to have Rodger Goodell fly to a tech conference to sit with you and then bring his team talk about the deal. >> Well, ya know, we've been partners with the NFL for a while with the Next Gen Stats that they use on all their telecasts and one of the things I really like about Roger is that he's very curious and very interested in technology and the first couple times I spoke with him he asked me so many questions about ways the NFL might be able to use the Cloud and digital transformation to transform their various experiences and he's always said if you have a creative idea or something you think that could change the world for us, just call me he said or text me or email me and I'll call you back within 24 hours. And so, we've spent the better part of the last year talking about a lot of really interesting, strategic ways that they can evolve their experience both for fans, as well as their players and the Player Health and Safety Initiative, it's so important in sports and particularly important with the NFL given the nature of the sport and they've always had a focus on it, but what you can do with computer vision and machine learning algorithms and then building a digital athlete which is really like a digital twin of each athlete so you understand, what does it look like when they're healthy and compare that when it looks like they may not be healthy and be able to simulate all kinds of different combinations of player hits and angles and different plays so that you could try to predict injuries and predict the right equipment you need before there's a problem can be really transformational so we're super excited about it. >> Did you guys come up with the idea or was it a collaboration between them? >> It was really a collaboration. I mean they, look, they are very focused on players safety and health and it's a big deal for their- you know, they have two main constituents the players and fans and they care deeply about the players and it's a-it's a hard problem in a sport like Football, I mean, you watch it. >> Yeah, and I got to say it does point out the use cases of what you guys are promoting heavily at the show here of the SageMaker Studio, which was a big part of your Keynote, where they have all this data. >> Andy: Right. >> And they're data hoarders, they hoard data but the manual process of going through the data was a killer problem. This is consistent with a lot of the enterprises that are out there, they have more data than they even know. So this seems to be a big part of the strategy. How do you get the customers to actually wake up to the fact that they got all this data and how do you tie that together? >> I think in almost every company they know they have a lot of data. And there are always pockets of people who want to do something with it. But, when you're going to make these really big leaps forward; these transformations, the things like Volkswagen is doing where they're reinventing their factories and their manufacturing process or the NFL where they're going to radically transform how they do players uh, health and safety. It starts top down and if the senior leader isn't convicted about wanting to take that leap forward and trying something different and organizing the data differently and organizing the team differently and using machine learning and getting help from us and building algorithms and building some muscle inside the company it just doesn't happen because it's not in the normal machinery of what most companies do. And so it always, almost always, starts top down. Sometimes it can be the Commissioner or CEO sometimes it can be the CIO but it has to be senior level conviction or it doesn't get off the ground. >> And the business model impact has to be real. For NFL, they know concussions, hurting their youth pipe-lining, this is a huge issue for them. the low level building blocks and stitch them together creatively however they see fit to create whatever's in their-in their heads. And then we have the second segment of customers that say look, I'm willing to give up some of that flexibility in exchange for getting 80% of the way there much faster.

>> Hi, my name is Andy Clemenko. I'm a Senior Solutions Engineer at StackRox. Thanks for joining us today for my talk on labels, labels, labels. Obviously, you can reach me at all the socials. Before we get started, I like to point you to my GitHub repo, you can go to andyc.info/dc20, and it'll take you to my GitHub page where I've got all of this documentation, socials. Before we get started, I like to point you to my GitHub repo, you can go to andyc.info/dc20, (upbeat music) >> Hi, my name is Andy Clemenko. I'm a Senior Solutions Engineer at StackRox. Thanks for joining us today for my talk on labels, labels, labels. Obviously, you can reach me at all the socials. Before we get started, I like to point you to my GitHub repo, you can go to andyc.info/dc20, and it'll take you to my GitHub page where I've got all of this documentation, I've got the Keynote file there. YAMLs, I've got Dockerfiles, Compose files, all that good stuff. If you want to follow along, great, if not go back and review later, kind of fun. So let me tell you a little bit about myself. I am a former DOD contractor. This is my seventh DockerCon. I've spoken, I had the pleasure to speak at a few of them, one even in Europe. I was even a Docker employee for quite a number of years, providing solutions to the federal government and customers around containers and all things Docker. So I've been doing this a little while. One of the things that I always found interesting was the lack of understanding around labels. So why labels, right? Well, as a former DOD contractor, I had built out a large registry. And the question I constantly got was, where did this image come from? How did you get it? What's in it? Where did it come from? How did it get here? And one of the things we did to kind of alleviate some of those questions was we established a baseline set of labels. Labels really are designed to provide as much metadata around the image as possible. I ask everyone in attendance, when was the last time you pulled an image and had 100% confidence, you knew what was inside it, where it was built, how it was built, when it was built, you probably didn't, right? The last thing we obviously want is a container fire, like our image on the screen. And one kind of interesting way we can kind of prevent that is through the use of labels. We can use labels to address security, address some of the simplicity on how to run these images. So think of it, kind of like self documenting, Think of it also as an audit trail, image provenance, things like that. These are some interesting concepts that we can definitely mandate as we move forward. What is a label, right? Specifically what is the Schema? It's just a key-value. All right? It's any key and pretty much any value. What if we could dump in all kinds of information? What if we could encode things and store it in there? And I've got a fun little demo to show you about that. Let's start off with some of the simple keys, right? Author, date, description, version. Some of the basic information around the image. That would be pretty useful, right? What about specific labels for CI? What about a, where's the version control? Where's the source, right? Whether it's Git, whether it's GitLab, whether it's GitHub, whether it's Gitosis, right? Even SPN, who cares? Where are the source files that built, where's the Docker file that built this image? What's the commit number? That might be interesting in terms of tracking the resulting image to a person or to a commit, hopefully then to a person. How is it built? What if you wanted to play with it and do a git clone of the repo and then build the Docker file on your own? Having a label specifically dedicated on how to build this image might be interesting for development work. Where it was built, and obviously what build number, right? These kind of all, not only talk about continuous integration, CI but also start to talk about security. Specifically what server built it. The version control number, the version number, the commit number, again, how it was built. What's the specific build number? What was