>> Commentator: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto, in Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world, this is a CUBE conversation. >> Welcome to theCUBE's conversation with Dell Technologies. I'm Lisa Martin and today I'm talking with Mark Sanders, the VP of Global Presales from the Data Protection Division at Dell Technologies. Mark, welcome to theCUBE. >> Thank you for having me, Lisa. >> Great to meet you virtually in this new world that we're all operating in. So I want to understand a couple of things, when you were in the field talking with customers, as I'm sure you are on a daily basis, now virtually. But, in terms of value, I think nowadays for businesses to understand the value that technology decisions and longterm benefits can make to their environments is critical as budgets are changing, they're shrinking, et cetera. Validate the Value or VTV is a methodology that Dell EMC has pioneered. Tell me about that and what does it actually mean? >> Yeah, I mean, when was the last time a customer said, "Hey, I need to do more with less", right? It just doesn't happen. So, the reality is customers are under extreme pressure when they make us an investment, to validate that what they planned it to solve, like, what's the outcome they're looking for actually came true. And, you know, we pioneered this process where we go back in after a solution has been implemented, and it's, you know, been installed for a little bit of time and go in and pull a bunch of stats from the system so we can objectively provide data to the customer that says, this is the actual performance, this is the actual outcome that you receive for the solution that you invested in. And then, you know, what's really transpired once we created that process is customer really loved seeing this information, so they wanted to see it on a frequent basis and it kind of evolved into a process where we can quickly identify key KPIs with a dashboard view, DU proficiency, time to back up, time to restore, success, failure rates and as systems evolve continually provide an update to the customer on the value of the system that they have from us is providing to them and keep in front of mind and then, you know, nowadays we not only show them the stats of the system, but also then validate the actual Cost to Serve, meaning the amount of data they're holding versus the investment they've made, you do the math, you can come up with a cost per Gigabyte to that store on the system, which are key metrics that customers like to see. >> Well, that quantification is critical, right? Because there's a lot of competitors in the market that do similar things, but being able to not just show metrics from a survey or an analyst report, but actual customer metrics. These are the numbers that we're generating for you on a weekly or a monthly basis. That sounds pretty differentiating. >> It sure is. The reality is, if you can show a customer not only the performance of their system and validate it to that level, that really puts a lot of the noise in the system from different competitors who are claiming other things, you know, puts it to rest when the real data, it's really performing, the cost of service is exceptional. When they compare that to another solution that they're looking at, it's a no brainer that why they continue to invest in and stay with Dell EMC. The other point of this is you can show an Automatized B2B to potential customer to show, hey, this is a customer, the same vertical you are, who's doing the same things that you're talking about doing with us. Here are the stats that they're seeing, it's a real proof points and what I've found in the market is those who can truly show the value that their system can do and validate it do, and those who just rely on Marchitecture and PowerPoint slides and handshakes, they don't talk about these things and, you know, if you scan the market, I don't hear any other vendor talking about validate the value or showing objective stats after implementation and actually doing the cost and serve math for them. And you should be asking yourself as a customer who's considering us, why aren't the other guys talking about this? It's because their numbers aren't as good as ours. If you had better stats than us, I guarantee you'd be talking about it all day long, twice on Sunday. >> So validate the value, how does that synergize with TCO and ROI some of the other metrics that we're often used to hearing? Is this a kind of like a trifecta where you can really show customers a number of significant statistics to show what they're in real time achieving with your technologies? >> Yeah, so there's a number of stats that are covered in a value to value, the amount of data that's protected and mandated your storing, how long it takes to back data up, how many systems are being protected and then, you know, we factor that into the original investment that you made, come up with your cost to serve. So those key metrics then validate the ROI or the return on investment that you're looking for, you know, are you able to meet the current demand need that you sized the system for? Therefore you don't have to invest more and so the actual projection on that TCO is true. You can continually validate that along the way and a normal customer will look at a B2B and their stats on a quarterly or six month basis, a rolling basis just to make sure that ROI, TCO, that they were, you know, that you modeled in the beginning is actually coming through. See what happens is a lot of times people think they have ROI, but then the reality is whoever sold them something didn't sell them enough, and then they have to invest more in, and so that ROI gets thrown out of whack and they don't go back and validate that they actually did meet the ROI. So one of the things we really pride ourselves on is sizing, being able to deliver a solution that performs as designed, you stand behind it and then we continually validate that we're being able to meet those milestones to hit that ROI. >> Can you give me a customer example in any industry that you think really, highlights and underscores the hallmark of what VTV actually means and delivers? >> Yeah, so we've done so many of these last year, just to give you an example, we did something like 33,000 Value to Values across all the different customers that we have. And so you see some very common statistics when you look at these as many of them as I do. So a common statistic will be, you know, 99% success rate, that means that 99% of the time, all the backups complete and finish a hundred percent, there's no issues. And then another common statistic is that, you know, about 80 to 90% of the backups finish in less than an hour. That means that out of all the thousands of clients that you have, almost, you know, almost all of your backups are actually happening in less than an hour, showing the performance of our system. And then the typical stats we see on a deduplication are anywhere from 20 to 100 to 1, it just depends on how many backups you're doing a day and what your intention is, but we see significant value on the deduplication of timeline. And then the last bit I'll tell you that's pretty typical is the actual, you know, replication window, how much data you have to replicate, right? There's three stats that show up here, the daily DD Break, the weekly DD Break and the overall. We typically show the overall, and that gives you your cost to serve, which is typically pennies a gig but what's very interesting is that daily DD Break is the amount of data you have to replicate. And that is consistently super low due to a high DD Break which drives that TCO that you were talking about before, who said drives ROI, right? If you have to invest in more bandwidth because the solution you have does not perform and you constantly are sending way more data than was advertised to you, you know, pipes are expensive, dedicated connections become costly, and it is opening up a new link becomes a real burden to an enterprise. >> So as organizations are evolving every day and especially in the COVID situation, when there's so much acceleration going on at the same time as there's budgets that are shrinking or being depleted or being eliminated, customers are also in this multi-cloud hybrid world in which they live, where they're trying to manage pretty much every organization that a suite of traditional technologies and they're taking on emerging technologies, whether it's Cloud Native, SaaS, 5G or Kubernetes. So how does Dell EMC help customers manage and protect this critical data across traditional technologies and those emerging and really be able to manage all of that, from a single pane of glass, ensuring that everything is protected from any type of accidental or malicious incident? >> Well, that's a lot, but let's go kind of unpack that real fast, right? So there's a couple of things that Dell does, which makes us unique in this current market that we live in where Multicloud you have both proven workloads that have been around for a while that still need protecting, plus you're looking at modern workloads, whether it's containers, Kubernetes or you can have stuff in Azure, Amazon, Google, you know, multiple clouds or you have your own private cloud. The reality is most customers have multiple applications in a life cycle management situation where they may have some older applications they're going to be around for several years while they're still doing modern apps at the same time. And so Dell's really got, you know, what we categorize is, you know, proven in modern and then coexistence. And the reality is, is that we have both proven technology that delivers a fantastic performance, fantastic ROI, fantastic cost to serve, and really protects that application tool set that's been out there in the market for a long time that customers still have. At the same time we now have modern capabilities that address things like Kubernetes and Multicloud and the ability to manage that all from a single pane of glass, click and launch, single sign on, everything's HTML5, simple and easy to do, the same time delivering full API transparency. A lot of customers have both the need for UI and full automation through an API and so it's this value that we unlock by allowing the customer to have a single vendor that protects both proven in modern capabilities and proven in modern workloads across all the different cloud environments that they need. So they don't need another vendor and I know we were talking earlier about the study that we've done at Dell, the Global Data Protection Index, done it multiple years in a row and it consistently shows that companies who have multiple data protection vendors to protect their workloads, tend to lose more data when they have a data loss, those data loss events take longer to recover and they cost more than a customer who's running a single vendor to protect all their workloads. Now, what happens when you partner with somebody who doesn't have that proven and modern coexistence capability for you to tap into? You're forced to then have another vendor in your mix to help you protect that modern workload or another vendor to stay with you, to help protect it, a proven workload that's not going anywhere for anytime soon. Plus entering more risks, more costs into your environment. Dell's really in a unique position with our proven and modern coexistence strategy, allowing our customers to remove that risk and have all the value unlocked so that they don't really have to worry about, hey, I got another use case. I'm going to Azure, I'm going to Amazon, I'm going to Google, I want it to back up on Chrome and want to replicate to the cloud. All that's covered with our solutions. There's no other vendors required. >> In that 2020 Global Data Protection Index research survey that you mentioned, an interesting stat that popped out to me is that about 80% of the respondents and I think there was about a thousand IT decision makers who have responded, over 80% said, we are using multiple data protection solutions. So presumably a big market opportunity for you guys. How do you go in, walk me through the strategy of helping a customer, either extract existing data protection solutions or maybe even coexist? >> Yeah. >> I'll use that word in a different route, What is that typical scenario like? If I can ask you to take something, I'm sure that's very broad, but maybe standardize it a bit? >> Yeah, so there are, you know, Dell's, in addition to this coexistence proven and modern strategy that we offer our customers, we have multiple ways for them to consume that strategy. One is software defined, another is integrated with our integrated data protection appliance and then we also have purpose-built technology. And so our ability to walk into a customer's environment and immediately add value by replacing one of the things that they use for data protection and our ability to support third-party allows them to easily transition off of something that they've been using for a while and onto our single vendor strategy. So we have, you know, the ability to deliver that capability right out of the gate, give them some value and then transition them over to a single vendor across all their work use cases. The other thing that you pointed out, is the opportunity is huge, you know, we have a number one share, according to IDC's recent poll for last year, but you know, the percentage of market share is, you know, we still have a lot of room to grow. So there's a lot of customers for us to continue to go help. And because of that, you know, it's all about getting to the customer with the message that, hey, I can help you now, I can help you remove risk and I can help you transition off of these multiple solutions to a single vendor. Some customers want to go really quickly, some want to go over time, and we are in a position to give them multiple options to make that journey happen. >> In this very interesting 2020 year that's unfolding, are you seeing more customers with the need to accelerate? As they have now, an expanding multi-cloud organization with, you know, traditional and emerging technologies. Are they coming to you saying help me actually get off of these multiple solutions? I understand the stats about the risks and the POS, is that acceleration point to me that you're seeing it as a trend? >> For sure, there's several things that happen in when you have a stress factor like we're dealing with now where, you know, the need to do more with less and to save money is more paramount now than it's ever been and so kind of some of the old things that stopped IT professionals from really transforming to get true cost savings if they go down this journey, you know, all those blockers are now kind of off the table and people are seriously looking at how do I reduce risks? How do I get myself in a situation where I'm partnered with a quality vendor? And then, how do I save money at the same time? And so we've done several things to help our customers with that process. One is we released a new a cloud subscription model that allows our customers to consume all of our functionality for much less than if they paid for all those individual piece parts, allowing them to take advantage of prepaying it upfront or paying on an annual basis so they can get some more cash to spend on other investments. And then our efficiencies have increased this year as well so systems that used to take up multiple racks can now be fit into a single rack and actually can store more data. So we're finding more value in the data center, while continuing to evolve that Cost to Serve strategy, then try to drive costs out of the environment and what we tend to find is when you consolidate multiple platforms, there's a lot of inefficiency in that. So there is a lot of savings initially if you go to one vendor, but then you know, when we go to our existing customers already done that, how do we then continue to save them more money, right? And, that's really the value that we're doing here. Now, the other thing I will tell you is in this pandemic, we're also seeing a real fight to security. And some of the value that we've unlocked for our customers with our cyber recovery solutions is also another key technology wave they've really gripped onto, with less physical people on site to help solve, you know, cyber recovery issue where they've maybe got impacted. They're really looking for vendor solutions that have that full coverage that can easily be implemented to allow them to quickly recover from an event. So, you know, when you combine those things together, we're really delivering some value and helping our customers both save money, transition and remove risk from their environments, which are key in this current market that we're in. >> Absolutely and I think the theme of this interview, Mark would be quantification. It really sounds like what Dell is able to do is show customers the hard numbers about significant benefits to their environment. So we thank you so much for walking us through that. There's a lot to unpack there, but this has been a great conversation. We appreciate your time, Mark. >> Thank you for having me. >> From Mark Sanders, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCUBE with Dell technologies. Thanks for watching. (upbeat acoustic music)

>> From Boston, Massachusetts, it's the Cube covering WTG Transform 2019. Brought to you by Winslow Technology Group. >> Welcome back. I'm Stu Miniman, and we're here at WTG Transform 2019. Happy to welcome to the program first time guest, Marty Sanders who's the Chief Security Services Officer at Arctic Wolf. Marty, thanks so much for joining us. >> Thank you, Stu. >> All right Arctic Wolf's a partner, but before we get there, I have to say welcome back. >> Thank you, thank you. >> Because you're familiar with this event quite well. You have a background at Compellent, which of course we were just talking to Scott Winslow. It's where his company started. Just give our audience a little bit thumbnail of your background. >> Perfect. So yeah, Scott and I go back a long time. We actually started back working together at Zylotech back in the late 90's. After we left Zylotech, we actually went to Compellent. We started building Compellent back in 2002. As a company we wanted to start a new philosophy. Really sit down with customers prior to actually releasing products. So we actually built a customer council. We started that in Minneapolis, and then what we wanted to do is take it to the next level. We wanted to replicate that out to other parts of the country, and the first person we called was Scott. We started to do it with Scott, and started back in 2004. Had the first meeting here at the Commonwealth, actually with a handful of customers, and now it's grown into this. So it's unbelievable what he's done with the company. And when I look at what he does, he provides a tremendous amount of value to the customers and just sells them exactly what they want. But what they need as well. >> Yeah we always know when certain segments of the market that degree of separation, you look on LinkedIn is like, one and a half. >> Absolutely. >> Everybody knows each other. We all run around some of the same circles. So bring us up to speed. Arctic Wolf. I believe you're the first person we've had on from the company. So give us a little bit kind of the who and the what and the why. >> Perfect. ^- [Stu] Of Arctic Wolf. >> And again thank you very much for inviting us out for this as well. Yeah Arctic Wolf has been around since 2012. Started off in the SOC as a service. Obviously, in that small-medium business, they didn't have the capabilities to do a lot of the security work. Actually, Brian NeSmith, our CEO, started the company with his other founder Kim Tremblay. They worked at Blue Coat, they understood the security world. But understood that there was a big hole in that space, in that small-medium enterprise business. So they were actually way ahead of their time. I mean you look at from 2012 to 2015, it was a little bit slow growth. But now you start to look at where we're at, and the adoption of that, having a SOC as a service 7 by 24, hasn't been adopted very well. >> Yeah, I thought it was rather telling, actually in the keynote this morning, some people were asking about security, and they're like, wait, if I do this hybrid cloud stuff, how does that work? And I'm like, yeah I go to too many events. It's like, I have ingrained in my system now security is everyone's problem. There is no such thing as a moat. You assume that they are going to get in, so therefore I need to build at every level of the stack. I need to get in. But I'm an industry watcher. ^- [Marty] Yep. >> The people that are doing, what's their mindset, what's workin' well for them? Is security heightened? How's Arctic Wolf going? >> And you want to take that premise. I mean, one of the things that we do is we actually assign a concierge security team to that customer. So we want to be that extension of their environment. I mean, in fact, as we started to talk to some of the clients that we have here, they're repeating the words, what they feel like. My team is part of their team. And it makes it so much easier. So you're not dealing with somebody fresh every time that you call in. If you have any type of event that validates that there's somebody trying to break in. You want to have that person that understands your environment. Understands exactly where you've been. Making sure that you're up to speed on their network, all their ingress/egress points that they can come into. So it makes it so much easier if you have that consistent face that you're dealing with. >> Okay. Marty, is there a typical customer of Arctic Wolf? Where do you fit in the WTG? Their customer base? >> Yeah, I mean, that's a great question. I mean, when you look at where we really fit is, the first questions that we want to ask is do you have a security team? Do you have it 7 by 24? I mean, that's where we really want to make sure that we're augmenting that. I mean, when you look at a