(upbeat music) >> Welcome back, everyone to CUBE Supercloud 22. I'm John Furrier, your host. Got a great influencer, Cloud Cloud RRT segment with Sarbjeet Johal, Cloud influencer, Cloud economist, Cloud consultant, Cloud advisor. Sarbjeet, welcome back, CUBE alumni. Good to see you. >> Thanks John and nice to be here. >> Now, what's your title? Cloud consultant? Analyst? >> Consultant, actually. Yeah, I'm launching my own business right now formally, soon. It's in stealth mode right now, we'll be (inaudible) >> Well, I'll just call you a Cloud guru, Cloud influencer. You've been great, friend of theCUBE. Really powerful on social. You share a lot of content. You're digging into all the trends. Supercloud is a thing, it's getting a lot of traction. We introduced that concept last reinvent. We were riffing before that. As we kind of were seeing the structural change that is now Supercloud, it really is kind of the destination or outcome of what we're seeing with hybrid cloud as a steady state into the what's now, they call multicloud, which is kind of awkward. It feels like it's default. Like multicloud, multi-vendor, but Supercloud has much more of a comprehensive abstraction around it. What's your thoughts? >> As you said, as Dave says that too, the Supercloud has that abstraction built into it. It's built on top of cloud, right? So it's being built on top of the CapEx which is being spent by likes of AWS and Azure and Google Cloud, and many others, right? So it's leveraging that infrastructure and building software stack on top of that, which is a platform. I see that as a platform being built on top of infrastructure as code. It's another platform which is not native to the cloud providers. So it's like a kind of cross-Cloud platform. That's what I said. >> Yeah, VMware calls it that cloud-cross cloud. I'm not a big fan of the name but I get what you're saying. We had a segment on earlier with Adrian Cockcroft, Laurie McVety and Chris Wolf, all part of the Cloud RRT like ourselves, and you've involved in Cloud from day one. Remember the OpenStack days Early Cloud, AWS, when they started we saw the trajectory and we saw the change. And I think the OpenStack in those early days were tell signs because you saw the movement of API first but Amazon just grew so fast. And then Azure now is catching up, their CapEx is so large that companies like Snowflake's like, "Why should I build my own? "I just sit on top of AWS, "move fast on one native cloud, then figure it out." Seems to be one of the playbooks of the Supercloud. >> Yeah, that is true. And there are reasons behind that. And I think number one reason is the skills gravity. What I call it, the developers and/or operators are trained on one set of APIs. And I've said that many times, to out compete your competition you have to out educate the market. And we know which cloud has done that. We know what traditional vendor has done that, in '90s it was Microsoft, they had VBS number one language and they were winning. So in the cloud era, it's AWS, their marketing efforts, their go-to market strategy, the micro nature of the releasing the micro sort of features, if you will, almost every week there's a new feature. So they have got it. And other two are trying to mimic that and they're having low trouble light. >> Yeah and I think GCP has been struggling compared to the three and native cloud on native as you're right, completely successful. As you're caught up and you see the Microsoft, I think is a a great selling point around multiple clouds. And the question that's on the table here is do you stay with the native cloud or you jump right to multicloud? Now multicloud by default is kind of what I see happening. We've been debating this, I'd love to get your thoughts because, Microsoft has a huge install base. They've converted to Office 365. They even throw SQL databases in there to kind of give it a little extra bump on the earnings but I've been super critical on their numbers. I think their shares are, there's clearly overstating their share, in my opinion, compared to AWS is a need of cloud, Azure though is catching up. So you have customers that are happy with Microsoft, that are going to run their apps on Azure. So if a customer has Azure and Microsoft that's technically multiple clouds. >> Yeah, true. >> And it's not a strategy, it's just an outcome. >> Yeah, I see Microsoft cloud as friendly to the internal developers. Internal developers of enterprises. but AWS is a lot more ISV friendly which is the software shops friendly. So that's what they do. They just build software and give it to somebody else. But if you're in-house developer and you have been a Microsoft shop for a long time, which enterprise haven't been that, right? So Microsoft is well entrenched into the enterprise. We know that, right? >> Yeah. >> For a long time. >> Yeah and the old joke was developers love code and just go with a lock in and then ops people don't want lock in because they want choice. So you have the DevOps movement that's been successful and they get DevSecOps. The real focus to me, I think, is the operating teams because