that job number in, say, Jenkins or GitLab? What if we could take it a step further? What if we could actually apply policy enforcement in the build pipeline, looking specifically for some of these specific labels? I've got a good example of, in my demo of a policy enforcement. So let's look at some sample labels. Now originally, this idea came out of label-schema.org. And then it was a modified to opencontainers, org.opencontainers.image. There is a link in my GitHub page that links to the full reference. But these are some of the labels that I like to use, just as kind of like a standardization. So obviously, Author's, an email address, so now the image is attributable to a person, that's always kind of good for security and reliability. Where's the source? Where's the version control that has the source, the Docker file and all the assets? How it was built, build number, build server the commit, we talked about, when it was created, a simple description. A fun one I like adding in is the healthZendpoint. Now obviously, the health check directive should be in the Docker file. But if you've got other systems that want to ping your applications, why not declare it and make it queryable? Image version, obviously, that's simple declarative And then a title. And then I've got the two fun ones. Remember, I talked about what if we could encode some fun things? Hypothetically, what if we could encode the Compose file of how to build the stack in the first image itself? And conversely the Kubernetes? Well, actually, you can and I have a demo to show you how to kind of take advantage of that. So how do we create labels? And really creating labels as a function of build time okay? You can't really add labels to an image after the fact. The way you do add labels is either through the Docker file, which I'm a big fan of, because it's declarative. It's in version control. It's kind of irrefutable, especially if you're tracking that commit number in a label. You can extend it from being a static kind of declaration to more a dynamic with build arguments. And I can show you, I'll show you in a little while how you can use a build argument at build time to pass in that variable. And then obviously, if you did it by hand, you could do a docker build--label key equals value. I'm not a big fan of the third one, I love the first one and obviously the second one. Being dynamic we can take advantage of some of the variables coming out of version control. Or I should say, some of the variables coming out of our CI system. And that way, it self documents effectively at build time, which is kind of cool. How do we view labels? Well, there's two major ways to view labels. The first one is obviously a docker pull and docker inspect. You can pull the image locally, you can inspect it, you can obviously, it's going to output as JSON. So you going to use something like JQ to crack it open and look at the individual labels. Another one which I found recently was Skopeo from Red Hat. This allows you to actually query the registry server. So you don't even have to pull the image initially. This can be really useful if you're on a really small development workstation, and you're trying to talk to a Kubernetes cluster and wanting to deploy apps kind of in a very simple manner. Okay? And this was that use case, right? Using Kubernetes, the Kubernetes demo. One of the interesting things about this is that you can base64 encode almost anything, push it in as text into a label and then base64 decode it, and then use it. So in this case, in my demo, I'll show you how we can actually use a kubectl apply piped from the base64 decode from the label itself from skopeo talking to the registry. And what's interesting about this kind of technique is you don't need to store Helm charts. You don't need to learn another language for your declarative automation, right? You don't need all this extra levels of abstraction inherently, if you use it as a label with a kubectl apply, It's just built in. It's kind of like the kiss approach to a certain extent. It does require some encoding when you actually build the image, but to me, it doesn't seem that hard. Okay, let's take a look at a demo. And what I'm going to do for my demo, before we actually get started is here's my repo. Here's a, let me actually go to the actual full repo. So here's the repo, right? And I've got my Jenkins pipeline 'cause I'm using Jenkins for this demo. And in my demo flask, I've got the Docker file. I've got my compose and my Kubernetes YAML. So let's take a look at the Docker file, right? So it's a simple Alpine image. The org statements are the build time arguments that are passed in. Label, so again, I'm using the org.opencontainers.image.blank, for most of them. There's a typo there. Let's see if you can find it, I'll show you it later. My source, build date, build number, commit. Build number and get commit are derived from the Jenkins itself, which is nice. I can just take advantage of existing URLs. I don't have to create anything crazy. And again, I've got my actual Docker build command. Now this is just a label on how to build it. And then here's my simple Python, APK upgrade, remove the package manager, kind of some security stuff, health check getting Python through, okay? Let's take a look at the Jenkins pipeline real quick. So here is my Jenkins pipeline and I have four major stages, four stages, I have built. And here in build, what I do is I actually do the Git clone. And then I do my docker build. From there, I actually tell the Jenkins StackRox plugin. So that's what I'm using for my security scanning. So go ahead and scan, basically, I'm staging it to scan the image. I'm pushing it to Hub, okay? Where I can see the, basically I'm pushing the image up to Hub so such that my StackRox security scanner can go ahead and scan the image. I'm kicking off the scan itself. And then if everything's successful, I'm pushing it to prod. Now what I'm doing is I'm just using the same image with two tags, pre-prod and prod. This is not exactly ideal, in your environment, you probably want to use separate registries and non-prod and a production registry, but for demonstration purposes, I think this is okay. So let's go over to my Jenkins and I've got a deliberate failure. And I'll show you why there's a reason for that. And let's go down. Let's look at my, so I have a StackRox report. Let's look at my report. And it says image required, required image label alert, right? Request that the maintainer, add the required label to the image, so we're missing a label, okay? One of the things we can do is let's flip over, and let's look at Skopeo. Right? I'm going to do this just the easy way. So instead of looking at org.zdocker, opencontainers.image.authors. Okay, see here it says build signature? That was the typo, we didn't actually pass in. So if we go back to our repo, we didn't pass in the the build time argument, we just passed in the word. So let's fix that real quick. That's the Docker file. Let's go ahead and put our dollar sign in their. First day with the fingers you going to love it. And let's go ahead and commit that. Okay? So now that that's committed, we can go back to Jenkins, and we can actually do another build. And there's number 12. And as you can see, I've been playing with this for a little bit today. And while that's running, come on, we can go ahead and look at the Console output. Okay, so there's our image. And again, look at all the build arguments that we're passing into the build statement. So we're passing in the date and the date gets derived on the command line. With the build arguments, there's the base64 encoded of the Compose file. Here's the base64 encoding of the Kubernetes YAML. We do the build. And then let's go down to the bottom layer exists and successful. So here's where we can see no system policy violations profound marking stack regimes security plugin, build step as successful, okay? So we're actually able to do policy enforcement that that image exists, that that label sorry, exists in the image. And again, we can look at the security report and there's no policy violations and no vulnerabilities. So that's pretty good for security, right? We can now enforce and mandate