lot of the companies they might have that office admin that became the IT person, that became the security person. What we want to do is make sure that we're providing the true level of high security for those companies 7 by 24. Because obviously the bad guys know that there's going to be a hole after hours or whatever it's going to be. So that's when they want to go in. So we want to make sure that we're covering that. So Scott and his clients are kind of in that medium to small-medium business, moving up into the small enterprise, and it fits really well with them. >> Yeah, so you're saying most of them don't have an entire security SWAT team. >> Exactly. ^- Waiting 7 by 24, to do that. Walk us through maybe if you have a customer example or kind of a genericized version that you can share. What does an engagement look like from when they first plug in to when they're fully engaged? >> Perfect. So typically what we do is we actually once the deal is closed what we want to do is sit down with the customer and understand exactly all their different applications, all their environments. Understand all their ingress/egress points that they have coming in. We want to make sure that we're maximizing coverage. And what we want to do is triangulate anything that comes into that. Understand all the attack vectors that the bad guys may try to come in. So it takes us about 30 days to go through all of that. So once we get them onboarded, we assign that concierge security team. Going to be a senior and a less-senior person dedicated to that team. And basically they're going to go through and review that environment, make sure that they understand all the different applications. Is it Office 365? Any cloud apps that we need to hook up to it? All the different servers to make sure we're getting all that information. We want to provide more quiet service. We don't want to be, anytime someone knocks on the door, we don't want to be calling, Little Red Hen-type stories. We want to make sure that anything that we actually report on is going to be actionable for those customers. So that's that trusted confidante, that's where we build that strong relationship rather than sending out a note and retracting it as a false positive or anything like that. >> Okay. And Marty, I heard you mentioned some SAS applications and their infrastructure environment. Is public cloud included in that also? >> Absolutely. And what we want to do is make sure that we understand, like you said. And like Joe and Rick went through and talked about. There's going to be that private and public cloud. We want to make sure that we're capturing everything internally, but also if you're using those SAS applications on the outside, whatever they may be, we want to make sure that we're capturing all that information so that we can help with that. >> Okay. And billing. Is there multi-year commitments? Or how does the financial piece of this work? >> It can be MRR. I mean, we're going to go through on a monthly basis and we'd like to get at least a year commitment. It can be something that they sign up for a couple of months or they sign up for a year and pay monthly whatever they need to do. But typically what we want to do is provide that level of service and when you think about it, if you were to go out and buy a security team to cover 7 by 24, it's at least a minimum of six, seven people to do that. So when you look at the price point, we want to be less than that. We want to provide that high level of value. When you think about a single team going out and trying to do something, the typical threat is it has been in their environment for at least 100 days before they notice it. What we want to do is get it down to minutes. We want to make sure that any threat that's coming in we're notifying on it immediately. We want to make sure that we're going to capture all those things. >> All right. So Marty, when I talk to the big enterprises, security it's not only top of mind it's often a board-level discussion. When you come down to kind of the mid-size to small companies, where does security fit in their overall pictures? What are some of the biggest things on their mind? >> So it's very interesting. When you start to think about it, one of the things that is challenging, you look at some of the places that were having the greatest adoption rates are those companies that have the biggest threats. You look at where the money is. You look in the healthcare environments. The smaller healthcare. Or you look at the legal side of things. I mean, people know where there's money and where they need to have that data. So when you look at it, it's becoming a higher topic and it's becoming every conversation. And we don't like to say that the conversation gets highlighted after a breach or whatever it's going to be, but it does. I mean, and we'll be in the middle of some discussions and you'll hear about somebody that just got hit in a similar environment. And that's how then it gets brought up. >> Oh, boy. Sounds almost all the discussion is data is the new oil. >> Yes. Well those bad actors out there know where the oil is. >> Absolutely >> And therefore that's a security risk for them. >> Absolutely. And I mean the thing that you look at is, you hear about where some of the Atlanta, and some of the other cities that were hit. I mean they go after the localities and the municipalities of making sure that they're going after. And they know that they're going to pay very quickly because of how incredibly important that data is to do that. And even some of the sitting talking to some of the customers here today. Manufacturing, you know? Just the ability to go in and steal the IP that they have to make their business a little bit unique. That's where the people are concentrating because they want to take that and find that uniqueness in that business. >> All right. Marty, want to give you the final word. WTG Transform 2019. Talk about the partnership, talk about the customers and final takeaways. >> So the partnership, I mean, obviously Scott and I have known each other for a long time. The entire sales team and I know Scott. Rick Gowan actually was a customer of ours at Travelers Insurance. Scott hires great people, great employees. They partner. They take care of their customers better than anybody that I know. I mean, I just love the passion. In fact, some of the customers that we started with back in 2004 are still here. Still using the same products. But they continue to look at what provides the most value for them. >> All right. Marty Sanders the CSSO of Arctic Wolf, thanks so much for joining us. ^- Thank you, Stu. >> And appreciate all the updates. >> Thank you. All right. Full day of coverage here in the shadow of Fenway Park, Boston, Massachusetts. The East Coast team's home game as we like to say. I'm Stu Miniman. Thanks so much for watching the Cube. (gentle techno music)

>> Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're in Mountain View, California, at a really cool start-up, Phantom Auto. They're coming at this autonomous vehicle thing from a very different direction. They're not a car company, it's not BMW and Audi and Nissan and all the other people you hear about. It's a pure software play, but it really has a huge impact on the autonomous vehicle industry. We're excited with the guy who's putting all these development, business development deals together. He's Jordan Sanders, director of business development and operations. Jordan, great to see you. >> Yeah, thanks for having me. >> So, again, when I first heard about you guys I thought, "Okay, do I order "this to drive my grandfather to the store," because he shouldn't be driving even though he has his driver's license, but no, that's not it at all. You guys have a very specific target market and it's really more a biz dev than a direct-to-consumer market. >> Yeah, exactly, so we are a B2B business and our target customers are those who are closest to getting their autonomous vehicles on the road. And so, that's frankly where we're seeing the most traction for now, at this point, from customers. As you get closer to true deployment of level four robo-taxis you realize a need for remote assistance, and we think we have the best solution on the market. >> Jeff: Right. >> To actually remotely drive the car and have a human in the loop to promote safety and service. >> So, as you look at your kind of tam, your ecosystem that you're going to market with, obviously we all know Waymo. We see the cars driving around all the time, the Nest is right up the street, but how's that landscape evolving? You know, we obviously hear about Uber, we hear about Lyft, you hear little bits and pieces about BMW and different car companies. As you sit back from where you're sitting, how do you kind of segment the market, how do you figure out where you're going to go next? >> Yeah, it's an interesting question. I mean, right now, you know, there's obviously a lot of excitement around this market and where it will be in five years. Right now the number of actual autonomous vehicles deployed is relatively low, and so that is frankly what our business is tied to. Again, it's enabling every vehicle on the road to actually operate safely, and so in terms of total addressable market, how we see it evolving, right now it's a relatively small number of cars and a relatively small number of players, but we see huge opportunity and huge growth in the sector over the next five years and 10 years. >> Right, and obviously a big integration challenge for you guys because each platform that you partner with is, you know, we hear all the time, some of them are using some shared infrastructure, some of them are trying to use their own, some are RADAR, some are LIDAR, some are camera, some are combination, so from a business development point of view you guys have to integrate with all those different platforms. >> That's correct, and so that's from the very beginning, we're building our end-to-end service to be very flexible and the software piece especially can integrate with any vehicle, with any vehicle manufacturer, because frankly we want to be open to the market and we don't want to just cover, you know, one customer's vehicles. We are sort of a third party who can provide a safety solution for a number of AV operators. >> Right, now the other interesting thing that people probably don't think about is, you know, we hear all about the technology in the cars and the machines, right, and IOT and it's all about machines, but in bringing a human operator into the equation it's not just to operate the vehicle, it's actually a person and all that that means. I wonder if you can kind of explain how that impacts people's autonomous car vehicle when there's actually a person involved. >> Yeah, definitely, so I think, you know, I think about this from a personal standpoint, so part of me is very excited for autonomous vehicles and I've ridden in several autonomous vehicles, feel very comfortable in them very quickly, but I also live in Silicon Valley and not everyone does just get to zip around in autonomous vehicles and is working in this industry, and so we do view there's going to be a, you know, a big consumer adoption kind of hurdle to overcome, and a piece of that is having the passengers in the car comfortable and feeling that, you know, someone has their back, right? >> Jeff: Right. >> So that's a key part of what we believe that we deliver is a human touch to self-driving cars, which we think is very important just at a psychological level, knowing that you have somebody who is monitoring your ride and is ready to intervene and protect you, you know, in the event that something goes wrong with the ride. And the other thing is by having a human in the loop it also enables all sorts of interesting ways of providing better service, and that's going to be a very, a key piece of whenever everyone inside the car is a passenger, there are no longer drivers, we're passengers. There are going to be lots of opportunities for enhancing passenger experience, and we think part of that can be, you know, providing a human service, an actual human on the other end making you feel comfortable and also connecting you with almost like a concierge. >> Right, and like OnStar has been around forever, right, that's probably the first kind of two way- >> You said that, not me, yeah. >> Two way communication, right, into the vehicle, which at first was I think mainly a safety feature. You crash and it sends out a 911 and then I think they kind of evolved it into a little bit of a concierge service. >> Exactly, so again, there's certainly that piece that we think is going to be really important for consumer adoption. I mean, I think AAA did a survey recently that showed 75% of consumers are afraid of trusting a machine, an autonomous vehicle. Now, we're very confident that the AV tech, once you get inside an autonomous vehicle that you very quickly realize, "Wow, this is a great driver," and we're very bullish on, you know, autonomous vehicle technology and believe that it's very reliable. But again, in those edge case scenarios, having a human who's going to intervene on your behalf and be able to actually operate the vehicle will be really important. >> Right, so somebody's watching this and going, "Ha-ha-ha," you know, "I'm a hacker, I'm going to hack into the stream," and it's not going to be Ben, the nice, smooth driver taking over the car but some person that maybe we don't want taking over the car. So, in terms of security and network infrastructure, how much are you leveraging your partners' infrastructure, how much are you leveraging your own, where does kind of security fit in this whole puzzle? >> Yeah, it's a great question and certainly one that, you know, we're hearing from a lot of customers. So, we are working with a variety of cybersecurity firms for making sure that our solution is extremely secure across multiple vectors, so whether it's just on the software piece or really our end-to-end solution, from the hardware that we can offer in the car, to the software, to the actual control center, the operation center where the driver's driving you, making sure that we have end-to-end security to avoid any situation like that. >> Right, so Jordan, for the people that aren't in Silicon Valley, what should they know about autonomous vehicles, how close are we, how much is it just, you know, stuff in the newspaper and you know, kind of nirvana still or just, you know, specialize Waymo vehicles that we see all the time in this neighborhood. How close is this to Main Street, how close is this to being that vehicle that picks me up when I get off the Caltrain to San Francisco and I need to go to a meeting over the Embarcadero? >> Yeah, so I think what people should know about this technology is that it is incredible technology that will be life-saving and that needs to get on the road, but that needs to happen in a safe manner and at a time where you can have full confidence in the operation and all settings, right. The technology is incredible, and so what Phantom Auto is here to do is to get these life-saving vehicles on the road quicker, and so what I would say to the average person who's a little uncertain of this technology is that it is incredible and you're going to enjoy the experience and it will be life-saving, and again, I think Phantom Auto is working to actually bring that experience to consumers by getting these robo-taxi services deployed. >> Jeff: Right. >> Pull out the safety driver and have a remote safety driver, a Phantom Auto remote operator ready to take over control of the vehicle in the event that you need assistance. >> And in terms of where you guys are as a company, right, you're a relatively small company, got this cool Lincoln here, where are you in terms of your company? Do you have POCs in place, do you have customers in place, kind of where is it in terms of the deployment of the technology within your ecosystem? >> Yeah, well we realize that we're bringing a very critical solution to these operators, so again, if you're an autonomous vehicle developer and operator and really thinking seriously about deployment you realize that you need a solution like ours, and so on the business standpoint we have several deals already closed, some pilots planned over the next few months, so you'll be seeing a lot more, I think, of us very soon out in the market. >> All right, now you're going to see more of us on the street. So, Jordan, let's stop talking and let's go take a ride in the car. >> Let's get in the car. >> All right, he's Jordan, I'm Jeff. We're getting in the car, thanks for watching. (techy music playing)

>>From the Bellagio hotel in Las Vegas. It's the cube covering UI path forward for brought to you by UI path. >>Good morning. Welcome to the cubes coverage of UI path forward for day two. Live from the Bellagio in Las Vegas. I'm Lisa Martin with Dave Velante, Dave. We had a great action packed day yesterday. We're going to have another action packed day today. We've got the CEO coming on. We've got customers coming on, but there's been a lot in the news last 24 hours. Facebook, what are your thoughts? >>Yeah, so wall street journal today, headline Facebook hearing fuels call for rain in on big tech. All right, everybody's going after big tech. Uh, for those of you who missed it, 60 minutes had a, uh, an interview with the whistleblower. Her name is, uh, Francis Haugen. She's very credible, just a little background. I'll give you my take. I mean, she was hired to help set Facebook straight and protect privacy of individuals, of children. And I really feel like, again, she, she didn't come across as, as bitter or antagonistic, but, but I feel as though she feels betrayed, right, I think she was hired to do a job. They lured her in to say, Hey, this is again, just my take to say, Hey, we want your help in earnest to protect the privacy of our users, our citizens, et cetera. And I think she feels betrayed because she's now saying, listen, this is not cool. >>You hired us to do a job. We in earnest, went in and tried to solve this problem. And you guys kind of ignored it and you put profit ahead of safety. And I think that is the fundamental crux of this. Now she made a number of really good points in her hearing yesterday and I'll, and we'll try to summarize, I mean, there's a lot of putting advertising revenue ahead of children's safety and, and, and others. The examples they're using are during the 2020 election, they shut down any sort of negative conversations. They would be really proactive about that, but after the election, they turned it back on and you know, we all know what happened on January 6th. So there's sort of, you know, the senators are trying that night. Um, the second thing is she talked about Facebook as a wall garden, and she made the point yesterday at the congressional hearings that Google actually, you can data scientists, anybody can go download all the data that Google has on you. >>You and I can do that. Right? There's that website that we've gone to and you look at all the data Google has and you kind of freak out. Yeah, you can't do that with Facebook, right? It's all hidden. So it's kind of this big black box. I will say this it's interesting. The calls for breaking up big tech, Bernie Sanders tweeted something out yesterday said that, uh, mark Zuckerberg was worth, I don't know. I think 9 billion in 2007 or eight or nine, whatever it was. And he's worth 122 billion today, which of course is mostly tied up in Facebook stock, but still he's got incredible wealth. And then Bernie went on his red it's time to break up big tech. It's time to get people to pay their fair share, et cetera. I'm intrigued that the senators don't have as much vigilance around other industries, whether it's big pharma, food companies addicting children to sugar and the like, but that doesn't let Facebook. >>No, it doesn't, but, but you ha you bring up a good point. You and I were chatting about this yesterday. What the whistleblower is identifying is scary. It's dangerous. And the vast majority, I think of its users, don't understand it. They're not aware of it. Um, and why is big tech being maybe singled out and use as an example here, when, to your point, you know, the addiction to sugar and other things are, uh, have very serious implications. Why is big tech being singled out here as the poster child for what's going wrong? >>Well, and they're comparing it to big tobacco, which is the last thing you want to be compared to as big tobacco. But the, but the, but the comparison is, is valid in that her claim, the whistleblower's claim was that Facebook had data and research that it knew, it knows it's hurting, you know, you know, young people. And so what did it do? It created, you know, Instagram for kids, uh, or it had 600,000. She had another really interesting comment or maybe one of the senators did. Facebook said, look, we scan our records and you know, kids lie. And we, uh, we kicked 600,000 kids off the network recently who were underaged. And the point was made if you have 600,000 people on your network that are underage, you have to go kill. That's a problem. Right? So now the flip side of this, again, trying to be balanced is Facebook shut down Donald Trump and his nonsense, uh, and basically took him off the platform. >>They kind of thwarted all the hunter Biden stuff, right. So, you know, they did do some, they did. It's not like they didn't take any actions. Uh, and now they're up, you know, in front of the senators getting hammered. But I think the Zuckerberg brings a lot of this on himself because he put out an Instagram he's on his yacht, he's drinking, he's having fun. It's like he doesn't care. And he, you know, who knows, he probably doesn't. She also made the point that he owns an inordinate percentage and controls an inordinate percentage of the stock, I think 52% or 53%. So he can kind of do what he wants. And I guess, you know, coming back to public policy, there's a lot of narrative of, I get the billionaires and I get that, you know, the Mo I'm all for billionaires