the ops side is really with the pressure vis-a-vis. I want to get your reaction because we're seeing kind of the script flip. DevOps worked, infrastructure's code has worked. We don't yet see security as code yet. And you have things like cloud native services which is all developer, goodness. So I think the developers are doing fine. Give 'em a thumbs up and open source's booming. So they're shifting left, CI/CD pipeline. You have some issues around repo, monolithic repos, but devs are doing fine. It's the ops that are now have to level up because that seems to be a hotspot. What's your take? What's your reaction to that? Do you agree? And if you say you agree, why? >> Yeah, I think devs are doing fine because some of the devs are going into ops. Like the whole movement behind DevOps culture is that devs and ops is one team. The people who are building that application they're also operating that as well. But that's very foreign and few in enterprise space. We know that, right? Big companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Twitter, those guys can do that. They're very tech savvy shops. But when it comes to, if you go down from there to the second tier of enterprises, they are having hard time with that. Once you create software, I've said that, I sound like a broken record here. So once you create piece of software, you want to operate it. You're not always creating it. Especially when it's inhouse software development. It's not your core sort of competency to. You're not giving that software to somebody else or they're not multiple tenants of that software. You are the only user of that software as a company, or maybe maximum to your employees and partners. But that's where it stops. So there are those differences and when it comes to ops, we have to still differentiate the ops of the big companies, which are tech companies, pure tech companies and ops of the traditional enterprise. And you are right, the ops of the traditional enterprise are having tough time to cope up with the changing nature of things. And because they have to run the old traditional stacks whatever they happen to have, SAP, Oracle, financial, whatnot, right? Thousands of applications, they have to run that. And they have to learn on top of that, new scripting languages to operate the new stack, if you will. >> So for ops teams do they have to spin up operating teams for every cloud specialized tooling, there's consequences to that. >> Yeah. There's economics involved, the process, if you are learning three cloud APIs and most probably you will end up spending a lot more time and money on that. Number one, number two, there are a lot more problems which can arise from that, because of the differences in how the APIs work. The rule says if you pick one primary cloud and then you're focused on that, and most of your workloads are there, and then you go to the secondary cloud number two or three on as need basis. I think that's the right approach. >> Well, I want to get your take on something that I'm observing. And again, maybe it's because I'm old school, been around the IT block for a while. I'm observing the multi-vendors kind of as Dave calls the calisthenics, they're out in the market, trying to push their wears and convincing everyone to run their workloads on their infrastructure. multicloud to me sounds like multi-vendor. And I think there might not be a problem yet today so I want to get your reaction to my thoughts. I see the vendors pushing hard on multicloud because they don't have a native cloud. I mean, IBM ultimately will probably end up being a SaaS application on top of one of the CapEx hyperscale, some say, but I think the playbook today for customers is to stay on one native cloud, run cloud native hybrid go in on OneCloud and go fast. Then get success and then go multiple clouds. versus having a multicloud set of services out of the gate. Because if you're VMware you'd love to have cross cloud abstraction layer but that's lock in too. So what's your lock in? Success in the marketplace or vendor access? >> It's tricky actually. I've said that many times, that you don't wake up in the morning and say like, we're going to do multicloud. Nobody does that by choice. So it falls into your lab because of mostly because of what MNA is. And sometimes because of the price to performance ratio is better somewhere else for certain kind of workloads. That's like foreign few, to be honest with you. That's part of my read is, that being a developer an operator of many sort of systems, if you will. And the third tier which we talked about during the VMworld, I think 2019 that you want vendor diversity, just in case one vendor goes down or it's broken up by feds or something, and you want another vendor, maybe for price negotiation tactics, or- >> That's an op mentality. >> Yeah, yeah. >> And that's true, they want choice. They want to get locked in. >> You want choice because, and also like things can go wrong with the provider. We know that, we focus on top three cloud providers and we sort of assume that they'll be there for next 10 years or so at least. >> And what's