use of certain labels within our images. And let's flip back over to Skopeo, and let's go ahead and look at it. So we're looking at the prod version again. And there's it is in my email address. And that validated that that was valid for that policy. So that's kind of cool. Now, let's take it a step further. What if, let's go ahead and take a look at all of the image, all the labels for a second, let me remove the dash org, make it pretty. Okay? So we have all of our image labels. Again, author's build, commit number, look at the commit number. It was built today build number 12. We saw that right? Delete, build 12. So that's kind of cool dynamic labels. Name, healthz, right? But what we're looking for is we're going to look at the org.zdockerketers label. So let's go look at the label real quick. Okay, well that doesn't really help us because it's encoded but let's base64 dash D, let's decode it. And I need to put the dash r in there 'cause it doesn't like, there we go. So there's my Kubernetes YAML. So why can't we simply kubectl apply dash f? Let's just apply it from standard end. So now we've actually used that label. From the image that we've queried with skopeo, from a remote registry to deploy locally to our Kubernetes cluster. So let's go ahead and look everything's up and running, perfect. So what does that look like, right? So luckily, I'm using traefik for Ingress 'cause I love it. And I've got an object in my Kubernetes YAML called flask.doctor.life. That's my Ingress object for traefik. I can go to flask.docker.life. And I can hit refresh. Obviously, I'm not a very good web designer 'cause the background image in the text. We can go ahead and refresh it a couple times we've got Redis storing a hit counter. We can see that our server name is roundrobing. Okay? That's kind of cool. So let's kind of recap a little bit about my demo environment. So my demo environment, I'm using DigitalOcean, Ubuntu 19.10 Vms. I'm using K3s instead of full Kubernetes either full Rancher, full Open Shift or Docker Enterprise. I think K3s has some really interesting advantages on the development side and it's kind of intended for IoT but it works really well and it deploys super easy. I'm using traefik for Ingress. I love traefik. I may or may not be a traefik ambassador. I'm using Jenkins for CI. And I'm using StackRox for image scanning and policy enforcement. One of the things to think about though, especially in terms of labels is none of this demo stack is required. You can be in any cloud, you can be in CentOs, you can be in any Kubernetes. You can even be in swarm, if you wanted to, or Docker compose. Any Ingress, any CI system, Jenkins, circle, GitLab, it doesn't matter. And pretty much any scanning. One of the things that I think is kind of nice about at least StackRox is that we do a lot more than just image scanning, right? With the policy enforcement things like that. I guess that's kind of a shameless plug. But again, any of this stack is completely replaceable, with any comparative product in that category. So I'd like to, again, point you guys to the andyc.infodc20, that's take you right to the GitHub repo. You can reach out to me at any of the socials @clemenko or andy@stackrox.com. And thank you for attending. I hope you learned something fun about labels. And hopefully you guys can standardize labels in your organization and really kind of take your images and the image provenance to a new level. Thanks for watching. (upbeat music) >> Narrator: Live from Las Vegas It's theCUBE. Covering AWS re:Invent 2019. Brought to you by Amazon Web Services and Intel along with it's ecosystem partners. >> Okay, welcome back everyone theCUBE's live coverage of AWS re:Invent 2019. This is theCUBE's 7th year covering Amazon re:Invent. It's their 8th year of the conference. I want to just shout out to Intel for their sponsorship for these two amazing sets. Without their support we wouldn't be able to bring our mission of great content to you. I'm John Furrier. Stu Miniman. We're here with the chief of AWS, the chief executive officer Andy Jassy. Tech athlete in and of himself three hour Keynotes. Welcome to theCUBE again, great to see you. >> Great to be here, thanks for having me guys. >> Congratulations on a great show a lot of great buzz. >> Andy: Thank you. >> A lot of good stuff. Your Keynote was phenomenal. You get right into it, you giddy up right into it as you say, three hours, thirty announcements. You guys do a lot, but what I liked, the new addition, the last year and this year is the band; house band. They're pretty good. >> Andy: They're good right? >> They hit the queen notes, so that keeps it balanced. So we're going to work on getting a band for theCUBE. >> Awesome. >> So if I have to ask you, what's your walk up song, what would it be? >> There's so many choices, it depends on what kind of mood I'm in. But, uh, maybe Times Like These by the Foo Fighters. >> John: Alright. >> These are unusual times right now. >> Foo Fighters playing at the Amazon Intersect Show. >> Yes they are. >> Good plug Andy. >> Headlining. >> Very clever >> Always getting a good plug in there. >> My very favorite band. Well congratulations on the Intersect you got a lot going on. Intersect is a music festival, I'll get to that in a second But, I think the big news for me is two things, obviously we had a one-on-one exclusive interview and you laid out, essentially what looks like was going to be your Keynote, and it was. Transformation- >> Andy: Thank you for the practice. (Laughter) >> John: I'm glad to practice, use me anytime. >> Yeah. >> And I like to appreciate the comments on Jedi on the record, that was great. But I think the transformation story's a very real one, but the NFL news you guys just announced, to me, was so much fun and relevant. You had the Commissioner of NFL on stage with you talking about a strategic partnership. That is as top down, aggressive goal as you could get to have Rodger Goodell fly to a tech conference to sit with you and then bring his team talk about the deal. >> Well, ya know, we've been partners with the NFL for a while with the Next Gen Stats that they use on all their telecasts and one of the things I really like about Roger is that he's very curious and very interested in technology and the first couple times I spoke with him he asked me so many questions about ways the NFL might be able to use the Cloud and digital transformation to transform their various experiences and he's always said if you have a creative idea or something you think that could change the world for us, just call me he said or text me or email me and I'll call you back within 24 hours. And so, we've spent the better part of the last year talking about a lot of really interesting, strategic ways that they can evolve their experience both for fans, as well as their players and the Player Health and Safety Initiative, it's so important in sports and particularly important with the NFL given the nature of the sport and they've always had a focus on it, but what you can do with computer vision and machine learning algorithms and then building a digital athlete which is really like a digital twin of each athlete so you understand, what does it look like when they're healthy and compare that when it looks like they may not be healthy and be able to simulate all kinds of different combinations of player hits and angles and different plays so that you could try to predict injuries and predict the right equipment you need before there's a problem can be really transformational so we're super excited about it. >> Did you guys come up with the idea or was it a collaboration between them? >> It was really a collaboration. I mean they, look, they are very focused on players safety and health and it's a big deal for their- you know, they have two main constituents the players and fans and they care deeply about the players and it's a-it's a hard problem in a sport like Football, I mean, you watch it. >> Yeah, and I got to say it does point out the use cases of what you guys are promoting heavily at the show here of the SageMaker Studio, which was a big part of your Keynote, where they have all this data. >> Andy: Right. >> And they're data hoarders, they