paying more taxes. >>But if you look at the tax policies that's coming out of the house of representatives, it really doesn't hit the billionaires the way billionaires can. We kind of know the way that they protect their wealth is they don't sell and they take out low interest loans that aren't taxed. And so if you look at the tax policies that are coming out, they're really not going after the billionaires. It's a lot of rhetoric. I like to deal in facts. And so I think, I think there's, there's a lot of disingenuous discourse going on right now at the same time, you know, Facebook, they gotta, they gotta figure it out. They have to really do a better job and become more transparent, or they are going to get broken up. And I think that's a big risk to the, to their franchise and maybe Zuckerberg doesn't care. Maybe he just wants to give it a, give it to the government, say, Hey, are you guys are on? It >>Happens. What do you think would happen with Amazon, Google, apple, some of the other big giants. >>That's a really good question. And I think if you look at the history of the us government, in terms of ant anti monopolistic practices, it spent decade plus going after IBM, you know, at the end of the day and at the same thing with Microsoft at the end of the day, and those are pretty big, you know, high profiles. And then you look at, at T and T the breakup of at T and T if you take IBM, IBM and Microsoft, they were slowed down by the U S government. No question I've in particular had his hands shackled, but it was ultimately their own mistakes that caused their problems. IBM misunderstood. The PC market. It gave its monopoly to Intel and Microsoft, Microsoft for its part. You know, it was hugging windows. They tried to do the windows phone to try to jam windows into everything. >>And then, you know, open source came and, you know, the world woke up and said, oh, there's this internet that's built on Linux. You know, that kind of moderated by at T and T was broken up. And then they were the baby bells, and then they all got absorbed. And now you have, you know, all this big, giant telcos and cable companies. So the history of the U S government in terms of adjudicating monopolistic behavior has not been great at the same time. You know, if companies are breaking the law, they have to be held accountable. I think in the case of Amazon and Google and apple, they, a lot of lawyers and they'll fight it. You look at what China's doing. They just cut right to the chase and they say, don't go to the, they don't litigate. They just say, this is what we're doing. >>Big tech, you can't do a, B and C. We're going to fund a bunch of small startups to go compete. So that's an interesting model. I was talking to John Chambers about this and he said, you know, he was flat out that the Western way is the right way. And I believe in, you know, democracy and so forth. But I think if, to answer your question, I think they'll, they'll slow it down in courts. And I think at some point somebody's going to figure out a way to disrupt these big companies. They always do, you know, >>You're right. They always do >>Right. I mean, you know, the other thing John Chambers points out is that he used to be at 1 28, working for Wang. There is no guarantee that the past is prologue that because you succeeded in the past, you're going to succeed in the future. So, so that's kind of the Facebook break up big tech. I'd like to see a little bit more discussion around, you know, things like food companies and the, like >>You bring up a great point about that, that they're equally harmful in different ways. And yet they're not getting the visibility that a Facebook is getting. And maybe that's because of the number of users that it has worldwide and how many people depend on it for communication, especially in the last 18 months when it was one of the few channels we had to connect and engage >>Well. And, and the whistleblower's point, Facebook puts out this marketing narrative that, Hey, look at all this good we're doing in reality. They're all about the, the, the advertising profits. But you know, I'm not sure what laws they're breaking. They're a public company. They're, they're, they have a responsibility to shareholders. So that's, you know, to be continued. The other big news is, and the headline is banks challenge, apple pay over fees for transactions, right? In 2014, when apple came up with apple pay, all the banks lined up, oh, they had FOMO. They didn't want to miss out on this. So they signed up. Now. They don't like the fact that they have to pay apple fees. They don't like the fact that apple introduced its own credit card. They don't like the fact that they have to pay fees on monthly recurring charges on your, you know, your iTunes. >>And so we talked about this and we talk about it a lot on the cube is that, that in, in, in, in his book, seeing digital David, Michelle, or the author talked about Silicon valley broadly defined. So he's including Seattle, Microsoft, but more so Amazon, et cetera, has a dual disruption agenda. They're not only trying to disrupt horizontally the technology industry, but they're also disrupting industry. We talked about this yesterday, apple and finances. The example here, Amazon, who was a bookseller got into cloud and is in grocery and is doing content. And you're seeing these a large companies, traverse industry value chains, which have historically been very insulated right from that type of competition. And it's all because of digital and data. So it's a very, pretty fascinating trends going on. >>Well, from a financial services perspective, we've been seeing the unbundling of the banks for a while. You know, the big guys with B of A's, those folks are clearly concerned about the smaller, well, I'll say the smaller FinTech disruptors for one, but, but the non FinTech folks, the apples of the world, for example, who aren't in that industry who are now to your point, disrupting horizontally and now going after individual specific industries, ultimately I think as consumers we want, whatever is going to make our lives easier. Um, do you ever, ever, I always kind of scratch my nose when somebody doesn't take apple pay, I'm like, you don't take apple pay so easy. It's so easy to make this easy for me. >>Yeah. Yeah. So it's, it's going to be really interesting to see how this plays out. I, I do think, um, you know, it begs the question when will banks or Willbanks lose control of the payment systems. They seem to be doing that already with, with alternative forms of payment, uh, whether it's PayPal or Stripe or apple pay. And then crypto is, uh, with, with, with decentralized finance is a whole nother topic of disruption and innovation, >>Right? Well, these big legacy institutions, these organizations, and we've spoke with some of them yesterday, we're going to be speaking with some of them today. They need to be able to be agile, to transform. They have to have the right culture in order to do that. That's the big one. They have to be willing. I think an open to partner with the broader ecosystem to unlock more opportunities. If they want to be competitive and retain the trust of the clients that they've had for so long. >>I think every industry has a digital disruption scenario. We used to always use the, don't get Uber prized example Uber's coming on today, right? And, and there isn't an industry, whether it's manufacturing or retail or healthcare or, or government that isn't going to get disrupted by digital. And I think the unique piece of this is it's it's data, data, putting data at the core. That's what the big internet giants have done. That's what we're hearing. All these incumbents try to do is to put data. We heard this from Coca-Cola yesterday, we're putting data at the core of our company and what we're enabling through automation and other activities, uh, digital, you know, a company. And so, you know, can these, can these giants, these hundred plus year old giants compete? I think they can because they don't have to invent AI. They can work with companies like UI path and embed AI into their business and focused on, on what they do best. Now, of course, Google and Amazon and Facebook and Microsoft there may be going to have the best AI in the world. But I think ultimately all these companies are on a giant collision course, but the market is so huge that I think there's a lot of, >>There's a tremendous amount of opportunity. I think one of the things that was exciting about talking to one, the female CIO of Coca-Cola yesterday, a hundred plus old organization, and she came in with a very transformative, very different mindset. So when you see these, I always appreciate when I say legacy institutions like Coca-Cola or Merck who was on yesterday, blue cross blue shield who's on today, embracing change, cultural change going. We can't do things the way we used to do, because there are competitors in that review mirror who are smaller, they're more nimble, they're faster. They're going to be, they're going to take our customers away from us. We have to deliver this exceptional customer and employee experience. And Coca-Cola is a great example of one that really came in with CA brought in a disruptor in order to align digital with the CEO's thoughts and processes and organization. These are >>Highly capable companies. We heard from the head of finance at, at applied materials today. He was also coming on. I was quite, I mean, this is a applied materials is really strong company. They're talking about a 20 plus billion dollar company with $120 billion market cap. They supply semiconductor equipment and they're a critical component of the semiconductor supply chain. And we all know what's going on in semiconductors today with a huge shortage. So they're a really important company, but I was impressed with, uh, their finance leaders vision on how they're transforming the company. And it was not like, you know, 10 years out, these were not like aspirational goals. This is like 20, 19, 20, 22. Right. And, and really taking costs out of the business, driving new innovation. And, and it's, it was it's, it's refreshing to me Lisa, to see CFOs, you know, typically just bottom line finance focused on these industry transformations. Now, of course, at the end of the day, it's all about the bottom line, but they see technology as a way to get there. In fact, he put technology right in the middle of his stack. I want to ask him about that too. I actually want to challenge him a little bit on it because he had that big Hadoop elephant in the middle and this as an elephant in the room. And that picture, >>The strategy though, that applied materials had, it was very well thought out, but it was also to your point designed to create outcomes year upon year upon year. And I was looking at some of the notes. I took that in year one, alone, 274 automations in production. That's a lot, 150,000 in annual work hours automated 124 use cases they tackled in one year. >>So I want to, I want to poke at that a little bit too. And I, and I did yesterday with some guests. I feel like, well, let's see. So, um, I believe it was, uh, I forget what guests it was, but she said we don't put anything forward that doesn't hit the income statement. Do you remember that? Yes, it was Chevron because that was pushing her. I'm like, well, you're not firing people. Right. And we saw from IDC data today, only 13% of organizations are saying, or, or, or the organizations at 13% of the value was from reduction in force. And a lot of that was probably in plan anyway, and they just maybe accelerated it. So they're not getting rid of headcount, but they're counting hours saved. So that says to me, there's gotta be an normally or often CFOs say, well, it's that soft dollars because we're redeploying folks. But she said, no, it hits the income statement. So I don't, I want to push a little bit and see how they connect the dots, because if you're going to save hours, you're going to apply people to new work. And so either they're generating revenue or cutting costs somewhere. So, so there's another layer that I want to appeal to understand how that hits the income state. >>Let's talk about some of that IDC data. They announced a new white paper this morning sponsored by UI path. And I want to get your perspectives on some of the stats that they talked about. They were painting a positive picture, an optimistic picture. You know, we can't talk about automation without talking about the fear of job loss. They've been in a very optimistic picture for the actual gains over a few year period. What are your thoughts about that? Especially when we saw that stat 41% slowed hiring. >>Yeah. So, well, first of all, it's a sponsored study. So, you know, and of course the conferences, so it's going to be, be positive, but I will say this about IDC. IDC is a company I would put, you know, forest they're similar. They do sponsored research and they're credible. They don't, they, they have the answer to their audience, so they can't just out garbage. And so it has to be defensible. So I give them credit there that they won't just take whatever the vendor wants them to write and then write it. I've used to work there. And I, and I know the culture and there's a great deal of pride in being able to defend what you do. And if the answer doesn't come out, right, sorry, this is the answer. You know, you could pay a kill fee or I dunno how they handle it today. >>But, but, so my point is I think, and I know the people who did that study, many of them, and I think they're pretty credible. I, I thought by the way, you, to your 41% point. So the, the stat was 13% are gonna reduce head count, right? And then there were two in the middle and then 41% are gonna reduce or defer hiring in the future. And this to me, ties into the Erik Brynjolfsson and, and, and, uh, and, and McAfee work. Andy McAfee work from MIT who said, look, initially actually made back up. They said, look at machines, have always replaced humans. Historically this was in their book, the second machine age and what they said was, but for the first time in history, machines are replacing humans with cognitive functions. And this is sort of, we've never seen this before. It's okay. That's cool. >>And their, their research suggests that near term, this is going to be a negative economic impact, sorry, negative impact on jobs and salaries. And we've, we've generally seen this, the average salary, uh, up until recently has been flat in the United States for years and somewhere in the mid fifties. But longterm, their research shows that, and this is consistent. I think with IDC that it's going to help hiring, right? There's going to be a boost buddy, a net job creator. And there's a, there's a, there's a chasm you've got across, which is education training and skill skillsets, which Brynjolfsson and McAfee focused on things that humans can do that machines can't. And you have this long list and they revisited every year. Like they used to be robots. Couldn't walk upstairs. Well, you see robots upstairs all the time now, but it's empathy, it's creativity. It's things like that. >>Contact that humans are, are much better at than machines, uh, even, even negotiations. And, and so, so that's, those are skills. I don't know where you get those skills. Do you teach those and, you know, MBA class or, you know, there's these. So their point is there needs to be a new thought process around education, public policy, and the like, and, and look at it. You can't protect the past from the future, right? This is inevitable. And we've seen this in terms of economic activity around the world countries that try to protect, you know, a hundred percent employment and don't let competition, they tend to fall behind competitively. You know, the U S is, is not of that category. It's an open market. So I think this is inevitable. >>So a lot about upskilling yesterday, and the number of we talked with PWC about, for example, about what they're doing and a big focus on upscaling. And that was part of the IDC data that was shared this morning. For example, I'll share a stat. This was a survey of 518 people. 68% of upscaled workers had higher salaries than before. They also shared 57% of upskilled workers had higher roles and their enterprises then before. So some, again, two point it's a sponsored study, so it's going to be positive, but there, there was a lot of discussion of upskilling yesterday and the importance on that education, because to your point, we can't have one without the other. You can't give these people access to these tools and not educate them on how to use it and help them help themselves become more relevant to the organization. Get rid of the mundane tasks and be able to start focusing on more strategic business outcome, impacting processes. >>We talked yesterday about, um, I use the example of, of SAP. You, you couldn't have predicted SAP would have won the ERP wars in the early to mid 1990s, but if you could have figured out who was going to apply ERP to their businesses, you know what, you know, manufacturing companies and these global firms, you could have made a lot of money in the stock market by, by identifying those that were going to do that. And we used to say the same thing about big data, and the reason I'm bringing all this up is, you know, the conversations with PWC, Deloitte and others. This is a huge automation, a huge services opportunity. Now, I think the difference between this and the big data era, which is really driven by Hadoop is it was big data was so complicated and you had a lack of data scientists. >>So you had to hire these services firms to come in and fill those gaps. I think this is an enormous services opportunity with automation, but it's not because the software is hard to get to work. It's all around the organizational processes, rethinking those as people process technology, it's about the people in the process, whereas Hadoop and the big data era, it was all about the tech and they would celebrate, Hey, this stuff works great. There are very few companies really made it through that knothole to dominate as we've seen with the big internet giants. So you're seeing all these big services companies playing in this market because as I often say, they like to eat at the trough. I know it's kind of a pejorative, but it's true. So it's huge, huge market, but I'm more optimistic about the outcomes for a broader audience with automation than I was with, you know, big data slash Hadoop, because I think the software as much, as much more adoptable, easier to use, and you've got the cloud and it's just a whole different ball game. >>That's certainly what we heard yesterday from Chevron about the ease of use and that you should be able to see results and returns very quickly. And that's something too that UI path talks about. And a lot of their marketing materials, they have a 96, 90 7% retention rate. They've done a great job building their existing customers land and expand as we talked about yesterday, a great use case for that, but they've done so by making things easy, but hearing that articulated through the voice of their customers, fantastic validation. >>So, you know, the cube is like a little, it's like a interesting tip of the spirits, like a probe. And I will tell you when I, when we first started doing the cube and the early part of the last decade, there were three companies that stood out. It was Splunk service now and Tableau. And the reason they stood out is because they were able to get customers to talk about how great they were. And the light bulb went off for us. We were like, wow, these are three companies to watch. You know, I would tell all my wall street friends, Hey, watch these companies. Yeah. And now you see, you know, with Frank Slootman at snowflake, the war, the cat's out of the bag, everybody knows it's there. And they're expecting, you know, great things. The stock is so priced to perfection. You could argue, it's overpriced. >>The reason I'm bringing this up is in terms of customer loyalty and affinity and customer love. You're getting it here. Absolutely this ecosystem. And the reason I bring that up is because there's a lot of questions in the, in the event last night, it was walking around. I saw a couple of wall street guys who came up to me and said, Hey, I read your stuff. It was good. Let's, let's chat. And there's a lot of skepticism on, on wall street right now about this company. Right? And to me, that's, that's good news for you. Investors who want to do some research, because the words may be not out. You know, they, they, they gotta prove themselves here. And to me, the proof is in the customer and the lifetime value of that customer. So, you know, again, we don't give stock advice. We, we kind of give fundamental observations, but this stock, I think it's trading just about 50. >>Now. I don't think it's going to go to 30, unless the market just tanks. It could have some, you know, if that happens, okay, everything will go down. But I actually think, even though this is a richly priced stock, I think the future of this company is very bright. Obviously, if they continue to execute and we're going to hear from the CEO, right? People don't know Daniel, Denise, right? They're like, who is this guy? You know, he started this company and he's from Eastern Europe. And we know he's never have run a public company before, so they're not diving all in, you know? And so that to me is something that really pay attention to, >>And we can unpack that with him later today. And we've got some great customers on the program. You mentioned Uber's here. Spotify is here, applied materials. I feel like I'm announcing something on Saturday night. Live Uber's here. Spotify is here. All right, Dave, looking forward to a great action packed today. We're going to dig more into this and let's get going. Shall we let's do it. All right. For David Dante, I'm Lisa Martin. This is the cube live in Las Vegas. At the Bellagio. We are coming to you presenting UI path forward for come back right away. Our first guest comes up in just a second.

