources of the big four, not even close, yet they'll build out data centers and yes they'll have a play, but they're different and that's okay. Now in the Barron's article on Oracle, the author was quite positive on Oracle, noting that quote, "On a recent earnings call CEO Safra Catz said that Oracle cloud infrastructure revenue was up 139% for the quarter". So, (laughs) we have really no sense or a stake in the ground is to up from what? Anyway, noting further the author said, quote, "Alas! Oracle doesn't break out OCI sales and comps can be messy". Hmm, indeed. Oracle is hiding the ball on OCI, that's because if they did break it out, which by the way they used to report, AIS revenue explicitly, but if they did break it out, they would only be highlighting that they are a minor player in AIS. Further, the article continues, quote, "Catz says that hers is the only tech company that has both a global cloud and a full set of enterprise applications". Unquote, bingo. There it is. That's why Oracle is in a better position than many of or most of the on-prem players listed in this chart. By the way, I would argue that Microsoft has a pretty impressive set of enterprise applications in a fairly global cloud. But what Safra is talking about is applications that support the world's most mission critical work. And when it comes to that, Oracle is number one. Don't fool yourself and get caught up in the Oracle lock-in and high pricing narrative, thinking that they're going to get crushed. They're not. Oracle is the best in the mission critical workload game. There is no one better, period. But guys, come on. The big four last year grew 41% and accounted for $86 billion in AIS revenue, AKA real cloud revenue. And they're going to surpass $115 billion this year combined. Real cloud companies don't grow in the single digits today. So talk to me when we reach equilibrium on that front. Okay. So let's wrap by looking at what does a cloud company look like in the 2020s? Now, I'm not saying that the rest of the pack shouldn't redefine cloud they should. But I hope we can all agree by now that modern day cloud computing was defined in business terms by AWS. They are number one in cloud computing, make no mistake. However, AWS is bringing the cloud into the wheelhouse of the on-prem players, cleverly saying that it's bringing AWS to the edge and it looks at the data centers. Just another edge node is great positioning but that is not trivial. Just look it out posts and how AWS has had to evolve its pricing strategy in terms, can't just turn it off like you can, the public cloud. I have an entire rant on all the, SaaS service transformations. It's really interesting to watch as AWS goes out, and the on-prem players come in and go hybrid. I got a lot of thought on what's happening there both in terms of SaaS, which I think is an outdated pricing model, and the infrastructure as a service players that are really getting into this game, we would love to do a session on that sometime. And it's a real disruption I think coming. Anyway, AWS competitors should absolutely try to redefine cloud. By AWS moving to the edge, it's opened up the door to that possibility. Microsoft is obviously in the best position I think by far here. They've earned the right and I'll never accuse them of cloud washing. Google, they got some work to do in this regard, but they probably have the largest physical cloud infrastructure in the world. As I've said, they just need to pull their heads out of their ads and quadruple down on cloud. But this idea of abstracting away the underlying complexity of the cloud, leveraging cloud native capabilities and building on top of the shoulders of the cloud giants such as David Floyer has expressed in this chart, moving from stateless to state full, integrating across clouds, advancing automation not only through the stack, but across domains and ultimately using metadata to govern where workloads should live or be moved, be disintegrated and recombined with low latency and be highly secured. I look at this, I think about this and I say one there is this technically feasible and smart techies tell me yes, so I keep trying to dig here for signs and I definitely see some movement in this direction. And two, I don't think any one vendor is going to do this themselves. They're not going to, it's not going to be owned by one company. I think what's going to happen is you'll get successes within layers of the stack. I mean, think about Snowflakes data cloud. We're going to see that for storage. See it for backup, data management, security maybe security within different domains. You see endpoint and identity access management. Maybe that cloud comes together as cloud security. You see it in applications, but without clear standards, it's going to be a challenge. And with respect to my friends at Snowflake, we might even see it in database sometime LOL, but look you all have a lot of work to do. And to my CIO friends, you know the drill much better than I, technology is going to keep relentlessly coming at you and you can deal with that. It's the people and the change management in the culture. Those are your bigger challenges, but don't screw up the tech. Okay. Thanks for watching. Remember, these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen, just search breaking analysis podcasts, and please subscribe to the series, we appreciate that. Check out ETR's website at ETR.plus sorry, ETR.plus. We also publish a full report every week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. You can email me at David.Vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me on Twitter at DVellante that's @DVellante or comment, excuse me on my LinkedIn posts. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Stay safe, be well, get the jab if you have an opportunity. And we'll see you next time. (soft music)