hoard data but the manual process of going through the data was a killer problem. This is consistent with a lot of the enterprises that are out there, they have more data than they even know. So this seems to be a big part of the strategy. How do you get the customers to actually wake up to the fact that they got all this data and how do you tie that together? >> I think in almost every company they know they have a lot of data. And there are always pockets of people who want to do something with it. But, when you're going to make these really big leaps forward; these transformations, the things like Volkswagen is doing where they're reinventing their factories and their manufacturing process or the NFL where they're going to radically transform how they do players uh, health and safety. It starts top down and if the senior leader isn't convicted about wanting to take that leap forward and trying something different and organizing the data differently and organizing the team differently and using machine learning and getting help from us and building algorithms and building some muscle inside the company it just doesn't happen because it's not in the normal machinery of what most companies do. And so it always, almost always, starts top down. Sometimes it can be the Commissioner or CEO sometimes it can be the CIO but it has to be senior level conviction or it doesn't get off the ground. >> And the business model impact has to be real. For NFL, they know concussions, hurting their youth pipe-lining, this is a huge issue for them. This is their business model. >> They lose even more players to lower extremity injuries. And so just the notion of trying to be able to predict injuries and, you know, the impact it can have on rules and the impact it can have on the equipment they use, it's a huge game changer when they look at the next 10 to 20 years. >> Alright, love geeking out on the NFL but Andy, you know- >> No more NFL talk? >> Off camera how about we talk? >> Nobody talks about the Giants being 2 and 10. >> Stu: We're both Patriots fans here. >> People bring up the undefeated season. >> So Andy- >> Everybody's a Patriot's fan now. (Laughter) >> It's fascinating to watch uh, you and your three hour uh, Keynote, uh Werner in his you know, architectural discussion, really showed how AWS is really extending its reach, you know, it's not just a place. For a few years people have been talking about you know, Cloud is an operational model its not a destination or a location but, I felt it really was laid out is you talked about Breadth and Depth and Werner really talked about you know, Architectural differentiation. People talk about Cloud, but there are very-there are a lot of differences between the vision for where things are going. Help us understand why, I mean, Amazon's vision is still a bit different from what other people talk about where this whole Cloud expansion, journey, put ever what tag or label you want on it but you know, the control plane and the technology that you're building and where you see that going. >> Well I think that, we've talked about this a couple times we have two macro types of customers. We have those that really want to get at the low level building blocks and stitch them together creatively however they see fit to create whatever's in their-in their heads. And then we have the second segment of customers that say look, I'm willing to give up some of that flexibility in exchange for getting 80% of the way there much faster. In an abstraction that's different from those low level building blocks. And both segments of builders we want to serve and serve well and so we've built very significant offerings in both areas. I think when you look at microservices um, you know, some of it has to do with the fact that we have this very strongly held belief born out of several years of Amazon where you know, the first 7 or 8 years of Amazon's consumer business we basically jumbled together all of the parts of our technology in moving really quickly and when we wanted to move quickly where you had to impact multiple internal development teams it was so long because it was this big ball, this big monolithic piece. And we got religion about that in trying to move faster in the consumer business and having to tease those pieces apart. And it really was a lot of impetus behind conceiving AWS where it was these low level, very flexible building blocks that6 don't try and make all the decisions for customers they get to make them themselves. And some of the microservices that you saw Werner talking about just, you know, for instance, what we-what we did with Nitro or even what we did with Firecracker those are very much about us relentlessly working to continue to uh, tease apart the different components. And even things that look like low level building blocks over time, you build more and more features and all of the sudden you realize they have a lot of things that are combined together that you wished weren't that slow you down and so, Nitro was a completely re imagining of our Hypervisor and Virtualization layer to allow us, both to let customers have better performance but also to let us move faster and have a better security story for our customers. >> I got to ask you the question around transformation because I think that all points, all the data points, you got all the references, Goldman Sachs on stage at the Keynote, Cerner, I mean healthcare just is an amazing example because I mean, that's demonstrating real value there there's no excuse. I talked to someone who wouldn't be named last night, in and around the area said, the CIA has a cost bar like this a cost-a budget like this but the demand for mission based apps is going up exponentially, so there's need for the Cloud. And so, you see more and more of that. What is your top down, aggressive goals to fill that solution base because you're also a very transformational thinker; what is your-what is your aggressive top down goals for your organization because you're serving a market with trillions of dollars of spend that's shifting, that's on the table. >> Yeah. >> A lot of competition now sees it too, they're going to go after it. But at the end of the day you have customers that have a demand for things, apps. >> Andy: Yeah. >> And not a lot of budget increase at the same time. This is a huge dynamic. >> Yeah. >> John: What's your goals? >> You know I think that at a high level our top down aggressive goals are that we want every single customer who uses our platform to have an outstanding customer experience. And we want that outstanding customer experience in part is that their operational performance and their security are outstanding, but also that it allows them to build, uh, build projects and initiatives that change their customer experience and allow them to be a sustainable successful business over a long period of time. And then, we also really want to be the technology infrastructure platform under all the applications that people build. And we're realistic, we know that you know, the market segments we address with infrastructure, software, hardware, and data center services globally are trillions of dollars in the long term and it won't only be us, but we have that goal of wanting to serve every application and that requires not just the security operational premise but also a lot of functionality and a lot of capability. We have by far the most amount of capability out there and yet I would tell you, we have 3 to 5 years of items on our roadmap that customers want us to add. And that's just what we know today. >> And Andy, underneath the covers you've been going through some transformation. When we talked a couple of years ago, about how serverless is impacting things I've heard that that's actually, in many ways, glue behind the two pizza teams to work between organizations. Talk about how the internal transformations are happening. How that impacts your discussions with customers that are going through that transformation. >> Well, I mean, there's a lot of- a lot of the technology we build comes from things that we're doing ourselves you know? And that we're learning ourselves. It's kind of how we started thinking about microservices, serverless