>>from the Cube Studios in Palo Alto and Boston connecting with thought leaders all around the world. This is a cube conversation. Hi, I'm stupid, man. And welcome to a cube conversation. I'm coming to you from our Boston area studio, and we're gonna be talking about the networking giant. So, uh, joining me is the first time on the program some of the members been on and the cover launch of Pensando so vivid Jane, his CTO and co founder of Pensando Bipin thanks so much for joining us. >>Thank you. It was very nice talking to you. >>All right, so in a big theme we've been talking about for a number of years now is multi cloud. And, you know, I go back and think about you know, that the concept of cloud and even, you know, I've been around long enough You think about the and one of the challenges you look at is well, security is always a challenge. The other things network bandwidth is not infinite. The speed of light has not been solved, though you know, help us understand is you know the first I guess give our audience a little bit of your background. As I said, anybody in the networking world knows less team, though. Tell us, you know, have you been on the journey with them for all of that? Or And you know what brought you and Sandy? >>Yes. Yes. Um, I mean, I've been in the journey with the team since 2000 and six, so it's pretty long, I would say 14 years now, and it's been tremendous. Um uh, at heart, I'm an engineer who takes, you know, Brian brilliant things and taking upon challenges. And I've got multiple startups before this been in a new era, The more startups before that. And of course, you know, they were not experience more independent startups. And, you know, all through the course, I have gained appreciation for, like, you know, starting all the way from silicon to build a distributed systems and a u io all the way up to the fully consumable, you know, system. So I I totally understand the the angle I need to look at this time in a holistic manner. Having contributed to Cisco, UCS of and Nexus products on. Before joining pensando, I was, um I was contributing with my own open source container networking project, which is quite exciting to see How do you evangelize, You know, my own my own core, and that was fun. And that's where I come from, But, uh, but I I'm I'm a software engineer. To start off it started contributing to a six, then started going into the application world with containers trying to pull a container networking with, Ah, we did a server product with Cisco UCS and on and pretty much all over the stack with respect, participation. So that's my background. Um, but it's being exciting to consider what's next for me. And I was largely trying to see >>so, so definitive, actually, if I If I could jump in there, right, you know, I think back the UCS it was, You know, some of those ways I gather virtualization had been around for quite a number of years at that point. But, you know, how do you optimize it you're in. How do you transform infrastructure toe live for those environments, though? You know, UCS, You know, remember, people get back saying, you know, Cisco getting into services like Well, they are. They are because they're changing that compute model really caught that. You know, Cisco led that way. If the urge instructor, so many things you talked about that we'll get to later in the interview open for station. When I look out today, you know infrastructure's paint a lot and cloud obviously, is a huge impact, but also the application. So help us understand kind of the the waves that were writing together And, you know, what was it that you know in Santo decided to build in order to meet what you know, the customers of a require >>Um So I think, you know, going back to the UCS common that you had We started off thinking, for example, what are what were the challenges with respect is scaling out the deployment of servers and we quickly realized that manageability is number one challenge on. And of course, you know when we speak about manageability, it comes down to the underpinnings of what you're building. Are you Are you able to see the entire infrastructure together, or are you still seeing those big pieces? And that's when I think UCS was born to say that Look, we need to bring everything together that could be consumed in a holistic manner. And for that you have to have all those components there are There are somewhat independent to be consumed as a unified thing. And which is why I think it was a unified computing system. UCS. Um and then I think, you know, and Sanders a journey that takes it to probably not just that concept, but in general, the the challenges and the disruptions that we're seeing to the next level. So, I mean, just to summarize, I would say we started off looking at all the disruptions that are happening in the industry. And there are many of those I'm happy to talk about, which means we looked at, uh and then we looked at What are the consumption models that people are largely, you know, finding it very appealing these days because the days in which you're going to write a spirit to do something is still pretty old you want to be able to consume and most this after consumable way, How can we build, you know, how can you build systems that are programmable in the field? Those kind of things? The consumption model reliability software is the friendly factor there, and highly appealing to you guys and all their last one. You know, at least we also we also wanted to be really heard in the game, competitiveness wise. So those were like the the overarching set of things there that we started to think about, like, what descriptions are we going to solve, um, and how the consumption model needs to be for or ah, for the future of infrastructure. And how can we get that key, which is which is far ahead and better than anything that exists out there? So that's where we started to look at. Let's bring something which is bigger B sphere and and something. Even if we have the possibility of feeling it. Let's go ahead and they're doing their anything. >>Yeah, and absolutely. There's been so much discussion over the last decade or so about about software's eating the world and what's going on there yet you know, your your team mates. It's a lot of times it's been the chip set. There have been some huge ripples in the industry, you know, major acquisitions by some of the big, disruptive companies out there. Apple made a silicon acquisition, you know, everybody paid and that will have. You can't talk about disruption today without talking about Amazon. And, of course, when Amazon bought Annapurna Labs, you know, those of us looking at the Enterprise and the clouds base was like, Keep an eye on this. And absolutely, it's been something over the last year or so now, where we've seen Amazon roll things out and, of course, a critical component of what Amazon's doing from outposts. So with that as the stage there, you talked about wanting to be interesting leading, you know Amazon, you know, is really sick, and it's setting the bar that everyone is measured against. And when I look at the solution pensando, the kind of best comparable analogy that we've seen is, you know, look at what Nitro chip can do. This is an alternative for all of the other 1000 for customers that might not want to get them from Amazon. Is that a fair comparison? And how would you line up what founder is doing compared to what Amazon has done there? >>Um, so you know, what you've seen in the Amazon announcement really is possible. Amazon is a great benchmark to beat eso No make mistakes. We are very happy to say that, you know, we are We are doing by comfortably so But then, you know, Amazon is more than more than just the just the chips that are that they are building. I mean, what you consume is what they're building and underneath the engines are really part up by by the nicety off all these things that they're very, um, having said that, you know, And Sandra was consisting off both the you know, it's recognized us as a team which has been in traditionally building chips. But yet I think you know, the the Iot or the the previous venture from Mpls Team was somewhat of an eye opening as to how bringing things together is much more value in op, ex and and simplifying things is a huge, huge value compared to just putting performance and those things. So why this is important? That is another aspect which is important in trying to simplify things and make it consumable like software. And Sandra itself has probably, you know, I would say, Ah, good chunk, like about 60% of people in software team and not the, you know, basic harbor t This is not to say that, you know, we, you know, we are under emphasizing one versus the other. Software is a bigger beast when you start trying to build all those programs on a programmable and doing that here and start to roll out those applications on. So that's why I think the emphasis on software is there. Having said that, you know, it's the software that runs the data path pipeline. There's also a layer of software that we're building that can help manage all you know, all the product in a more cohesive manner and unified. >>Okay, that's Ah, thank you for laying that out. You mentioned you've got some background and open for definitely an area where, for a number of years, you know, Amazon has not exactly, uh, open source. Not exactly been a strength for AWS. They have put a lot of effort. They've done some president IRS over the last couple of years. >>And >>how do you see open source fitting into the space? What is I kind of the philosophy of pensando when it comes to open source. And where do you see it playing in the You know, this network piece of the multi cloud. >>Yeah, no, I think it's It's ah, it's a squared, relevant in a way that you know of the cloud native movement on how applications with very Onda normalization of AP eyes across multiple clouds. Israel, We are all seeing the benefits offered. And I think that that trend will continue and which is all driven through open source Ah, you know, community that exist in, you know, in the heart of the word. So personally for me, I think I learned a whole lot of things in the open source community. You know, the importance off evangelizing whatever you're working on, the reason to have convinced other people about contributing into what you're working on on. Frankly, I also learned how difficult it is to make revenues in an open source based part of that strategy. So I think you know that those were the things that I got away from it when I was doing my own open source project of container networking. Um, but at the same time, pensando, uh, you know, we have to make sure that we are 100% aligned with anything that's happening in open source. Never replicated, Um, anything that might be that might be happening in open source instead tried to make people use those things in the best possible way and in the most efficient way and the easiest possible way to use those. So our strategy largely is that, you know, embrace open source which exists are there from an infrastructure point of view, we are collaborating and communicating with less of the users are Hello. I think we're going to standardize most of things we're looking in before community. So our stands largely is that, you know, if we are building a programmable platform than the community is what is gonna driver and we are very much working towards a step by step, of course, trying to get through, you know, a stable state where we could we could not just empower people who are who are taking up the open source efforts which are going on. But at the same time, we can also contribute our program are programs into the open source community and defining the right abstractions into into the community. Um, because we came out of stealth pretty recently, you'll start seeing that and helping those activity as Well, >>excellent. Well, you know the launch of Pensando you had a phenomenal lineup. Not only you know, John Chambers obviously has the relationship with your theme, but you know, oh, am partners of Hewlett Packard, Enterprise and IBM, as well as the Marquis of Goldman Sachs. Things look a little bit different in the first half of 2020 and then they didn't end of 29 teams. So, you know, curious, You know that the global pandemic, the rippling financial implications, you know, what does that mean? The pensando. How has that impacted conversations that you're having with your >>Well, one thing I know at a broader level, let me cover, um, where things are heading. And in that sense, you know, I see that network and the infrastructure in general cloud infrastructure networking it's going to become. And we have realized it's this during during during recent early 20 twenties that that is going to be very important to have the have a new underpinning infrastructure that is not just working efficiently, securely, but is, you know, highly cost effective and very high performance, you know, ranging from people who are trying to connect from home to people who are trying to use videoconferencing and people who are going to be more and more use cloud based services even to order simple of the data being, you know, going to source for so network will become essential, you know, essential element for four things as we go forward. And we do see that being embraced by our customers and and things where we were trying to communicate that, you know, look, you will need performance and cost benefits are becoming more and more real Now. It's like, oh, things that we were having things in the pipeline for us. We need to work on that now. And the reason is because the things that we anticipated the demand increase, which is gonna happen over the fear of years, is happening literally in a few months. And so that is what we see. We are definitely, you know, very well poised to take advantage of their of their demand for sure. But also the fact that you know it needs to be done super efficiently. And so I think we are. You know, we are right. Well, I would say, you know, situated to be able to take advantage of start. >>Yeah, absolutely. You know, one thing you can't control as a company is you know what the global situation is when you come out of stealth and, you know, move through some of those early phases, you know, you've been part of You said a number of startups you've been part of been in give us a little bit of the inside baseball of, you know, being part of Rondo. You know, any stories on a little some of the ups and downs on the multi year journey to get where you are today? >>Definitely. I think. You know, um, minutes aren't good. They are largely an execution play. Relatively independent startup is is going to be about you know, how we cracked the overall market market fit and, ah, on execution, Of course, on deal with maybe in a competition in a different way, of course, like maybe big companies are our great partners. At the same time, you have to navigate that. So the overall the overall landscape in Spain and forces forces not is it's quite different. We can be much more border than we are independent company In trying to disrupt almost anything because we don't have any point of view to define per se. We do exactly, You know, what could be the most disruptive way, too, to potentially benefit the users on day? That's a big, you know, big change. I would say, um, we are being but paranoid as well at the same time, impractical to look at. You know how how we could navigate this situation in a very practical may. And the journey off, often independent startup is, you know, personally, for me, this is this is my fourth in different and start and best off. Off off, all independent. Once, I would stay largely because the kind of tradition that we're getting being an independent company is so huge. I'm just concerned about those things. But what We're really trying to trying to ensure that, you know, we can't get our stuff, but I want you and we started. >>Excellent. Guess what? One of the other things about being a startup is You know what you know adjustments You need to make along the way. So I'm curious. As you know, you've gone to some of your early customers. Any feedback or adjustments in some of the use cases or, you know, things that you've learned along the way that you can share. >>Um, fundamentally, at a base level, we haven't shifted from what we started off. We look at disruptions on on how consumption models are going to be changing, how speeds and feeds are gonna become important because, you know, because most law is going to be almost operating, how we how we deliver things into and containers are going to be a primary, you know, vehicle to deliver and build applications. So we recognize those disruptions, and we haven't changed, But normally from those disruptions that we wanted people after her. Uh, but at the same time, I think, you know, as we went and socialize our ideas and on architecture and designs with customers, we realized that that they are giving us lots more feedback on work all we could do and ah, and starting to become like we could take on different segments of market and not just one. So why stick ourselves to the data center power? Why not work on something on edge, blur wine or wine are real solutions for five G where latency and and performance is super crucial. Why don't take up on, you know, branch that use cases. So there are many things that are opening up. Um, and largely the you know, the shift. Or I would say the the inclination of what we should change versus not is happening with respect to where our customers are driving us. And and it is very important to make sure that you know the users of our lives Articulating all of the shift happens as opposed to, uh, you know, as opposed to anything else. We listen to them like super, super carefully, uh, and at the same time trying to make sure that we not only meet their means for you there their demands. So, um, definitely, you know, from the from the overall landscape of things, we are starting to get a lot more than what we are capture, which is good news For the same time, we're trying to also, uh, take on one part. I'm you know, >>all right, Vivienne, I can't let you off the hook as the cto without talking a little bit about that. You know, I think earlier in my career there was the old discussion and said you know, we should have started it, you know, a year or two ago. But, you know, we didn't. So we should start it today with changing pace of technology. You know, I've always said, you know, if I could I'd rather wait a year because I could take the next generation. I can take advantage of all these other things, but I can't wait, because then I'd never ship any things that I need to start now, Give us a little bit, you know, Look out in the future. How is your architecture designed to be able to take advantage of all the wonders coming with five G and everything there, Um, and anything that we should be looking at, You know, through the next kind of 12 18 months on the roadmap that you could share >>your Ah, yes. So, um, I would first of all say that we didn't build a part of, actually, what we build was a platform on which we can build multiple products. And we started we started off going there because we thought that, you know, the the platform that we're building is capable of capable of doing a lot more things than than one use case that we start off with. And so, to that point, I would say that yes. I mean, he started focusing on one product initially on the possibilities off. Trying to take it to multiple segments is is normally very much there. But we are already, you know, having those conversations to see what is the core set of use cases that we could we could get into for different segments. Besides the data center, you know, public Private Data center, you're looking at edge. We're looking by the looking at, Yeah, you mentioned this is as well as the, you know, storage and conversion infrastructure. So I would say that the food of all those things that we're starting to engage is going to start showing up in next 18 months. I could actually I think we are very well boys to take advantage of what we have. The hardware that we're shipping is going to be 100% compatible with four programs, but I don't those. So that is that is lot more possibilities are interesting. More use cases as people. The software's architecture that we have built is very extensible as well. Eh so we believe that. You know, uh, we believe that we can normally satisfy those use cases, but we're starting to you get into those things now, which will start to show up in and actually useful products of unusable for us with customer testimonials and then maybe 12 to 18 months from now. All >>right, well, thank you so much. It's great to catch up with. You really appreciate you coming on. >>Thank you to Because they're talking to you. And, you know, I appreciate your time. >>All right, I'm stew minimum. And be sure to check out the cube dot net for all the coverage. Go see the launch that we did. So in the second half of 2019. Thank you for watching you. Yeah, Yeah, yeah, yeah.