also true is not everyone can do everything. >> Yeah, exactly. So you have to pick the provider based on all these sort of three sets of high level criteria, if you will. And I think the multicloud should be your last choice. Like you should not be gearing up for that by default but it should be by design, as Chuck said. >> Okay, so I need to ask you what does Supercloud in my opinion, look like five, 10 years out? What's the outcome of a good Supercloud structure? What's it look like? Where did it come from? How did it get there? What's your take? >> I think Supercloud is getting born in the absence of having standards around cloud. That's what it is. Because we don't have standards, we long, or we want the services at different cloud providers, Which have same APIs and there's less learning curve or almost zero learning curve for our developers and operators to learn that stuff. Snowflake is one example and VMware Stack is available at different cloud providers. That's sort of infrastructure as a service example if you will. And snowflake is a sort of data warehouse example and they're going down the stack. Well, they're trying to expand. So there are many examples like that. What was the question again? >> Is Supercloud 10 years out? What does it look like? What's the components? >> Yeah, I think the Supercloud 10 years out will expand because we will expand the software stack faster than the hardware stack and hardware stack will be expanding of course, with the custom chips and all that. There was the huge event yesterday was happening from AWS. >> Yeah, the Silicon. >> Silicon Day. And that's an eyeopening sort of movement and the whole technology consumption, if you will. >> And yeah, the differentiation with the chips with supply chain kind of herding right now, we think it's going to be a forcing function for more cloud adoption. Because if you can't buy networking gear you going to go to the cloud. >> Yeah, so Supercloud to me in 10 years, it will be bigger, better in the likes of HashiCorp. Actually, I think we need likes of HashiCorp on the infrastructure as a service side. I think they will be part of the Supercloud. They are kind of sitting on the side right now kind of a good vendor lost in transition kind of thing. That sort of thing. >> It's like Kubernetes, we'll just close out here. We'll make a statement. Is Kubernetes a developer thing or an infrastructure thing? It's an ops thing. I mean, people are coming out and saying Kubernetes is not a developer issue. >> It's ops thing. >> It's an ops thing. It's in operation, it's under the hood. So you, again, this infrastructure's a service integrating this super pass layer as Dave Vellante and Wikibon call it. >> Yeah, it's ops thing, actually, which enables developers to get that the Azure service, like you can deploy your software in sort of different format containers, and then you don't care like what VMs are those? And, but Serverless is the sort of arising as well. It was hard for a while now it's like the lull state, but I think Serverless will be better in next three to five years on. >> Well, certainly the hyperscale is like AWS and Azure and others have had great CapEx and investments. They need to stay ahead, in your opinion, final question, how do they stay ahead? 'Cause, AWS is not going to stand still nor will Azure, they're pedaling as fast as they can. Google's trying to figure out where they fit in. Are they going to be a real cloud or a software stack? Same with Oracle. To me, it's really, the big race is now with AWS and Azure's nipping at their heels. Hyperscale, what do they need to do to differentiate going forward? >> I think they are in a limbo. They, on one side, they don't want to compete with their customers who are sitting on top of them, likes of Snowflake and others, right? And VMware as well. But at the same time, they have to keep expanding and keep innovating. And they're debating within their themselves. Like, should we compete with these guys? Should we launch similar sort of features and functionality? Or should we keep it open? And what I have heard as of now that internally at AWS, especially, they're thinking about keeping it open and letting people sort of (inaudible)- >> And you see them buying some the Cerner with Oracle that bought Cerner, Amazon bought a healthcare company. I think the likes of MongoDB, Snowflake, Databricks, are perfect examples of what we'll see I think on the AWS side. Azure, I'm not so sure, they like to have a little bit more control at the top of the stack with the SaaS, but I think Databricks has been so successful open source, Snowflake, a little bit more proprietary and closed than Databricks. They're doing well is on top of data, and MongoDB has got great success. All of these things compete with AWS higher level services. So, that advantage of those companies not having the CapEx investment and then going multiple clouds on other ecosystems that's a path of customers. Stay one, go fast, get traction, then go. >> That's huge. Actually the last sort comment I want to make is that, Also, that you guys include this in the definition