too, we saw the need, you know, we would have we would build all these functions that when some kind of object came into an object store we would spin up, compute, all those tasks would take like, 3 or 4 hundred milliseconds then we'd spin it back down and yet, we'd have to keep a cluster up in multiple availability zones because we needed that fault tolerance and it was- we just said this is wasteful and, that's part of how we came up with Lambda and you know, when we were thinking about Lambda people understandably said, well if we build Lambda and we build this serverless adventure in computing a lot of people were keeping clusters of instances aren't going to use them anymore it's going to lead to less absolute revenue for us. But we, we have learned this lesson over the last 20 years at Amazon which is, if it's something that's good for customers you're much better off cannibalizing yourself and doing the right thing for customers and being part of shaping something. And I think if you look at the history of technology you always build things and people say well, that's going to cannibalize this and people are going to spend less money, what really ends up happening is they spend less money per unit of compute but it allows them to do so much more that they ultimately, long term, end up being more significant customers. >> I mean, you are like beating the drum all the time. Customers, what they say, we encompass the roadmap, I got that you guys have that playbook down, that's been really successful for you. >> Andy: Yeah. >> Two years ago you told me machine learning was really important to you because your customers told you. What's the next traunch of importance for customers? What's on top of mind now, as you, look at- >> Andy: Yeah. >> This re:Invent kind of coming to a close, Replay's tonight, you had conversations, you're a tech athlete, you're running around, doing speeches, talking to customers. What's that next hill from if it's machine learning today- >> There's so much I mean, (weird background noise) >> It's not a soup question (Laughter) And I think we're still in the very early days of machine learning it's not like most companies have mastered it yet even though they're using it much more then they did in the past. But, you know, I think machine learning for sure I think the Edge for sure, I think that um, we're optimistic about Quantum Computing even though I think it'll be a few years before it's really broadly useful. We're very um, enthusiastic about robotics. I think the amount of functions that are going to be done by these- >> Yeah. >> robotic applications are much more expansive than people realize. It doesn't mean humans won't have jobs, they're just going to work on things that are more value added. We're believers in augmented virtual reality, we're big believers in what's going to happen with Voice. And I'm also uh, I think sometimes people get bored you know, I think you're even bored with machine learning already >> Not yet. >> People get bored with the things you've heard about but, I think just what we've done with the Chips you know, in terms of giving people 40% better price performance in the latest generation of X86 processors. It's pretty unbelievable in the difference in what people are going to be able to do. Or just look at big data I mean, big data, we haven't gotten through big data where people have totally solved it. The amount of data that companies want to store, process, analyze, is exponentially larger than it was a few years ago and it will, I think, exponentially increase again in the next few years. You need different tools and services. >> Well I think we're not bored with machine learning we're excited to get started because we have all this data from the video and you guys got SageMaker. >> Andy: Yeah. >> We call it the stairway to machine learning heaven. >> Andy: Yeah. >> You start with the data, move up, knock- >> You guys are very sophisticated with what you do with technology and machine learning and there's so much I mean, we're just kind of, again, in such early innings. And I think that, it was so- before SageMaker, it was so hard for everyday developers and data scientists to build models but the combination of SageMaker and what's happened with thousands of companies standardizing on it the last two years, plus now SageMaker studio, giant leap forward. >> Well, we hope to use the data to transform our experience with our audience. And we're on Amazon Cloud so we really appreciate that. >> Andy: Yeah. >> And appreciate your support- >> Andy: Yeah, of course. >> John: With Amazon and get that machine learning going a little faster for us, that would be better. >> If you have requests I'm interested, yeah. >> So Andy, you talked about that you've got the customers that are builders and the customers that need simplification. Traditionally when you get into the, you know, the heart of the majority of adoption of something you really need to simplify that environment. But when I think about the successful enterprise of the future, they need to be builders. how'l I normally would've said enterprise want to pay for solutions because they don't have the skill set but, if they're going to succeed in this new economy they need to go through that transformation >> Andy: Yeah. >> That you talk to, so, I mean, are we in just a total new era when we look back will this be different than some of these previous waves? >> It's a really good question Stu, and I don't think there's a simple answer to it. I think that a lot of enterprises in some ways, I think wish that they could just skip the low level building blocks and only operate at that higher level abstraction. That's why people were so excited by things like, SageMaker, or CodeGuru, or Kendra, or Contact Lens, these are all services that allow them to just send us data and then run it on our models and get back the answers. But I think one of the big trends that we see with enterprises is that they are taking more and more of their development in house and they are wanting to operate more and more like startups. I think that they admire what companies like AirBnB and Pintrest and Slack and Robinhood and a whole bunch of those companies, Stripe, have done and so when, you know, I think you go through these phases and eras where there are waves of success at different companies and then others want to follow that success and replicate it. And so, we see more and more enterprises saying we need to take back a lot of that development in house. And as they do that, and as they add more developers those developers in most cases like to deal with the building blocks. And they have a lot of ideas on how they can creatively stich them together. >> Yeah, on that point, I want to just quickly ask you on Amazon versus other Clouds because you made a comment to me in our interview about how hard it is to provide a service to other people. And it's hard to have a service that you're using yourself and turn that around and the most quoted line of my story was, the compression algorithm- there's no compression algorithm for experience. Which to me, is the diseconomies of scale for taking shortcuts. >> Andy: Yeah. And so I think this is a really interesting point, just add some color commentary because I think this is a fundamental difference between AWS and others because you guys have a trajectory over the years of serving, at scale, customers wherever they are, whatever they want to do, now you got microservices. >> Yeah. >> John: It's even more complex. That's hard. >> Yeah. >> John: Talk about that. >> I think there are a few elements to that notion of there's no compression algorithm for experience and I think the first thing to know about AWS which is different is, we just come from a different heritage and a different background. We ran a business for a long time that was our sole business that was a consumer retail business that was very low margin. And so, we had to operate at very large scale given how many people were using us but also, we had to run infrastructure services deep in the stack, compute storage and database, and reliable scalable data centers at very low cost and margins. And so, when you look at our business it