>>from Las >>Vegas. It's the cues covering quality security Conference 2019 by quality. Hey, welcome back already, Jefe Rick here with the Cube were in Las Vegas at the Bellagio at the Kuala Security Conference. It's the 19th year they've been doing this. It's our first year here, and we're excited to be here. And it's great to have a veteran who's been in this space for so long to give a little bit more of historical perspective as to what happened in the past. Where we are now, what can we look forward to in the future? So coming right off its keynote is Felipe Quarto, the chairman and CEO of Qualities felt great. See, >>Thank you. Same. Same same for me. >>Absolutely. So you touched on so many great topics in your conversation about kind of the shifts of of modern computing, from the mainframe to the mini. We've heard it over and over and over. But the key message was really about architecture. If you don't have the right architecture, you can't have the right solution. How is the evolution of architects of architectures impacted your ability to deliver security solutions for your clients >>So no That's a very good question. And in fact, you know what happened is that we started in 1999 with the vision that we could use exactly like Salesforce. They'll come this nascent Internet technologies and apply that to security. And s and Marc Benioff applied that essentially changing the way serum was essentially used and deployed in enterprises and with a fantastic success as we know. So for us, the I can't say today that 19 years later the vision was right. It took a significant longer because the security people are not really, uh, warm at the idea of Senate Lee, uh, having the data interview which was in place that they could not control. And the i t people, they didn't really like a toll. The fact that certainly they were not in control anymore of the infrastructure. So whether a lot of resistance, I wever, we always I always believe, absolutely believe that the cloud will be the architecture to go back. A lot of people make the confusion That was part of the confusion that for people it was a cloud, that kind of magical things someplace would you don't know where and when I was trying to explain, and I've been saying that so many times that well, you need to look at the club like a computer that can architecture which distribute the computing power for more efficiently than the previous one, which was Clyde Server, which was distributing the computing power for better then, of course, the mainframes and minicomputers. And so if you look at their architecture's so the mainframe were essentially big data centers in in Fort Knox, like setting private lines of communication to damn terminal. And of course, security was not really an issue then, because it's a gritty was building by the IBM said company simply with the minicomputer, which then was, instead of just providing the computing power to the large, very large company could afford it. Now 70 the minicomputer through the advance and say, My conductor technology could reduce the food frank. And then I'll bring the company power to the labs and to the departments. And that was then the new era of the dish, your equipment, the primes, that General et cetera, Uh, and then conservative. So what client service did again? If you look at the architecture, different architectures now, incidently servers LAN or the Internet network and the PC, and that was now allowing to distribute the computing power to the people in the company. And so, but then you needed to so everybody. Nobody paid attention to security because then you were inside of the enterprise. So it starts inside the wars of the castle if you prefer. So nobody paid attention to that. It was more complex because now you have multiple actors instead of having one IBM or one desert equipped. But its center said, You have the people manufacturing the servers. The software that that obeys the PC is an unannounced excellently there was the complexity increased significantly, but nobody paid attention to security because it was not needed. Until suddenly we realized that viruses could come in through the front door being installed innocent. You were absolutely, absolutely compromised. And of course, that's the era of the anti VARS, which came in and then because of the need to communicate more more. Now, Senator, you could not stay only in your castle. You need to go and communicate your customers to your suppliers, et cetera, et cetera. And now you were starting to up and up your your castle to the word and a low now so that the bad guy could come in and start to steal your information. And that's what the new era of the far wall. Now you make sure that those who come in But of course, that was a bit naive because there were so many other doors and windows that people could come in, you know, create tunnels and these and over that transfer, insure your custard. Because the day I was becoming more, more rich and more more important, more value. So whatever this value, of course, the bad guys are coming in to try to sell it. And that was that new era off a win. Each of attention to security. The problem is being is because you have so many different actors. There was nothing really central there. Now. I just suddenly had Maura and more solutions, and now absolutely like 800 vendors. Boarding on security and boating on anything is shortly at the end of the day because you put more more weight, and then you also increasing complexity in all these different solutions. Didn't they need to talk together? So you have a better context, but they weren't designed to talk together. So now you need to put other system where they could communicate that information. So you complicated, complicated, complicated the solution. And that's the problem of today. So now cloud computing comes in and again. If you look at the architecture of cloud computing, it's again Data centers, which not today, have become, thanks to the technology, having infinite, almost company power and storage capabilities. And like the previous data center, there are much more fracture because you just once gave and they become essentially a bit easier to secure. And by the way, it's your fewer vendors now doing that. And then, of course, the access can be controlled better on then. Of course, the second component is that the land and the one it's now the Internet and the Internet, of course, eyes the Web communications extremely cheap, and it brings you in every place on the planet and soon in Morse. Why no so and so now. The issue today is that still the Internet needs to be secure, and today how are you going to secure the Internet? Which is very important thing today because you see today that you can spoof your image, you can spoof your website. You could attack the Deanna's who? Yes, there's a lot of things that the bad guy still do in fact, themselves that ever is the Internet, of course, to access everywhere, so they take advantage of it. So now this is obviously, you know, I created the trustworthy movement many years ago to try to really address that. Unfortunately, qualities was too small, and it was not really our place. Today there's all the Google, the Facebook, the big guys which contract their business, depend on the Internet. Now need to do that and I upload will be been criticised very much so. Google was the 1st 1 to essentially have a big initiative. I was trying to Bush SSL, which everybody understands secret encryption, if you prefer and to everybody. So they did a fantastic job, really push it. So now today's society is becoming like okay, it's a said. You want to have this a settle on your communication, but that's not enough. And now they're pushing and some people criticize them, and I absolutely applaud them to say we need to change the Internet protocols which were created at the time when security you were transferring information from universities. And so for these was a hay days, you know, if everything was fine, there's no bad guys. No, The heebie day is if you like arranging that everybody was free, Everybody was up in fantastic. Okay. And now, of course, today, these poor cold this to be a graded, which is a lot of work. But today I really believe that if you put Google Amazon Facebook altogether and they can fix these internet for records so we could forget about the spoofing and we forget about all these fishing and all this thing this is there responsibility. So and then you have now on the other side, you have now a very intelligent devices from in a very simple sensors and, you know, too sophisticated devices the phone, et cetera, and Maura and more Maur devices interconnected and for people to understand what is being so This is the new environment. And whether we always believe is that if you adopt an architecture which is exactly which fits which is similar, then we could instead of bolting security in, we can also have the build security in voting signal on. We could be in security in. And we have been very proud of the work that went down with my car itself, which we announce, in fact, reluctantly recently, very recently, that, in fact, our agent technologies now it's banned erred in Microsoft. So we have been security with Microsoft in So from a security perspective today, if you go to the Microsoft as your security center, you click on a link, and now you have the view. If you're in tar, is your environment courtesy of record? It's agent. You click on a second link, and now you have the view of your secret cameras. First year, crazy of the same qualities agent. And then you click on the third inning with us. Nothing to do with quite it's It's old Mike ourself you create your playbook and Yuri mediates The security in this environment has become quickly, quick, nothing to in store, nothing to update, and the only thing you bring. All your policies saying I don't want to have this kind of machine exposed on the Internet on what this is what I want and you can continuously owed it essentially in real time, right? So, as you can see, totally different than putting boxes and boxes and so many things. And then I think for you, so very big game changer. So the analogy that I want you that I give to people it's so people understand that paradigm shift. It's already happening in the way we secure our homes. You put sensors everywhere, your cameras of detection, approximately detection. Essentially, when somebody tried to enter your home all that day, that's continuously pumped up into an incident response system. And then from your phone again across the Internet, you can change the temperature of your rooms. You can do it. You can see the person who knocks on the door. You can see its face. You can open the door, close the door, the garage door. You can do all of that remotely and automatically. And then, if there's a burglar, then in your house, who's raking immediately that the incidence response system called the cops or the farmer shirt? If good far. And that's the new paradigm. So security has to follow that product, and then you have interesting of the problem today that we see with all the current security systems incidents Original system developed for a positive force. Positive and negative are the enemy reedy off security? Because if you have forced positive, you cannot automate the response because then you're going to try to respond to something that is that true? So you are. You could create a lot of damage. And the example. I give you that today in the if you leave your dog in your house and if you don't have the ability the dog would bark would move, and then the senses will say intruder alert. So that's become the force. Pretty. So how do you eliminate that? By having more context, you can eliminate automatically again this false positives, like now you, I think a fingerprint of fuel dog and of his voice. And now the camera and this and the sensors on the voice can pick up and say, Oh, this is my dog. So then, of course, you eliminate that forces right now, if if another dog managed to return your home through a window which was open or whatever for so what do we know? A window was open, but you know you can't necessarily fix it on the dog weapons, then you will know it. Sze, not yours. So that's what securities avoiding such a huge sea of change which is happening because of all that injured that end today Companies today after leverages nuclear technology which are coming, there's so much new to college. What people understand is where's that technology coming from? How come silently we have doctors cybernetics a ll these solutions today which are available at almost no cost because it's all open source So what happened is that which is unlike the enterprise software which were Maur the oracle, et cetera, the manufacturer of that software today is in fact the cloud bubbly club Sanders, the Amazon, the Google, the Facebook, the macro self which shouldn't be needed to have to develop new technology so they could scale at the size of the planet. And that very shrewdly realized that if I keep the technology for me, I'm essentially going to imprison. The technology is not going to evolve. And then I need other technologies that I'm not developing. So they realize that they totally changed that open source movement, which in the early days of happens offers more controlled by people who had more purity. If you prefer no commercial interests, it was all for the good, off the civilization and humankind. And they say they're licensing Modern was very complex or the simplified all of that. And then Nelson and you had all this technology coming at you extremely fast. And we have leverage that technology, which was not existing in the early days when when such was not come started with the eunuchs, the lamb, pork or what's called leaks. Apache mice Fewer than Petri limiting Announcer Tiel This technology, like elasticsearch, was coming. We index today now back and three trillion points or less excerpts, clusters, and we return information in 100 minutes seconds and then on the calf campus, which is again something that open source way Baker Now today, five million messages a day and on and on and on. So the word is changing. And of course, if that's what it's called now, the dish transformation now enterprises to be essentially a joy to reach out to the customers better and Maur, they need to embrace the cloud as well, >>right? I >>do retool their entire right infrastructure, and it's such A. It's a huge sea of change, and that's what we see even the market of security just to finish now, evolving in a totally different ways than the way it has Bean, which in the positive market of security was essentially the market for the enterprise. And I'm bringing you might my board, my board, towns, traditions that you have to go in installed and make work. And then you had the the anti virus, essentially for all the consumers and so forth. So today, when we see the marketplace, which is fragmenting in four different segments, which is one is the large enterprise which are going to essentially constantly data start moving to the transformation. Leveraging absolutely develops, which isn't becoming the new buyer. And, of course, so they could improve their I t. For to reach out to more customers and more effectively than the current providers. As I mentioned earlier, which are building security in the knife, you use them. You don't have to worry about infrastructure about how many servers you need, amenities. It's all done for you and something about security. The third market is going to be in an emergence of a new generation of managed Grannie service providers which are going to take all these companies. We don't have enough resources. Okay, Don't worry. I'm going to help you, you know, duel that digital transformation and help you build the security. And then there's a totally new market of all these devices, including the phone, et cetera, which connects and that you essentially I want to all these i, o t and I ot devices that are or now connected, which, of course, present security risk. So I need to also secure them. But you also need to be able to also not only check their health to make sure that okay, because you cannot send people read anymore. So you tournament simply on security. If you find that that phone is compromised, you need to make to be able to make immediate decisions about Should I kill that phone? Destroyed everything in it. Should I Now don't let that phone connect any more to my networks. What should I do? Should I, by the way, detected that they've done with the application which another loud Because what we see is more and more companies are giving tablets to their users and in doing so now, today's the company property so they could say, OK, you use these tablets and you're not allowed to do that so you could check all of that and then automatically. But that again requires full visibility in what you are. And that's why just to finish, we make a big decision about the few three months ago that were We build the ability for any company on the planet to automatically build their targetable itis it eventually, which nobody knows what they have. That old networking environment. You don't know what connects to have the view of the known and the unknown totally free of charge across on premise and pawned crowd continues Web obligations or to united devices to come. So now that's the cornerstone of securities with that totally free. So and then, of course, you have all these additional solutions, and we're being very scalable up in platform where we can take data, a passel data as well. So we really need to be and want to be good citizen here because security at the end of it, it's almost like we used to say, like the doctors, you have to have that kind of feeble court oath that you can do no arms. So if you keep if you try to take the data that you have, keep it with you, that's all.

>> from Cambridge, Massachusetts. It's the Cube covering M I T. Chief data officer and information quality Symposium 2019. Brought to you by Silicon Angle Media. >> Welcome back to M I. T. Everybody. This is the Cube. The leader in live coverage. My name is David wanted. I'm here with my co host, Paul Gill, in this day to coverage of the M I t cdo I Q conference. A lot of acronym stands for M I. T. Of course, the great institution. But Chief Data officer information quality event is his 13th annual event. Lars to Maria's here is the managing partner of Brass Rat Capital. Cool name Lars. Welcome to the Cube. Great. Very much. Glad I start with a name brass around Capitol was That's >> rat is reference to the M I t school. Okay, Beaver? Well, he is, but the students call it a brass rat, and I'm third generation M i t. So it's just seen absolutely appropriate. That is a brass rods and capital is not a reference to money, but is actually referenced to the intellectual capital. They if you have five or six brass rats in the same company, you know, we Sometimes engineers arrive and they could do some things. >> And it Boy, if you put in some data data capital in there, you really explosions. We cause a few problems. So we're gonna talk about some new regulations that are coming down. New legislation that's coming down that you exposed me to yesterday, which is gonna have downstream implications. You get ahead of this stuff and understand it. You can really first of all, prepare, make sure you're in compliance, but then potentially take advantage for your business. So explain to us this notion of open government act. >> Um, in the last five years, six years or so, there's been an effort going on to increase the transparency across all levels of government. Okay, State, local and federal government. The first of federal government laws was called the the Open Data Act of 2014 and that was an act. They was acted unanimously by Congress and signed by Obama. They was taking the departments of the various agencies of the United States government and trying to roll up all the expenses into one kind of expense. This is where we spent our money and who got the money and doing that. That's what they were trying to do. >> Big picture type of thing. >> Yeah, big picture type thing. But unfortunately, it didn't work, okay? Because they forgot to include this odd word called mentalities. So the same departments meant the same thing. Data problem. They have a really big data problem. They still have it. So they're to G et o reports out criticizing how was done, and the government's gonna try and correct it. Then in earlier this year, there was another open government date act which said in it was signed by Trump. Now, this time you had, like, maybe 25 negative votes, but essentially otherwise passed Congress completely. I was called the Open as all capital O >> P E >> n Government Data act. Okay, and that's not been implemented yet. But there's live talking around this conference today in various Chief date officers are talking about this requirement that every single non intelligence defense, you know, vital protection of the people type stuff all the like, um, interior, treasury, transportation, those type of systems. If you produce a report these days, which is machine, I mean human readable. You must now in two years or three years. I forget the exact invitation date. Have it also be machine readable. Now, some people think machine riddle mil means like pdf formats, but no, >> In fact, what the government did is it >> said it must be machine readable. So you must be able to get into the reports, and you have to be able to extract out the information and attach it to the tree of knowledge. Okay, so we're all of sudden having context like they're currently machine readable, Quote unquote, easy reports. But you can get into those SEC reports. You pull out the net net income information and says its net income, but you don't know what it attaches to on the tree of knowledge. So, um, we are helping the government in some sense able, machine readable type reporting that weaken, do machine to machine without people being involved. >> Would you say the tree of knowledge You're talking about the constant >> man tick semantic tree of knowledge so that, you know, we all come from one concept like the human is example of a living thing living beast, a living Beeston example Living thing. So it also goes back, and they're serving as you get farther and farther out the tree, there's more distance or semantic distance, but you can attach it back to concept so you can attach context to the various data. Is this essentially metadata? That's what people call it. But if I would go over see sale here at M I t, they would turn around. They call it the Tree of Knowledge or semantic data. Okay, it's referred to his semantic dated, So you are passing not only the data itself, but the context that >> goes along with the data. Okay, how does this relate to the financial transparency? >> Well, Financial Transparency Act was introduced by representative Issa, who's a Republican out of California. He's run the government Affairs Committee in the House. He retired from Congress this past November, but in 2017 he introduced what's got referred to his H R 15 30 Um, and the 15 30 is going to dramatically change the way, um, financial regulators work in the United States. Um, it is about it was about to be introduced two weeks ago when the labor of digital currency stuff came up. So it's been delayed a little bit because they're trying to add some of the digital currency legislation to that law. >> A front run that Well, >> I don't know exactly what the remember soul coming out of Maxine Waters Committee. So the staff is working on a bunch of different things at once. But, um, we own g was asked to consult with them on looking at the 15 30 act and saying, How would we improve quote unquote, given our technical, you know, not doing policy. We just don't have the technical aspects of the act. How would we want to see it improved? So one of the things we have advised is that for the first time in the United States codes history, they're gonna include interesting term called ontology. You know what intelligence? Well, everyone gets scared by the word. And when I read run into people, they say, Are you a doctor? I said, no, no, no. I'm just a date. A guy. Um, but an intolerant tea is like a taxonomy, but it had order has important, and an ontology allows you to do it is ah, kinda, you know, giving some context of linking something to something else. And so you're able Thio give Maur information with an intolerant that you're able to you with a tax on it. >> Okay, so it's a taxonomy on steroids? >> Yes, exactly what? More flexible, >> Yes, but it's critically important for artificial intelligence machine warning because if I can give them until ology of sort of how it goes up and down the semantics, I can turn around, do a I and machine learning problems on the >> order of 100 >> 1000 even 10,000 times faster. And it has context. It has contacts in just having a little bit of context speeds up these problems so dramatically so and it is that what enables the machine to machine? New notion? No, the machine to machine is coming in with son called SP R M just standard business report model. It's a OMG sophistication of way of allowing the computers or machines, as we call them these days to get into a standard business report. Okay, so let's say you're ah drug company. You have thio certify you >> drugged you manufactured in India, get United States safely. Okay, you have various >> reporting requirements on the way. You've got to give extra easy the FDA et cetera that will always be a standard format. The SEC has a different format. FERC has a different format. Okay, so what s p r m does it allows it to describe in an intolerant he what's in the report? And then it also allows one to attach an ontology to the cells in the report. So if you like at a sec 10 Q 10 k report, you can attach a US gap taxonomy or ontology to it and say, OK, net income annual. That's part of the income statement. You should never see that in a balance sheet type item. You know his example? Okay. Or you can for the first time by having that context you can say are solid problem, which suggested that you can file these machine readable reports that air wrong. So they believe or not, There were about 50 cases in the last 10 years where SEC reports have been filed where the assets don't equal total liabilities, plus cheryl equity, you know, just they didn't add >> up. So this to, >> you know, to entry accounting doesn't work. >> Okay, so so you could have the machines go and check scale. Hey, we got a problem We've >> got a problem here, and you don't have to get humans evolved. So we're gonna, um uh, Holland in Australia or two leaders ahead of the United States. In this area, they seem dramatic pickups. I mean, Holland's reporting