of Supercloud, the likes of Capital One and Soner sort of vendors, right? So they are verticals, Capital One is in this financial vertical, and then Soner which Oracle bar they are in this healthcare vertical. And remember in the beginning of the cloud and when the cloud was just getting born. We used to say that we will have the community clouds which will be serving different verticals. >> Specialty clouds. >> Specialty clouds, community clouds. And actually that is happening now at very sort of small level. But I think it will start happening at a bigger level. The Goldman Sachs and others are trying to build these services on the financial front risk management and whatnot. I think that will be- >> Well, what's interesting, which you're bringing up a great discussion. We were having discussions around these vertical clouds like Goldman Sachs Capital One, Liberty Mutual. They're going all in on one native cloud then going into multiple clouds after, but then there's also the specialty clouds around functionality, app identity, data security. So you have multiple 3D dimensional clouds here. You can have a specialty cloud just on identity. I mean, identity on Amazon is different than Azure. Huge issue. >> Yeah, I think at some point we have to distinguish these things, which are being built on top of these infrastructure as a service, in past with a platform, a service, which is very close to infrastructure service, like the lines are blurred, we have to distinguish these two things from these Superclouds. Actually, what we are calling Supercloud maybe there'll be better term, better name, but we are all industry path actually, including myself and you or everybody else. Like we tend to mix these things up. I think we have to separate these things a little bit to make things (inaudible) >> Yeah, I think that's what the super path thing's about because you think about the next generation SaaS has to be solved by innovations of the infrastructure services, to your point about HashiCorp and others. So it's not as clear as infrastructure platform, SaaS. There's going to be a lot of interplay between this levels of services. >> Yeah, we are in this flasker situation a lot of developers are lost. A lot of operators are lost in this transition and it's just like our economies right now. Like I was reading at CNBC today, and here's sort of headline that people are having hard time understanding what state the economy is in. And so same is true with our technology economy. Like we don't know what state we are in. It's kind of it's in the transition phase right now. >> Well we're definitely in a bad economy relative to the consumer market. I've said on theCUBE publicly, Dave has as well, not as aggressive. I think the tech is still in a boom. I don't think there's tech bubble at all that's bursting, I think, the digital transformation from post COVID is going to continue. And this is the first recession downturn where the hyperscalers have been in market, delivering the economic value, almost like they're pumping on all cylinders and going to the next level. Go back to 2008, Amazon web services, where were they? They were just emerging out. So the cloud economic impact has not been factored into the global GDP relationship. I think all the firms that are looking at GDP growth and tech spend as a correlation, are completely missing the boat on the fact that cloud economics and digital transformation is a big part of the new economics. So refactoring business models this is continuing and it's just the early days. >> Yeah, I have said that many times that cloud works good in the bad economy and cloud works great in the good economy. Do you know why? Because there are different type of workloads in the good economy. A lot of experimentation, innovative solutions go into the cloud. You can do experimentation that you have extra money now, but in the bad economy you don't want to spend the CapEx because don't have money. Money is expensive at that point. And then you want to keep working and you don't need (inaudible) >> I think inflation's a big factor too right now. Well, Sarbjeet, great to see you. Thanks for coming into our studio for our stage performance for Supercloud 22, this is a pilot episode that we're going to get a consortium of experts Cloud RRT like yourselves, in the conversation to discuss what the architecture is. What is a taxonomy? What are the key building blocks and what things need to be in place for Supercloud capability? Because it's clear that if without standards, without defacto standards, we're at this tipping point where if it all comes together, not all one company can do everything. Customers want choice, but they also want to go fast too. So DevOps is working. It's going the next level. We see this as Supercloud. So thank you so much for your participation. >> Thanks for having me. And I'm looking forward to listen to the other sessions (inaudible) >> We're going to take it on A stickers. We'll take it on the internet. I'm John Furrier, stay tuned for more Supercloud 22 coverage, here at the Palo Alto studios in one minute. (bright music)