actually, today, I mean its, its a higher margin business in our retail business, its a lower margin business in software companies but at real scale, it's a high volume, relatively low margin business. And the way that you have to operate to be successful with those businesses and the things you have to think about and that DNA come from the type of operators we have to be in our consumer retail business. And there's nobody else in our space that does that. So, you know, the way that we think about costs, the way we think about innovation in the data center, um, and I also think the way that we operate services and how long we've been operating services as a company its a very different mindset than operating package software. Then you look at when uh, you think about some of the uh, issues in very large scale Cloud, you can't learn some of those lessons until you get to different elbows of the curve and scale. And so what I was telling you is, its really different to run your own platform for your own users where you get to tell them exactly how its going to be done. But that's not the way the real world works. I mean, we have millions of external customers who use us from every imaginable country and location whenever they want, without any warning, for lots of different use cases, and they have lots of design patterns and we don't get to tell them what to do. And so operating a Cloud like that, at a scale that's several times larger than the next few providers combined is a very different endeavor and a very different operating rigor. >> Well you got to keep raising the bar you guys do a great job, really impressed again. Another tsunami of announcements. In fact, you had to spill the beans earlier with Quantum the day before the event. Tight schedule. I got to ask you about the musical festival because, I think this is a very cool innovation. It's the inaugural Intersect conference. >> Yes. >> John: Which is not part of Replay, >> Yes. >> John: Which is the concert tonight. Its a whole new thing, big music act, you're a big music buff, your daughter's an artist. Why did you do this? What's the purpose? What's your goal? >> Yeah, it's an experiment. I think that what's happened is that re:Invent has gotten so big, we have 65 thousand people here, that to do the party, which we do every year, its like a 35-40 thousand person concert now. Which means you have to have a location that has multiple stages and, you know, we thought about it last year and when we were watching it and we said, we're kind of throwing, like, a 4 hour music festival right now. There's multiple stages, and its quite expensive to set up that set for a party and we said well, maybe we don't have to spend all that money for 4 hours and then rip it apart because actually the rent to keep those locations for another two days is much smaller than the cost of actually building multiple stages and so we thought we would try it this year. We're very passionate about music as a business and I think we-I think our customers feel like we've thrown a pretty good music party the last few years and we thought we would try it at a larger scale as an experiment. And if you look at the economics- >> At the headliners real quick. >> The Foo Fighters are headlining on Saturday night, Anderson Paak and the Free Nationals, Brandi Carlile, Shawn Mullins, um, Willy Porter, its a good set. Friday night its Beck and Kacey Musgraves so it's a really great set of um, about thirty artists and we're hopeful that if we can build a great experience that people will want to attend that we can do it at scale and it might be something that both pays for itself and maybe, helps pay for re:Invent too overtime and you know, I think that we're also thinking about it as not just a music concert and festival the reason we named it Intersect is that we want an intersection of music genres and people and ethnicities and age groups and art and technology all there together and this will be the first year we try it, its an experiment and we're really excited about it. >> Well I'm gone, congratulations on all your success and I want to thank you we've been 7 years here at re:Invent we've been documenting the history. You got two sets now, one set upstairs. So appreciate you. >> theCUBE is part of re:Invent, you know, you guys really are apart of the event and we really appreciate your coming here and I know people appreciate the content you create as well. >> And we just launched CUBE365 on Amazon Marketplace built on AWS so thanks for letting us- >> Very cool >> John: Build on the platform. appreciate it. >> Thanks for having me guys, I appreciate it. >> Andy Jassy the CEO of AWS here inside theCUBE, it's our 7th year covering and documenting the thunderous innovation that Amazon's doing they're really doing amazing work building out the new technologies here in the Cloud computing world. I'm John Furrier, Stu Miniman, be right back with more after this short break. (Outro music)

>> Live from New York City, It's theCUBE! Covering Levnovo Transform 2.0. Brought to you by Lenovo. (techno music) >> Welcome back to theCUBE's live coverage of Lenovo Transform here in New York City. I'm your host Rebecca Knight along with my co-host Stu Miniman. We're joined by Rod Lappin. He is the senior vice president in marketing here at Lenovo. And Roger Cox, the research vice president at Gartner. Thank you much, gentlemen for coming on theCUBE. >> Thanks for having us! Excited. >> So the big news for the day, NetApp, Lenvovo Two global powerhouses joining forces I want to hear Rod, the Lenovo speil, and then I want to hear your analysis of the deal and what you make of it. So why don't you go ahead. >> Yes, so obviously we're really really excited, Rebecca. It's a great day for us. I think it's something that we've been really planning with NetApp for obviously a long time, and to actually have it come to fruition is really exciting for all of us, right. So as you would have known, probably, our storage offering in market has been quite small up until now. We're addressing about 15% of the market. With this new deal with NetApp we're sort of in the TAM the target market. We can after up to about 92%. We've been quite good at storage. We've been growing about 2X the market average in Flash, over 100% year on year, but we haven't really had the full product range that we've needed to really address out customers' needs, and so, now having this, having this deal now with NetApp means we can go after our customers and really bring value to them the way that we have wanted and definitely the way our customers are asking us to. >> And so that's my question. Was it customer driven? Was it them saying: We just need you to able to do more or what? >> I think if you look at our core business last quarter, Gartner, obviously, ranked us as the fastest growing server business globally. We grew 68% year on year on our revenue last quarter. And so, with the momentum we've got now as a business, we're seeing our customers want us to do more. We're number one in customer satisfaction, number one in reliability, so they see value in us generally but we had sort of what I would classify as a subsegment of the storage market that we want to address. And of course our customers are saying to us: Hey, we want you to do more for us because we like the way you've performed. So it's been good for us. We're excited >> Yeah. >> So, Rodger you know a thing or two about the storage industry and NetApp specifically. So give us the customer viewpoint. You talked to a lot of them. >> Well, first of all let's say this is one of the better kept secrets because it never leaked out. So really haven't been getting customer calls on this event yet but I'm sure we will starting today be getting a lot >> Yeah, they brought a few analysts down to RTP in July and I remember, Rodger you said: What do I do when the customers call? and they're like, shh, shh. Customers aren't going to call. We're going to keep it under wraps. >> And they did a good job of it. But anyways, what it means, I think, to Lenovo is it really elevates Lenovo's standing as a provider of IT technology for the data center. So they now have, not only a very competitive server offering, which