something on the order of 90%. Pick up Australia's reporting 60% pickup. >> We say pick up. You're talking about pickup of errors. No efficiency, productivity, productivity. Okay, >> you're taking people out of the whole cycle. It's dramatic. >> Okay, now what's the OMG is rolling on the hoof. Explain the OMG >> Object Management Group. I'm not speaking on behalf of them. It's a membership run organization. You remember? I am a >> member of cold. >> I'm a khalid of it. But I don't represent omg. It's the membership has to collectively vote that this is what we think. Okay, so I can't speak on them, right? I have a pretty significant role with them. I run on behalf of OMG something called the Federated Enterprise Risk Management Group. That's the group which is focusing on risk management for large entities like the federal government's Veterans Affairs or Department offense upstairs. I think talking right now is the Chief date Officer for transportation. OK, that's a large organization, which they, they're instructed by own be at the, um, chief financial officer level. The one number one thing to do for the government is to get an effective enterprise worst management model going in the government agencies. And so they come to own G let just like NIST or just like DARPA does from the defense or intelligence side, saying we need to have standards in this area. So not only can we talk thio you effectively, but we can talk with our industry partners effectively on space. Programs are on retail, on medical programs, on finance programs, and so they're at OMG. There are two significant financial programs, or Sanders, that exist once called figgy financial instrument global identifier, which is a way of identifying a swap. Its way of identifying a security does not have to be used for a que ce it, but a worldwide. You can identify that you know, IBM stock did trade in Tokyo, so it's a different identifier has different, you know, the liberals against the one trading New York. Okay, so those air called figgy identifiers them. There are attributes associated with that security or that beast the being identified, which is generally comes out of 50 which is the financial industry business ontology. So you know, it says for a corporate bond, it has coupon maturity, semi annual payment, bullets. You know, it is an example. So that gives you all the information that you would need to go through to the calculation, assuming you could have a calculation routine to do it, then you need thio. Then turn around and set up your well. Call your environment. You know where Ford Yield Curves are with mortgage backed securities or any portable call. Will bond sort of probabilistic lee run their numbers many times and come up with effective duration? Um, And then you do your Vader's analytics. No aggregating the portfolio and looking at Shortfalls versus your funding. Or however you're doing risk management and then finally do reporting, which is where the standardized business reporting model comes in. So that kind of the five parts of doing a full enterprise risk model and Alex So what >> does >> this mean for first? Well, who does his impact on? What does it mean for organizations? >> Well, it's gonna change the world for basically everyone because it's like doing a clue ends of a software upgrade. Conversion one's version two point. Oh, and you know how software upgrades Everyone hates and it hurts because everyone's gonna have to now start using the same standard ontology. And, of course, that Sarah Ontology No one completely agrees with the regulators have agreed to it. The and the ultimate controlling authority in this thing is going to be F sock, which is the Dodd frank mandated response to not ever having another chart. So the secretary of Treasury heads it. It's Ah, I forget it's the, uh, federal systemic oversight committee or something like that. All eight regulators report into it. And, oh, if our stands is being the adviser Teff sock for all the analytics, what these laws were doing, you're getting over farm or more power to turn around and look at how we're going to find data across the three so we can come up consistent analytics and we can therefore hopefully take one day. Like Goldman, Sachs is pre payment model on mortgages. Apply it to Citibank Portfolio so we can look at consistency of analytics as well. It is only apply to regulated businesses. It's gonna apply to regulated financial businesses. Okay, so it's gonna capture all your mutual funds, is gonna capture all your investment adviser is gonna catch her. Most of your insurance companies through the medical air side, it's gonna capture all your commercial banks is gonna capture most of you community banks. Okay, Not all of them, because some of they're so small, they're not regularly on a federal basis. The one regulator which is being skipped at this point, is the National Association Insurance Commissioners. But they're apparently coming along as well. Independent federal legislation. Remember, they're regulated on the state level, not regularly on the federal level. But they've kind of realized where the ball's going and, >> well, let's make life better or simply more complex. >> It's going to make life horrible at first, but we're gonna take out incredible efficiency gains, probably after the first time you get it done. Okay, is gonna be the problem of getting it done to everyone agreeing. We use the same definitions >> of the same data. Who gets the efficiency gains? The regulators, The companies are both >> all everyone. Can you imagine that? You know Ah, Goldman Sachs earnings report comes out. You're an analyst. Looking at How do I know what Goldman? Good or bad? You have your own equity model. You just give the model to the semantic worksheet and all turn around. Say, Oh, those numbers are all good. This is what expected. Did it? Did it? Didn't you? Haven't. You could do that. There are examples of companies here in the United States where they used to have, um, competitive analysis. Okay. They would be taking somewhere on the order of 600 to 7. How 100 man hours to do the competitive analysis by having an available electronically, they cut those 600 hours down to five to do a competitive analysis. Okay, that's an example of the type of productivity you're gonna see both on the investment side when you're doing analysis, but also on the regulatory site. Can you now imagine you get a regulatory reports say, Oh, there's they're out of their way out of whack. I can tell you this fraud going on here because their numbers are too much in X y z. You know, you had to fudge numbers today, >> and so the securities analyst can spend Mme. Or his or her time looking forward, doing forecasts exactly analysis than having a look back and reconcile all this >> right? And you know, you hear it through this conference, for instance, something like 80 to 85% of the time of analysts to spend getting the data ready. >> You hear the same thing with data scientists, >> right? And so it's extent that we can helped define the data. We're going thio speed things up dramatically. But then what's really instinct to me, being an M I t engineer is that we have great possibilities. An A I I mean, really great possibilities. Right now, most of the A miles or pattern matching like you know, this idea using face shield technology that's just really doing patterns. You can do wonderful predictive analytics of a I and but we just need to give ah lot of the a m a. I am a I models the contact so they can run more quickly. OK, so we're going to see a world which is gonna found funny, But we're going to see a world. We talk about semantic analytics. Okay. Semantic analytics means I'm getting all the inputs for the analysis with context to each one of the variables. And when I and what comes out of it will be a variable results. But you also have semantics with it. So one in the future not too distant future. Where are we? We're in some of the national labs. Where are you doing it? You're doing pipelines of one model goes to next model goes the next mile. On it goes Next model. So you're gonna software pipelines, Believe or not, you get them running out of an Excel spreadsheet. You know, our modern Enhanced Excel spreadsheet, and that's where the future is gonna be. So you really? If you're gonna be really good in this business, you're gonna have to be able to use your brain. You have to understand what data means You're going to figure out what your modeling really means. What happens if we were, You know, normally for a lot of the stuff we do bell curves. Okay, well, that doesn't have to be the only distribution you could do fat tail. So if you did fat tail descriptions that a bell curve gets you much different results. Now, which one's better? I don't know, but, you know, and just using example >> to another cut in the data. So our view now talk about more about the tech behind this. He's mentioned a I What about math? Machine learning? Deep learning. Yeah, that's a color to that. >> Well, the tech behind it is, believe or not, some relatively old tech. There is a technology called rd F, which is kind of turned around for a long time. It's a science kind of, ah, machine learning, not machine wearing. I'm sorry. Machine code type. Fairly simplistic definitions. Lots of angle brackets and all this stuff there is a higher level. That was your distracted, I think put into standard in, like, 2000 for 2005. Called out. Well, two point. Oh, and it does a lot at a higher level. The same stuff that already f does. Okay, you could also create, um, believer, not your own special ways of a communicating and ontology just using XML. Okay, So, uh, x b r l is an enhanced version of XML, okay? And so some of these older technologies, quote unquote old 20 years old, are essentially gonna be driving a lot of this stuff. So you know you know Corbett, right? Corba? Is that what a maid omg you know, on the communication and press thing, do you realize that basically every single device in the world has a corpus standard at okay? Yeah, omg Standard isn't all your smartphones and all your computers. And and that's how they communicate. It turns out that a lot of this old stuff quote unquote, is so rigidly well defined. Well done that you can build modern stuff that takes us to the Mars based on these old standards. >> All right, we got to go. But I gotta give you the award for the most acronyms >> HR 15 30 fi G o m g s b r >> m fsoc tarp. Oh, fr already halfway. We knew that Owl XML ex brl corba, Which of course >> I do. But that's well done. Like thanks so much for coming. Everyone tried to have you. All right, keep it right there, everybody, We'll be back with our next guest from M i t cdo I Q right after this short, brief short message. Thank you

>> Announcer: Live from San Francisco, it's theCUBE. Covering Google Cloud Next '19. Brought to you by Google Cloud and its ecosystem partners. >> Hey welcome back everyone. It's theCUBE's live coverage here in San Francisco in Moscone South. We're on the ground floor here at Google Next, Google's Cloud conference. I'm chatting with Stu Miniman; Dave Vellante's also hosting. He's out there getting stories. Our next two guests: Dana Berg, Chief Operating Officer of SADA and Chris Lehman, Head of Engineering for SADA. Guys, welcome to theCUBE. Thanks for joining us. We're here on the ground floor. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> This is exciting. I feel like a movie star right here. >> It's game day here. All the tech athletes are out, Dave. If you look at the show, look at the demographics, hardcore developers, lot of IT, leaders also here, cloud architects, a lot of people trying to figure it out. We heard the keynote. Google is bringing a lot to the table. So what's new with you guys? You guys recently sold your Microsoft business, going all-in on Google. Talk about that relationship. >> We are. This is a brand new day for SADA. The energy around this place, where we are in the market, and where we are with the expanded attendance here has actually reaffirmed our business strategy to go all-in with Google. I don't know if you are aware but SADA has been around for almost 20 years. Historically have always been leaders in bringing people to the cloud even before there was really much of a cloud. We were a you know a pilot partner within Microsoft and Google and had a great thriving Microsoft business but an even bigger Google business and you know, we looked at the tea leaves, we looked at where we wanted to be, and aligned with a company that shared our mission and values and it was a clear choice. We chose Google. We made a very specific and deliberate act to sell off our Microsoft business so that we could take the horsepower of all of our engineering staff and apply them to Google. >> It's interesting you know, we've been around for 10 years doing theCUBE, go to a lot of events, I mean Dave Vellante, Stu, and I have been around for 30 years covering the IT, you guys 20 years. You guys have seen many ways of innovation come and go. Now you're going all in on Google. What is it about this wave right now that made that decision? What do you guys see? You're seeing something early here. Expand on that. Give us some color commentary because there's a wave here, right? A lot of people try. It's a combination of things. I mean, we saw the client-server thing. We saw that movement. Also the internet, we saw the web, mobile, now it's cloud. What's the big wave? What are you guys riding? >> I think there's a couple of things and I think it's unique to, philosophically, how we think of our real special relationship with Google. There is a momentum, right, and not to quote like a Bernie Sanders, but, seems like there's a revolution going on here, right, and, you know, I think, you know, what we see when we look around and we hear conversations and even with our customers, the way that we're all winning together is because we're winning the hearts and minds of the people inside of our customer base that are actually the ones responsible for inventing and the ones responsible for building, so when we're in board rooms and we're selling and along with Google, we're talking with developers, we're talking with designers, we're talking about people that are actually driving the vision for these business applications. We're not always talking to the CIO down like some of our other competitors seems to have only been able to sell that way. We're talking about the people responsible for not only constructing it but maintaining it. So that revolution is there. These folks are bubbling that up and they're seeing the real value inside of Google and what is that value from our point of view, and why did we make such a bold statement just to stick with Google is, and we saw Thomas today echo this, I think there's very few cloud providers that are bold enough to actually lead with the fact that we want our customers to have full choice whether you're using GCP or not. We want to build, architect, and manufacture a product offering that allows you to keep your stuff in your data centers, move your stuff to AWS. That power of choice is really not like what we've never heard anywhere else. >> And then on top of that, too, you got an application renaissance, right? A whole new way of coding, infrastructure that's programmable and going away, I mean if you think about what that does to the existing infrastructures, they can now mix and match and rearchitect everything from scratch and accelerate the app movement. >> Well, that's absolutely true, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that there are managed services in the cloud which makes it dramatically easier to build applications of course, so there's no question about that. Some of the offerings on GCP are particularly attractive for our clients, particularly the managed Kubernetes service. That's where we're seeing perhaps most of the interest that we're seeing, like that's a very common theme. Also the ML stack is an area that our customers are very interested in. >> Chris, can you bring us in some of those customer environments, you know, one of the things you hear, you know, most customers, it's, "I've got my application portfolio." Modernizing that is pretty challenging. There are some things that are kind of easy, some things that take a lot more work, but, you know, migration is one of those things that makes most people that have been in IT a while cringe because there's always the devil in the details and something goes wrong once you've got 95 percent done. What are you seeing, what's working, what's not working, how's the role of data changing, and all of that? >> I think migrations are usually more complex than they at first appear and so even with best intentions thinking that customers can just move their workloads seamlessly to the cloud have actually in practice been more challenging. So some of the areas that we find challenges are around data migration, especially in the context of zero downtime. That's always more difficult than with applications. So that's definitely an area that were we're spending a lot of time working with our customers to deliver. >> Just to add to that, I have to keep reminding myself of the name, but obviously the Anthos announcement today sounds incredibly intriguing as a lower barrier of effort to actually migrate. Our customers have been trying to really absorb and take a hold of Kubernetes and can it containerize methods for a long time. Some are having a harder time doing it than others. I think Anthos promises to make that endeavor much, much easier, and I think about as we leave here this week and we go back and we reeducate our own engineering teams as well as our customers, I think we might see some highly accelerated project timelines go from here down to here. >> And the demo that Jennifer Lynn did was pretty impressive. I mean, running inside of containers, whether it's VMs, and then having service patches on the horizon coming to the table is going to change the implementation delivery piece too in a massive way. I mean, you've got-- >> Oh, absolutely. >> Code, build, run on the cloud side, but this this kind of changes the equation on your end. Can you guys share the insight into that equation, because Google's clearly posturing to be partner friendly. You guys are a big partner now. You're going all-in. This is an interesting dynamic because you can focus on solving customers' problems. All this heavy lifting kind of goes away. Talk about the impact to you as a partner when you look at Anthem, Anthem migrate in particular, some of these migration challenges with containers and Kubernetes seems like it's a perfect storm right now to kind of jump in and do more, faster. >> Yeah. >> Well, it's certainly very interesting. Well, we'll want to take a really hard look at it. I mean, a very, very cool announcement. Moving to containers in the source prior to the migration obviously solves a lot of challenges so for that reason, it's definitely a move forward. >> And I think... You know, we always talk about, in this industry, the acceleration for consumption, but really that's a poor way of saying... Probably what we should be saying is an acceleration of value. So we're constantly in this battle to try and deliver value to our customers faster. That's what our customers want, right, and in essence we see Anthos as being potentially a big game-changer there so that, you know, our CIOs that we're talking with can show to their various stakeholders that they are making very good proactive moves into the cloud at lower-caught barriers of entry, right? >> Yeah. So, you brought up the the ML piece of Google. Wondering if you could help share a little bit on that. When I think back two years ago, you know, data was really at the core of what a lot of what Google was talking about. I was actually surprised not to hear a lot of it on the main stage this morning, but you know, AI, ML, what are you doing, what are your customers doing, does Google have leadership in the space? >> Google certainly has leadership in the space. Our customers, I think, relatively universally, think that their ML stack is the strongest among the competitors, but I think in practice what we're finding is there's a lot more urgency as far as just literal data migrations off of their data centers into the cloud, and I foresee a lot more AI and ML work as more move in. >> John: Yeah. >> So you might, in our booth here, not to give a plug, but we've got a booth down at the end with a full-fledged racing car, just to talk about the art of the possible with AI and ML. Our engineering teams in the race teams that we sponsor, they're there, the driver's there, you should go down and talk to 'em. We've taken all the race telemetry data for the last six months and all of his races and practices, we've aggregated that data all into GCP, run AI and ML algorithms on it to provide his racing team some very predictive ways that he can get better and that team can get better, and so I'd invite just anybody that wants to go there and take a look at, even if you're in banking, or if you're in retail, or if you're in health care, take a look at some of how that was done, because it's a very, very powerful way, to answer your question, head and shoulders down why Google is actually accelerating and exceeding in AI. >> And one of the things that Thomas Kurian showed onstage was the recent Hack-a-Thon they had with the college students with the NCAA data of the game that just finished, and throughout that experience, this is a core theme of GCP, and now Anthos, which is getting data in and using it easily, and scaling at a scale level that seems unprecedented. So this team seems to be the application... The new differentiator. >> I think it is. I think that announcement, obviously the big three takeaways for us, certainly, scale, unmatched. Certainly speed and migration with Anthos. If I could highlight one other, I was incredibly pleased with, well I've been pleased since Thomas' arrival in general by bringing an enterprise class strategy within sight of Google that I think are going to respond well to our enterprise customers, and part of enterprise class is also making sure that their partner community has amazing enhancement programs that really incentivize those partners that are actually in the full managed services space from cradle to grave, lifetime customer value. So we're very excited about even further announcements this week that no doubt have been inspired by Thomas to try and really take advantage of their partner community that are in the business of cradle to grave support of customers. >> You feel comfortable with Thomas. He's taught a lot of customers, he knows the enterprise. >> We've had an opportunity to meet with him. We've had some shared customers that have had a great privilege of getting to know him and support us and collectively them. >> John: He knows the partner equation pretty well, and the enterprise. >> Without a doubt. >> It's about partnering, because there's a monetization, the shared go to markets together. Talk about the importance of that and what's it like to be a partner. >> Yeah, without a doubt, again, you know, his embrace of the open-source community that you saw today, really taking advantage of highlighting partner value is wonderful, but I think Thomas, above anything else, knows that Google needs to scale. They need to scale, and then they have to have breadth and they have to have depth, and, you know, to get to where Google needs to be over the course of the next two, three years, it's wonderful, it's refreshing, it's 100% accurate that Google knows and Thomas knows that the path to do that is via partners; partners that share in Google's vision, that are 100% aligned to the same things that Google is aligned with, and I think that's why I'm so thankful to be at SADA, large in part, because all of the things that we care about in terms of our customer success as well as Google's success, we all share that, so it's a great trifecta. >> It's a ground-floor opportunity. Congratulations. Guys, talk about your business. What's going on? You've got some new offices I heard you opened up. What's going on in the state of the business? Obviously the Google focus you're excited about obviously. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. >> There, at the beginning, I called Google the dark horse. I think with the tech that they have and the renewed focus on the enterprise, building on what Diane Greene had put foundationally, Thomas is meeting with hundreds of customers. He's so busy he doesn't have time to come on theCUBE, but he'll come on soon, but he's focused. This is now a great opportunity. Talk about your business. What's the state of the union there? Give an update. >> I can take that one if you don't mind. >> Go ahead. >> You can add poetic color if you want. (laughing) Yeah, so as I said, we're entering a new journey for SADA in light of renewed focus, renewed conviction to Google. We are investing more than we ever have into the common belief that Google is the one to beat in terms of momentum, drive, and ultimately winning the hearts and the minds of who we've talked about. So, over the last four months, we've opened five new offices in New York, Austin, Chicago, Denver. Our headquarters is in Los Angeles, and just recently, we just opened a brand new office in Toronto, so we can really help our Canadian customers really see the the same type of white-glove treatment we provide those customers in the States and so that's why, well, I wasn't earlier, but I'm walking around with a Canadian flag. We're very excited about the presence that we're going to have in Canada >> Its "Toronno." I always blow and I call it "Toron-to," being the American that I am. It's "Toronno." >> Dana: Glad you said it right. Good. >> Now, on the engineering side, so you guys are on the front lines as also a sales, development, there's also customer relationship, engineering side, so I'm sure you guys are hiring. There's some hard problems to solve out there. Can you guys share some color commentary on the type of solutions you guys are doing? What's the heavy? What solutions are you solving, problems that you're solving for customers, what are the key things that you got going on? >> Yeah. >> Well, a lot of cloud migrations, a lot of web and application development, custom development, and data pipelines. I'd say those are really the three key focus areas that we're working on at the moment. >> One other thing, too: so... we believe that we want 100% customer retention, always, and that goes above and beyond an implementation. So the other big area of investments that we're making is in a whole revamped technical account management team, so for those of our GCP customers that have had the privilege, we've had the privilege of working with and for, we are building out a team of individuals that will, well beyond the project, stay with that customer, work with them weekly, monthly, quarterly, and try to always find ways to expand and move workloads into the cloud. We think that provides stickiness. We think that provides ultimate value to try and help our customers identify where else they can take full advantage of the cloud, and it's a fairly new program, and large in part I just want to thank Thomas and the partner team for new programs that are coming out to help us so that we can actually reinvest in things that go you know throughout the lifecycle of the customer. So, very, very good stuff. >> Dana, Chris, thanks for coming on. Appreciate it. We'll check out your booth, the car's there, with the data. Bring that data exhaust to the table, pun intended. >> Yes. >> Analyzing with Google Cloud, Anthos. Good commentary. Thanks for sharing. >> Really appreciate being on board. Thanks for having us. >> Alright, great. CUBE coverage here live on the floor in San Francisco. Google Next 2019. This is Google's cloud conference. Customers are here. A lot of developers. More action, live on the day one of three days of coverage after this short break. Stay with us. (theCUBE Theme)