Rod's talked about quite a bit, they have what many believe to be one of the best storage offerings in the business. And now they can go compete head to head against Dell EMC, as well as with HPE, which would be the two larger competitors that they have to deal with. So it's going to be very good in terms of providing an alternative to clients for data center technology-involved storage. Good thing. We like competition. >> Absolutely, and we want to be part of it. I think up until now we probably haven't been able to. So when you look at how we're going to market, my field sales team has been planning with the NetApp field's also. We've been basically coordinating how we go to market where do we attack together, where do we have conflict, where do we not. So we actually go in and really focus in on those core competitors that Roger's just described which is where we want to go. >> In the keynote this morning it said from a channel standpoint, there's not a lot of overlap which, on the one hand, I'm saying: Well, sounds like we'll need a lot of training then. But how do you hit the ground running fast? >> So we are already ready to go. We start shipping tomorrow, so that's the good thing about this announcement. Like Roger said, we kept it under wraps, but we are ready to manufacture and go. So, I think it's a really exciting spot for us. From a go-to-market perspective in the channel, NetApp has traditionally been very much about engaging end users, fulfilling through the channel, but engaging end users. Where Lenovo's got a much stronger forte around mid-market and SMB. And we've got a much stronger forte in emerging market, so if you actually start to split geographically the world up a little bit and then you can start to split how we got to market a little you can actually find some really big parts of the market that we don't conflict at all that we can go after. >> But you see, from my point of view, the bigger challenge they have is to go to market. Now they could say there's not much overlap, but you know there's always overlap. There's going to be certain accounts where Lenovo already has a position, and maybe NetApp has a position, too. Then, who's going to do what given a time? So, the biggest challenge that Lenovo has here is also a challenge for NetApp is how they manage together the go to market motion, as well as the service and support because Lenovo's going to have level one, level two support responsibility. They're going to have that revenue to go for support. We'll see how that works out over time. >> I want to ask you what your advice would be to Lenovo leadership in terms of, this deal enables it to go after bigger players and to take over more of the market. But when it's now going head to head with Dell EMC , what do you think it should focus on? >> I think it should focus more on marketing. The products speak for themselves. The competency of these products are well-known. Besides this, it gives Lenovo the opportunity to become more cloud-friendly, too. Because they also have access to all of the software out of NetApp's cloud data services organization. So my main advice would be to Rod, because he's responsible for this, (Rod and Rebecca laugh) is put more wood behind arrow. Get Huawei to put up more money to accentuates the marketing of the product. Create more enthusiasm about the fact that you're now up at another level in terms of being an IT provider to the data center. >> It's a well kept secret as you started out by saying >> Yeah! >> That's right so we've got a business case that we've put together that's starting today obviously. Which involves us getting out and starting to hit the ground running with a lot of media. There's a lot of social media noise today on it obviously. Thanks very much to people like yourselves which is great. And I think we're going to see a lot more marketing-based initiative that run both through the channel as well as to the end users across our, what I classify as our T-1 countries to start with. To Roger's point, though, when we look at the go-to-market, we basically categorize in all the accounts into four boxes. Those accounts where NetApp's very strong and Lenovo's very strong which means Lenovo's strong from the server perspective. NetApp's very strong from the storage perspective. >> FAP would be one of those. >> That's right. That's a very good example. And in that environment, we're going to collaborate and show them we're communicating with each other and ultimately, not fight with each other. We're going to recognize that we want to continue to protect our server business. They're protecting their storage business. We don't want to touch that. In a place where Lenovo, for example, may be weak and NetApp very strong, so they're got a very good storage relationship, we want them to bring our servers into that space. Because obviously if they don't bring us in, then one of our key competitors that is also competitive in NetApp is going to have a foot in the door there somewhere. So, we're going to drive a little bit of a different strategy in that environment. Then, we've got obviously the third environment where Lenovo's very strong from a server perspective and NetApp's nowhere. In that environment, it's free fields for Lenovo to go after that with our new storage array. And then obviously, where we're both neither engaging those customers, it's in acquisition for both. We're going to play and ultimately go after them. There's some really great things that we've been able to put together with this relationship. Like for example, comp neutrality. So, the NetApp teams when we go into that third and fourth box I was just talking about, the NetApp sales force is going to paid the same whether it goes on a Lenovo hardware or goes on the NetApp hardware. So, we've got some pieces that sort of ensure that we don't have conflicts and we're all aligned to ultimately grow and compete with Dell EMC and HPE. >> So, Roger There have been some interesting server and storage partnerships. I think back a decade ago, Dell and EMC did billions of dollars together. It eventually broke up, and then what do you know, it went back together. I think five years ago, NetApp had pretty strong server partnership there. The storage market has changed a lot in the five to ten years. Tell our audience a little bit how NetApp's different, how the storage market's different, and how customers should be thinking about an arrangement like this. >> Well, the storage market's different because there's more alternatives for storage. There's the Cloud: AWS, Azure, even Google Cloud. You get over to Asia, Alibaba over in Asia and so forth. So that's had a very large impact on on-premises storage. The other one is hyper converged. Lenovo's very much a hyper converged business. They have relationships with Nutanix. They've got them with VMware. They have them with Pivot3 and some others. And so, all of these things come together to create a different alternative to the classical three-tier infrastructure: server, networking, and storage. So, all those things are going to exist. And, the upright storage market, while it may be a declining market from a revenue perspective, has a long payoff. It's going to be like mainframe, so it'll be here forever. Like Tate, here forever. It's like me. I'll be here forever. (Rod and Rebecca laugh) So right now, Stu, we're seeing a little bit of a bubble. So we are getting a bubble interns of, this is a good time by the way for Lenovo to have this partnership because there is more likelihood of increase spending for IT. Good economy in the States, good economy over in Europe. Good economy around the world for that matter. I think it's going to last another couple years. 2018, 2019, maybe in the 20's before it starts tailing off again. So the way people are talking to me now, it's kind of like a flush. Hey, we got all this money. We're going to go spend it. Refresh everything. Get more over into Flash. I think they will sell a lot of Flash, even with the entry product, what they call a DE. I think they'll sell a lot of Flash there. And of course up in the DM series, which is the equivalent of NetApp's A200, A300 which are top tier products. They'll sell a lot of Flash there, too. >> I would say as what you just mentioned, the traditional storage market is reducing, but Flash is obviously growing. NetApp last quarter was the number one Flash company in the world. 27.6% market share-- >> Where do I check that out? (Rebecca laughs) That comes from another source >> That comes from another source, yeah sorry. But they hit number one last quarter according to an unknown source. But I think that's really encouraging, right? And at that part of the market Flash is about 30-40% of the overall storage market right now and easily the fastest growing. So this product range really drives an all-Flash array type solution that we can actually take advantage of. >> Rod, we want to get your perspective China, too. That's a big piece of this announcement. Maybe you an talk a little bit about that. I think Roger's got some comments on it. >> Well, think this is a good deal for NetApp. This is the reason why I think maybe the channel conflict won't be as bad as it was for the Dell EMC guys. This is the way for NetApp. NetApp wants to go more and more towards the Cloud. You look at their strategy. It's going more and more towards the Cloud with all of the Cloud data services software that they're developing. And so they're putting more and more emphasis on that. At the same time, the relationship they have with Lenovo gives them the opportunity to get really a creative revenue that otherwise would not get. Allows them maybe to reduce the burden that they would have under manufacturing SGNE expenses and stuff like that. But the big benefit is China. They JB in China is going to give NetApp a entry into China that otherwise would not be able to get because of the laws that the People's Republic of China have. It's a big deal. >> I think we're really excited about China. Obviously that's one of the cornerstones of the deal. So it's an independent organization that's going to be set up. Lenovo will have 51% ownership. NetApp will have 49. Seven board members. Four of them will be Lenovo. Three of them will be NetApp. And ultimately we are going to have that organization just purely specializing on the Lenovo product that is designed by NetApp originally. And it's going to be doing joint IP. We'll have joint developers in there. We'll be able to leverage my existing sales force in China, that's our traditional sales force, to go and drive for everything from a tier one city all the way down to a tier six, tier seven city in PRC. But, that joint venture itself will just be a specialist organization specifically on storage. It's really exciting. >> The thing about the JB it's very very important. Whatever is developed by the JB has to stay in China. That software cannot be taken outside of China because of all the geopolitical issues that you have around the world. Big point. >> Yeah, and a challenge. >> Absolutely It's a challenge that both NetApp and Lenovo have to manage with respect to each other. >> Just for the record, I'm not totally sure. If we develop something in the joint venture, I'm not totally sure that we have to keep that in China. >> I'm not saying that legally you have to. I'm saying emotionally you should. >> Emotional we should. >> Ahhh... >> I was going to say... >> There might be some government concerns on some of that. >> I think it's always going to depend on the government. And we don't want to get into a geopolitical conversation. I think Europe for example will be a lot more liberally open to that sort of stuff >> Speak a little bit about the cultures coming together. NetApp. You've been working on this deal together. sometimes that can be the strength or the challenge. >> I think company cultures are always challenging. And when you get two companies that are, especially right now, as we've heard this morning in some of the sessions, turning the corner. They're both growing. They're both doing very well at the moment. So, there's always a level of confidence, shall we say, in both those situations that you've just got to break down. And I think what we've done very successfully this time is Wei Wei, and George and Kirk, and George and Henri Ricard and myself and Brad Anderson, you saw today who was actually up on stage with us today as well working with us as the executive sponsor on that side. We're lining up our executives globally. All of the field team for Henri Ricard's team and my field team globally have all been interlocking with each other. They're account planning. They're territory planning. We're really trying to break down any of the walls the way may have from a cultural perspective. And really drive a much more open conversation, so we don't get caught out early in the deal. There's a escalation process in the deal. So it goes to a geo level up and then ends up with Henri and myself to actually manage worldwide if something was to get really out of control. But, at the moment, day one, don't see any issues. Seems to be going okay, touch wood. >> They both, Brad and Kirk, said they're complementary companies. Is that your perspective, too? Would you agree with that? >> Well, I think they gave complementary purposes. The interesting thing here is this thing's coming together when both companies are on the uptick. It's not because, go back three years ago and look at where NetApp was three years ago versus where they are today. So it's coming together when both companies, and matter of fact, go back to look at Lenovo two years ago as well >> Absolutely. >> So it's been an uptick that happened here over the last three years, so this thing's coming together when both companies are doing quite well in that respect. >> So-- >> By the way I want to mention Gartner will be publishing a report in September on this transaction from NetApp's point of view. And we'll be publishing a report on in November on this transaction from Lenovo's point of view. >> Great, so one of the things people like Roger and I have to do is, we look at how we would say whether something's successful or not. So I want to get your point first too and then when you look out six, 12, 18 months from now, whether it is successful and the thing I have to say is Kirk and Brad said, well, our goal is to number three in China, and I said isn't that a low bar? Aren't you practically on day one? I mean you're two joint companies. It's going to be there? >> I can't count on my boss to be honest with you. >> You've got the sales team. I know you can do that. >> I would love to. I think at the moment let's just talk about the joint venture for a second. I think the point is at the moment we are only 15% addressable market with our existing range. And so at the moment, we're saying, hey we can address 15% of the market. That puts us way outside of the number 10 slot in PRC. So, to say we want to be number three, is quite ambitious. Especially because we want to try to do it in the next couple of years. So, I actually feel like he's being quite aggressive from a growth perspective, so I think that's quite balanced. Outside of that, I really want to measure us on profitable growth. We really want to diversify our share of wallet and our customer base. We've got a great customer base now from a server perspective. We need to really expand that to ensure that we're taking advantage of the customer feedback we've had. So, I think that's a pretty good spot. >> At the end of the day, the success of non-success of this program is in Rod's hands. (laughing) On the one hand, >> I love the pressure you're putting me under >> And then Laura, on the services support side. People will support this program if they get good quality service and support. So, you have to keep that up for this program. >> Absolutely, and at the moment, the services model is level one and level two is run by Lenovo internally and then level three escalation runs into the NetApp program. We believe we've got a model that runs well. >> A good note to end on. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE Rod and Roger. >> Thank you very much. >> Thanks for having us I appreciate it very much. It's my inaugural time here. >> First of many. I'm Rebecca Knight for Stu Miniman. We will have more from theCUBE at Lenovo Transform just in a little bit. (techno music)