>> Live from Orlando, Florida, it's theCUBE. Covering Microsoft Ignite brought to you by Cohesity and theCUBE's ecosystem partners. >> Welcome back everyone to day two of theCUBE's live coverage of Microsoft Ignite. We are coming at you from the Orange County Civic Center in Orlando, Florida. I'm your host Rebecca Knight along with my cohost Stu Miniman. We're joined by Patrick Moorhead, he is the founder and president and principal analyst at Moor Insights and Strategy. Thank you so much for coming back on theCUBE. You're an esteemed CUBE-alum. >> Gosh, this is great, can you introduce me on every show please? >> I would be happy to, delighted. So, Patrick, before the cameras were rolling, we were talking about how many, frankly, tech shows you go to a year, you said 40, 45. >> That's about right, I live in Austin but I actually live on a bunch of planes, kind of like you do, right. >> Right, sure, sure, yeah. So this is your 10th time at Ignite, or an Ignite like show, it used to be called Tech Ed, so what are your first quick takes on what this conference, what you're seeing, what you're hearing? >> So, Microsoft has a three layers, like a three-layered cake to their events, you have developers, you have customers, and you have channel. And this is their customer event, so what might seem like rehash or maybe build or inspire is if customers who haven't heard this content before. So it's really about getting them engaged and things like that and, what we've heard, first and foremost is we had 45 Azure announcements but I think the biggest news, was about the open data initiative that, I mean, how often do you have the three CEOs up on stage, where most corporate data sits, with Microsoft, SAP and Adobe, so it was impressive. And that's probably the number one thing so far. >> Okay, let's dissect that a little bit. What are your thoughts, I mean, we're sort of questioning, it's a big idea, >> Right. >> When will customers actually see the benefit and is there a benefit to customers? >> When I look at these big corporate announcements I'm thinking, is this thing paper or is this thing real? How far does it go? I think this is real, when I dug under the covers, in some, bendy NDA things, that I can't give details on, there's meat there for sure, but, where this all starts, is, is two things are going on here, first of all, to do machine learning correctly, you have to have a lot of data, right? Yesterday's big data, is today's machine learning. You have to have it all together, now you can pull in disparate data sources into your enterprise and work on that data, but it takes a lot of cleansing, you know most of the time in machine learning, is getting the data ready to be worked on. What having data interoperability standards means is you can bring it in, you don't have to cleanse it as much and you can do real time analytics and machine learning on it so it's agreement that says, we're all going to come in, if it's customer data, it's going to look like this, with different fields. Now you would think that something like XML could do this, but this is bigger and from a competitive standpoint, I have to ask the big question, where's Salesforce and where's Oracle, they're the two odd-companies out. >> Really interesting, you mention that there were a lot of Azure announcements here, something like 45. I was reading, Corey Sanders had a blog of list and lists and lists and it's typical of what we've seen in the cloud. You and I, we go to AWS re:invents, and it's like let's talk about all the compute instances, all the cool new storage, all the things, there's cheering and, you know, everything for every micro and macro thing that happens there but are there any things that jumped out at you? We had Jeffrey Silver on the program yesterday, he talked about the databoxes, like the Edge and the various versions of those, those seem kind of interesting when we talk about data and movement but anything in the Azure space that got your attention? >> So aside from the databoxes, I was really excited about AutoML. So, three ways you can do ML, you can do everything from scratch, you can take an off-the-shelf API and then you can use something in the middle, which says, kind of like the three bears, right in the middle, Google at GCP announced something like this and so did Azure. And essentially what this is, is it auto-tags your data. It's smart enough to know that this is an image as opposed to you having to start at the very beginning and hand code some data and that's not automatic because the key, so a good example might be an audio machine learning algorithm where, you might need it for an airplane versus a car, versus the factory floor, versus a smart-phone application. Those are all different environments and your algorithm's going to be different but, as an enterprise, you might not have the PhD on staff to be able to do that, but you can't live with the off-the-shelf API. >> There's another thing that kind of struck me, a little bit of dissonance I saw there, you've got a Microsoft surface sitting in front of you, Microsoft, it's gotten into hardware in a lot of places when they talked about their IoT Ps, they're like, we're going to put things out on the edge and then on the other stream it's like, well, but they're open and it's APIs and developers and software, not only Adobe and SAP but the announcement with Red Hat, talking about all they're doing with Linux, how do you reconcile the, I've heard people in Microsoft, we want to completely vertically integrate the stack and that's not something that I hear from the Googles and Amazons of the world, I thought we were kind of past that, no one company can do it all. On the other hand, they're very open and give you choice. How do you look at those pieces? >> This all stems with the slowdown of Moore's Law for general CPU compute. So, as Moore's Law is slowing down, we need to throw different kinds of accelerators at the same problem, to keep innovation going up and to the right at an increasingly faster pace. So people have gone to GPUs and CPUs and almost every one of the big infrastructure players has done that, whether it's Google, Apple, AWS, they all have their own hardware. Part of it is to accelerate time to market, the other is to get a lock-in, I'm still trying to figure out which one this is. Microsoft is saying very clearly in Azure IoT Edge that you can send your data, even if you have their hardware to AWS and GCP and I think enterprises are going to take a quick look. I've been doing this almost 30 years, I've gray hairs to show for it, but you just have to pick your lock-in, right? Enterprise AT always gets locked in and the question is, what you lock in on? If you go with Oracle and then build applications around it you're locked into Oracle. If you go with a certain hardware OEM, you could be locked into a certain OEM with converse infrastructures, so, I think it's just picking the poison, you're going to have some people who are very comfortable with going all Microsoft and you'll have some people who'll want to piece part it together and look to the future We still have people who were brought up on mainframes and they don't want to be there, they want to have flexibility and fluidity. >> One of the things you were talking about with the slow down of Moore's Law, Microsoft and frankly every other technology giant is really trying to stay ahead of the innovation curve. Microsoft, 42 years old, a middle-aged company, and really, in the tech world, a really old company. Is Microsoft effective at this? I mean, do you see, that this is a creative, an ingenuitive, an innovative company? >> Microsoft is one of the only companies that has been able to turn the corner from being aged and experienced, I guess like us, and moving into the new zone and everybody, in everybody's work has had to do that. Analysts used to, I remember getting Gartner and IDC reports on paper, but now it's very different. We're up here on theCUBE, we're on Twitter, we're doing research reports, so everything is changing and Microsoft has had to change too. Five years ago, when Azure hadn't really taken off, they had a billion dollar write-down on surface hardware, bought Nokia, shut Nokia down, you're wondering, wait a second, what really is happening but then Satya came in and, to the company's credit, has completely turned around. I will state though there is a difference between perception and reality, I think a lot of the things that Ballmer had in place were absolutely the right things, I think Satya takes a lot of credit for it, but these things just didn't magically appear when Satya came in. So, a lot of the things they did were right, and it was perceived to be new leadership and therefore they're looking good. >> I love it, 'cause, we had quite a few Microsoft people on the program and a lot of them, 10, 20 years with the company, and they said, it's still the vision that we had but, one articulated it really well, he said, we're even more focused on the customer than ever and that gets me really excited. I want to ask you, when people look at this show, 'cause it's such a broad ecosystem, so many different views, what will they be talking about later in the year? My initial take coming out of it is, I'm a little surprised that we're talking so much about things like Windows 2019 and the Office 365, Microsoft 365, Dynamics 365, obviously it's Microsoft's strength, it's where they've got the most customers but are they operating still relevant in the future? >> I met with the program manager of Windows 29 servers last night, Erin, and she had said that they had 1,300 people they had to turn away from the Windows 2019 server and there was 4,000 people and I flippantly said, oh my gosh, I didn't think Microsoft still did that, it's all as a service, but I was just kidding of course. But I think that that shows the, how long it takes for people to move but I think what we'll be talking about in a year is has Microsoft delivered on its IoT commitments in IoT Azure Central, how much of their business has moved to, I'll call it, on-prem software in a box, to as a service, so, Dynamics 365, Office 365, and then finally I think we're going to see the workflow, and here's something that my head finally went ding on, is, Microsoft's strategy to surround the data and then do workflow on it to supplant Oracle SAP applications around the data. That's what I think we'll be talking about in a year. >> One other specific I wanted to see if you've got some data on because it's something we wanted to understand, Azure Stack, the press, all agog on it for the last couple of years, I really haven't talked to, I've talked to the partners that are working in, you know, people like Intel, Lenovo, and the like that are doing it but I haven't talked to too many customers they've employed service providers, yes, but what are you hearing, what are you seeing, is Azure Stack a big deal or is it just one of the pieces in a multi-cloud data applications strategy that Microsoft has? >> So, Azure Stack is a big deal and I think that it's getting to it's a slow boil, to be honest with you, the company changed hardware strategies, it was first an ODM model and then it went to an OEM model and a very narrow OEM model. The compute requirements to Azure Stack were too big to some people so it's a slow boil, but I look at what has the competition done? Now to be even a public cloud player, you have to have an on-prem capability. With Google it's PKE On-Prem, you have Greengrasss, and Amazon DB that's on-prem sitting on top of Vmware, so hyper-cloud, multi-cloud is a real thing, I just think it's getting a little bit slower start than everybody had thought. >> Great, well Patrick, thank you so much for your insights. These were terrific, it's great having you on the show. >> Thanks for having me. >> I'm Rebecca Knight for Stu Miniman, we will have more from theCUBE's live coverage of Microsoft Ignite in just a little bit. (upbeat music)

>> Narrator: Live, from Las Vegas, it's the CUBE covering Dell Technologies World 2018. Brought to you by Dell EMC and its ecosystem partners. >> And welcome back to The Sands everyone. John Walls here along with Keith Townsend, and we are at Dell Technologies World, day one of three days of coverage here on theCUBE. Keith, good to see you sir, it's been a while. >> It has been about six months. >> Where have we been, and you've got that going on. You look so distinguished and professorial. >> You know what, I'm trying to make up for the lack of hair. (laughing) I appreciate that you noticed. >> Well it looks good, it looks good. Two guests with us, talking today about Extreme IO. We have Chhandomay Mandal, who is a Vice President of, or rather Director of Marketing, I gave you a promotion. >> Yeah, actually I like that. >> Can I get one, too? >> Director to VP, just like that, at Dell, and Kandy O'Mara who's a solutions architect at VMware, I'm sorry no promotion, Kandy, that's the way it goes. So Chhandomay, if you would, before we get started, let's talk about Extreme IO a little bit, and tell the viewers at home a little bit about the product and then we'll get into VMware's use of it and how that's taking shape. >> Yeah, so Extreme IO is the purpose build market leading all flash add-in. It's built on unique content, however meta data centric, party controller architecture coupled with intelligent software that helps us deliver very high performance, ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions of IOPs with consistently low sub millisecond latency, irrespective of what the system load is, how much data has written through the alley, or whatever the workload characteristics are. Now, this metadata centric architecture lends itself to a lot of other benefits, for example, we do in-line all the time data reduction on the data path, and that leads to not only very high storage efficiencies, but also, since we do not write anything that's not unique, down to the SSDs, it gives much more longevity to the SSDs themselves, driving down costs. Our thing is it's pretty simple to use. >> And probably from a customer perspective, right, that's the huge value. >> Yes, it's pretty simple to deploy. We have an intelligent HTML 5 best EY, that's consumer grade easy to use at the same time, providing all the enterprise functionalities that you'll expect. The fourth thing I'll mention is integrated copy data management, so because this is a extremely high performance all flash alley, it is expected to do great in well TP environments, marginalizer environments, but on top of it, the way it is architected, because of this always in memory metadata architecture, the copies are literally as good as production volumes, so it's not just for production, you can actually use the copies to run workloads on them, and you get the same performance, same in-line all the time data surfaces on the production, on the copies, and you can not really figure out any difference between production volume and a copy volume, so that lives in to a lot of business benefits in terms of consolidating various copies and changing the application workflows. >> So Chhandomay, we'll dig into that in a second, with the inline dedupe, inline dedupe with copy data management, but first let's bring it up higher in the stack. Kandy, amazing performance numbers out of Extreme IO, but the all flash market is an extremely crowded market. For the average use end-user, as you engage customers, and you come to them, you know VMware runs VMware or Dell Technologies runs best on Dell Technologies, how do you help customers, even when you look at the Dell Technologies portfolio, when you have all flash V sand, you have Isolon, you have Isolon with flash, you have all these solutions, how do you help them navigate the broad portfolio and them come to the, give us some typical use cases for an Extreme IO. >> Right. For our instance, the first implementation of Extreme IO we have done was with SAP Hanna. Now that's an in-flash memory database, so, everything's in flash, you need a really fast backend storage array. So extreme IO, all flash with sub millisecond latency is a perfect fit. If your database is all-in memory, you can't have a slow storage behind it. You'll lose the performance, right, your database will become degraded. So that was our reason for going that direction, was because of the all flash memory of SAP Hanna. Now, the rest of those infrastructures actually have good use cases for other things, but in this case, for us, it was extreme IO. >> So let's focus in on that SAP Hanna usage. So SAP, in memory database, a lot of SI's will tell you you know what, the storage layer just needs to be fast, it doesn't have to be extreme IO fast, what do you guys find, what was the specific advantages in the SAP Hanna that brought you down to extreme IO. I mean the rights are done in memory, so. >> Well, actually the rights actually go to the disc. It is in memory, but it still has to write to disc and get the response back, especially the rights, right? >> Especially on SAP Hanna, it has very specific requirements in terms of when you're loading up the database, it needs to load up in a very specific. >> Kandy: It's like a tenth of a second, they use. >> For SAP Hanna, even though it is a new memory database. >> Right, that's where the misconception is, people think oh we put out slower storage, no you actually need the storage to be able to respond back to the database as quick as it does. The minimum requirement, I mean the maximum latency is like a tenth of a second, I mean it's really low. But it's sub millisecond, so we have no latency, we are actually getting a through-put in the performance. And there's other benefits with it as well, always on the reduction, that's huge, that's a big factor. When you don't have to have multiple copies sitting on your array, that saves you a lot of capacity. >> So people are saying, crowded market, lot of options, lot of choices, what was it for you that specifically said, okay, this is our product, this is what we want to dance with, so to speak, because you've got a lot of options. >> It was basically, it was the response that was needed for performance, and it was all flash, we were making a decision on where we wanted to run SAP Hanna, we did not have it implemented anywhere else, and we were like, we have existing infrastructure, and we were moving to a new data center, and we had to make a decision where we wanted to go, and extreme IO fit the bill, it met many of our different requirements. One of them was performance, the second one was the total lower cost of ownership, and then the snap technology, that was huge. >> So, let's talk a little bit more about that snap technology. I've spent a lot of time as an SAP infrastructure architect, and one of the most painful parts of SAP operations is being able to refresh DEV, QA, M plus One, the lower environments from production. What advantages have your, have you and your customers seen using snap management with extreme IO? >> So, let me kind of give you the broader view, and then you can talk about the very specific instances that you have seen. Extreme IO's snapshot technology, we call it Extreme IO actual copies, they are best in, best on the in-memory metadata. And extreme IO doesn't write anything on the SSDs unless it's unique across the entire cluster. Snapshots, by definition, is a copy. Like you mount it and make it writeable, so, for us, when you take a snapshot, it's an extremely fast operation, because all that we are doing is updating the metadata in memory, and then, if you are keeping it as a prediction copy, say for example, like as a read-only, just to recover from a disaster, then that's one purpose, but then the other purpose is use them as writeable snapshot, where, you can run your DES DEV, copy for backup, all of those things. Now, why can it do these things? The reason is, all these copies, they are not consuming any extra space. Until you are writing something unique to it as a DES DEV copy, right? So now, you have that capability of consolidating lots of copies, in our tradition, I mean, our customers base, for every database, there is literally like five to eight copies, 60% of the storage that gets consumed is essentially copies now if you consolidated all those copies into the single alley without consuming any extra capacity at the same time delivering that very high performance, not only for your production environment, but also for your DES DEVs, Qas, sandboxing, that gives the customer a lot of values, not only in terms of infrastructure dollars, but also transforming the application workflows, improving the productivity of the developers, and the storage admin, VM admin in general. So that's where we kind of see across the board from our VS customers. Now, alright, what's your experience? >> I'm like, "wow." No, actually what we do is, we're a little different. We actually use the writeable performance snapshots, we use them at our DR site, and what we'll do there is we'll mount those into a test bubble, and it is having our production environment, instead of needing a separate DEV environment, we can mount basically, in a little isolated bubble, those writeable snapshots, or copies, and test anything we want in our true little production environment. And then toss it away when we're done. So we can test out a new release, or we can do something different with the database or an application, and then when we're done, toss it away, that way we don't need so many different environments built out so it's a savings there. We don't make the local copies, what you guys were talking about for staging DEV, those are already built out, but we do put those on the same array now. Used to be, you'd have production on one array and stage on a different, right? But now, because they're similar, and you want the dedupe and the compression benefits, you want them on the same array, because that's where you gain that. The snapshots we do at the target, we play with those, the writeable, it's performance ready. It's the same performance as if you were on the source, which is a big game changer there for us. >> And I think it's really, from a technical perspective, really important to know why extreme IO is so much better at snapshot management. One of the things that Sanders will warn us, is that snapshots degrade performance over a period of time, so therefore the fact that you guys have a dedicated metadata subsystem helps improve overall performance. But I'd like to talk about your use case for extending to your DR side. So, from DR DI, what do you guys use to replicate data from one extreme IO to your DR? >> Right now, we, for us right now with SAP Hanna, we're using recover point with extreme io snapshots, which is fabulous because once the two sync up, the first initial sync, at that point, recover point literally just goes out and gets a snap diff and that's all the data is transferring over, so it lowers the requirements of your LAN, you know the bandwidth requirements are lower, so that's what we're using today. It's a great tool for us. And that way, we can mount it at the target site. >> And then just briefly, we're about out of time. Chhandomay, if you would, going forward, let's talk about where you are in terms of development, what you see as being maybe the next critical phase for extreme IO. >> So, in fact, here in Dell Technologies world, we are announcing the ability of our native repetition technology. Kandy mentioned she is using extreme IO with Recover Point that's a great solution. Now, we are going to have the native repetition technology and what's different from other solutions that are out there is this replication is also metadata aware, and as a result, it's not only sending only the unique data over the web, but also it's globally deduped and complex. And, suppose on your target site, you already have a data block. That might be unique for your primary site, and hence the primary says hey I need to send over this data and our protocol is going to say, yep, I have this metadata, I already have it, so send me the metadata pointer to it, and we are all done, we don't even need to send that unique block that was in the primary site, if it happens to stay, or it happens to exist, on the secondary site. As a result, we see great reduction in the wan bandwidth that's going to be used, and the total capacity that you will need between primary and secondary. So that will also be reduced. In fact, our numbers that we are going to say, you can get 38% less storage capacity wise, and wan bandwidth could be reduced as high as 75 to 80% based on the traditional mechanisms. >> So we actually did a test on this to see the performance between replicating a database using Recover Point on extreme IO with snapshots, and then we also did it with extreme IO data replication, and it was eight times faster. It was eight times faster replicating the same amount of data. >> So less data loss in case of emergency, just a higher level of service to the business. >> Nothing like a happy customer, right? >> Yeah. >> I actually love this product, I would not be talking about it, I really like extreme IO and I've been doing this for a while. >> Well, Kandy and Chhandomay, thanks for being with us, we appreciate the time, sorry about the promotion. (laughing) I think you've earned it though. Thanks for joining us, we appreciate it. >> Together: Thank you. >> Back with more from Dell Technologies World here in Las Vegas, you're watching theCUBE, back in just a bit.

>> Narrator: Live from Nice, France. Its the Cube, covering .Next Conference 2017, Europe. Brought to you by Nutanix. >> Welcome back, I'm Stu Miniman and you're watching, Silicon Angle Medias production of the Cube. World Wide leader in live tech coverage. Happy to welcome to the program, first time guest, Anja Manuel, who's a Co-founder and partner at, Rice Hadley Gates. Thank you so much for joining us. >> Anja: Thank you for having me, Stu. >> So, I've attended all five of the Nutanix conferences. And definitely, when we get a speaker at the Key Note from R.H.G. is one of the highlights. So, Condoleezza Rice, everybody's like, how does Nutanix get Condie Rice to come in? Robert Gates, we've actually had the pleasure of having him on the Cube. We've had Stephen Hadley on in D.C. also. And a little bit different conversation than some of the, kind of, in the weeds technical discussion. So, Anja for our audience that's not familiar, give us a little bit about your background, what you led you in to be one of the founders. >> Absolutely. Well, I've done a bit of everything. I've been an investment banker, a lawyer doing international cases. I have worked at the State Department for Condie Rice, mostly on Asia issues. And, then at the very end of 2008, Condie, Steve and I founded this firm. And we feel very lucky to be working with each other and some of the great, young and already, some already large, some fast growing tech companies in the Valley. And helping them expand around the world. And it's been a particular pleasure to work with Dheeraj and his team at Nutanix. When we started with them, they were a couple hundred people. And now look around, you've got 2,000 people at this conference. So, we're very proud of them. >> Yeah, absolutely. Great growth for Nutanix, their eco-system's blossoming. One of the jokes I always have here on the Cube is, when I talk to any end user customers, its like, well your industry's not changing that much, right? And of course, it doesn't matter what industry you're in. Digital disruption is more than just what it's affecting. Globalization is just a fact of life. It brings, especially for a lot our audiences, USA based, we reach a global audience. But when we come to some of these international events, it really puts a point on some of the things going on globally. What're you talking to, when you speak to the CIOs and you're talking to Nutanix customers and partners, what are some of the big challenges? What are the things that they need to be looking at? >> Sure, globalization is happening and of course, it's more pronounced in tech. This is the first industry that really shows no sectoral boundaries. The big platform companies can basically go into any industry sector and no geographic boundaries. It's very easy to expand internationally. So, what I'm going to be talking about today on the main stage is just globalization and its backlash. As you know we've seen, after decades of evermore, open boarders, increase trade, easier immigration, and the last year or two, you've seen really the West in sort of, what I would call a defensive crouch. And there are real reasons for it in the US where you and I both live. If you are a white male, who has a high school education or less, you live on average, 10 years less than all of the very highly educated people in this room. And there is a real issue of people being left behind. And you can see that impact politically. You see it in the US, with Trump, and I would also argue on the left with Bernie Sanders. You see it with Brexit. You see it in the impact that Marine Le Pen and Aten a Tiva for Deutschland and others have had on European politics. And I would say that impact is strong, even though those right wing parties in Europe didn't win, they're setting the agenda much more than you would've seen 10 years ago. So it's something for the tech companies to consider as they keep expanding. >> Yeah, it's a trade. On the one hand, you said that there's no boundaries for tech, but one of the things a lot of the tech community, we look at, is some of those fragments that are happening. So, like, the internet. Is the internet a global internet or does China have their own internet? Will Germany just create their own internet? And how much is governance, and having data something we look and Nutanix looks at a lot, require that you have it within those boarders, and the boundaries between government and corporations now? There's certain countries where governments are heavily involved and certain ones where it almost feels that they're fighting. In the US, it's, is the government actually helping business or stopping business? >> That's right. >> Is something that we ask a lot. So I'm curious, your thoughts. >> Well, right now, we still have one global interoperable internet and that has been a huge boon to economies all around the world. Not just the American one. And it's this little known organization called ICANN, which was started in the 1990s. It has a convoluted thing called the multi stake holder model, where they say, we're going to get people, the technologists who are working on this and GOs and governments and everyone talking about how do we actually manage this thing and make sure that it stays interoperable and global. And I'm quite happy that that system of internet governance still stands and that it hasn't been taken over by individual governments or by the United Nations. You talked about data localization. It's a real issue. We see this with a lot of the tech companies that we work with out in California. More and more. You see the Russians doing it. You see the Chinese doing it. And I worry that if that trend really continues, you will have less interaction, for example, between Chinese and Americans, which is something we so dramatically need, now that our governments seem to be more and more at odds with each other. It's more important than ever that the companies and the people are talking to each other. >> Yeah, I actually, we interviewed the former president of ICANN, Fadi Chehade, a couple of years ago and he was raising red flags as to concern about would the US step back. Cause really, it put that in place, and had a very strong connection there. So would the US, kind of, advocate from some of this or how would that be involved? So you're happy with the way ICANN's going and kind of the global discussion? >> I was very happy to see that the United States allowed it to be privatized. Which is something that'd been planned for a long time. So we're quite happy that it happened the way it did. And that even the new Trump administration didn't stop that from going through, yeah. >> All right, you've written a lot about India, some of the others. How do companies, even in the global market place? Do they have to specialize in what they're doing? Certain regionalizations, that they need to do or how do they, global company, interact in some of the more emerging markets? >> Yeah, they do have to specialize. And I think sometimes, in Silicon Valley, we're so confident in our own abilities that sometimes we think, well if it's invented here, naturally the world will love it. That worked for Facebook. It worked for Google. It doesn't necessarily work for every technology company. And so, yes, of course you have to tailor it to the local market. And there are some innovations coming out of China and India that are, frankly, really impressive and we should adopt some of them. And China, the web payments infrastructure is much more advanced than what you see in the US. Lots of people do everything through their WeChat account. They pay, they interact, they talk. It's not just texting. It's a whole echo system in a way that we haven't really seen as much in the US and Europe. So we can learn from them as well. >> Yeah so another interesting topic is, Silicon Valley prides itself on being the center of innovation. What're you seeing globally, are there certain areas or pockets? Can there be other Silicon Valleys for different technologies or is Silicon Valley going to be the Silicon Valley for all of these waves? >> Well, we are the biggest Silicon Valley. And it is a very unique eco-system. I'm lucky enough to teach at Stanford and to work with some of these tech companies. The idea that a university and a venture capital eco-system and entrepreneurs all work together in something that isn't directed by the state is very very important. And you do see these springing up everywhere. You have it in Bangalore. You have it in Boston, where you're from. You have it outside of London. You're seeing a little bit in Berlin happening. You're seeing it in China in a much bigger way than I think people appreciate. I'll give you one story. I was at the Chinese World Internet Forums, sort of their vision of the world internet, a year and a half ago. And I get back to my hotel at midnight, ready to just go to bed, and there are a thousand people in the lobby. All with their phones out. And I'm wondering, who's coming? Is it Xi Xin Ping? Is it some rock star? In walks Jack Ma and the CEO of Xiaomi phones. And a huge shout goes up as if it's the Beatles. So if you're a young millennial Chinese person, you want to be Jack Ma. So innovation fever has captured them as well. >> Yeah, what about companies being global versus being based in a country? What advice do you give to how they balance that headquarters versus being a global company? >> Yeah, this is one of the ironies and all the protectionist talk you see from governments because I think the cat is out of the bag. So to speak. Every company we work with, even the very young ones, they're global from the very beginning. Even if you think your headquarters are in New York or in California, you're supply chain most likely, incorporates 10 different countries. Your customers are somewhere else. Maybe you don't advertise it because you try to be an all American company or all European company, but there's actually no such thing as a domestic company anymore. >> I want to give you the final word. Nutanix, you give some advice. I'm sure there's things we can't talk about. But how are they doing as being a global company? What are some of the things a company like Nutanix that they'll face as they expand globally? >> Yeah, Nutanix is very impressive. First of all, if you look at Dheeraj and Sudheesh and their senior management team, what I love about working with them, is that they are good technically, they're great at the people to people skills and they are instantly global just like we just talked about. If you look at their management team, they're from all over the world. And they very quickly got people out into all the different regions. I think they try to be sensitive to how their product would be used in different places around the world. So I'm quite optimistic about what they're going to be able to achieve. >> Okay, I do have one last question for you. I was just thinking about that globalization. One of the concerns we have these days is getting enough women in tech and with your global viewpoint, just women in the workforce is still something that we're challenged with in many parts of the globe. What's your take? >> Yeah, strangely, women in the workforce are doing better in China, for example, than in the US, Europe, India, other places. I love living and working in Silicon Valley. We really have a problem. And we need to do more. And it's on the stem side. It's on the investor side. You've seen all of the news coming out about how it's so much harder for a woman entrepreneurs to get funded. There's no reason. There's actually a recent study done saying that women who get funded, their companies do, on average, far better than companies founded by men. So clearly there's some problem going on here and I'm happy that Silicon Valley's finally paying attention. >> Well Anju Manuel, really appreciate you joining us for this segment. I'm Stu Miniman and we will be back with more coverage here from Nutanix .Next in Nice, France. You're watching the Cube.

>> Narrator: Live from Las Vegas, it's the Cube, covering VMWorld 2017. Brought to you by VMWare and its ecosystem partners. (bright music) >> Hi, I'm Stu Miniman with the Cube, here with my guest host, Justin Warren. Happy to have a returning Cube alum, but in a different role then we had. It's been a few years. Tal Klein, who is the author of The Punch Escrow. >> Au-tor, please. No, I'm just kidding. (laughing) Tal, thanks so much for joining us. It's great for you to be able to find time to hang out with the tech geeks rather than all the Hollywood people that you've been with recently. (laughing) >> You guys are more interesting. (laughing) >> Well thank you for saying that. So last time we interviewed you, you were working for a sizable tech company. You were talking about things like, you know, virtualization, everything like that. Your Twitter handle's VirtualTal. So how does a guy like that become not only an author but an author that's been optioned for a movie, which those of us that, you know, are geeks and everything are looking at, as a matter of fact, Pac Elsiger this morning said, "we are seeing science fiction become science fact." >> That's right. >> Stu: So tell us a little of the journey. >> Yeah, cool, I hope you read the book. (laughing) I don't know, the journey is really about marketing, right? Cause a lot of times when we talk about virtual, like, in fact last time I was on the Cube, we were talking about the idea that desktops could be virtual. Cause back then it was still this, you know, almost hypothetical notion, like could desktops be virtual, and so today, you know, so much of our life is virtual. So much of the things that we do are not actually direct. I was watching this great video by Apple's new augmented reality product, where you sit in the restaurant and you look at it with your iPad, and it's your plate, and you can just shift the menu items, and you see the menu items on your plate in the context of the restaurant and your seat and the person you're sitting across from. So I think the future is now. >> Yeah, it reminds of, you know, the movie Wall-E, the animated one. We're all going to be sitting in chairs with our devices or Ready Player One, you know, very popular sci-fi book that's being done by Speilberg, I believe. >> Yes, yeah, very exciting. >> Tell us a little bit about your book, you know, we talked, when I was younger and used to read a lot of sci-fi, it was like, what stuff had they done 50 years ago that now's reality, and what stuff had they predicted, like, you know, we're going to go away from currency and go digital currency, and it's like we're almost there. But we still don't have flying cars. >> Yeah, we're, I mean, the main problem with flying cars is that we need pilots. And I think actually we're very close to flying cars, cause once we have self-driving vehicles and we no longer need to worry about it being a person behind the joystick, then we're in really good shape. That's really the issue, you know, the problem with flying cars is that we are so incompetent at driving and or flying. That's not our core competency, so let's just put things that do understand how to make those things happen and eliminate us from the equation. >> Everything is a people problem. >> Yeah, so when I wrote the book, Punch Escrow, Punch Escrow, (laughing) when I wrote the book, I really thought about all the things that I read growing up in science fiction, you know, things like teleportation, things like nanotechnology, things like digital currency, you know, how do we make those, how do we present those in a viable way that doesn't seem too science fictiony. Like one of the things I really get when people read the book is it feels really near-future, even though it's set like 100 plus years in the future, all the concepts in it feel very pragmatic or within reach, you know? >> Yeah, absolutely. It's interesting, we look at, you know, what things happen in a couple of years and what things take a long time. So artificial intelligence, machine learning, it's not like these are new concepts, you know? I read a great book by, you know, it was Isaacson, The Innovators. You go back to like Aida Lovelace, and the idea of what a machine or computer would be able to do. So 100 years from now, what's real, what's not real? We still all have jobs or something? >> We have jobs but different. Remember, I don't know if you're a historian, but back in the industrial age, there was a whole bunch of people screaming doom and gloom. In fact, if we go way back to the age of the Luddites, who just hated machines of any kind. I think that in general, we don't like, you know, we're scared of change. So I do think a lot of the jobs that exist today are going to be done by machines or code. That doesn't mean the jobs are going away. It means jobs are changing. A lot of the jobs that people have today didn't exist in the industrial age. So I think that we have to accept that we are going to be pragmatic enough to accept the fact that humans will continue to evolve as the infrastructure powering our world evolves, you know? We talk about living in the age of the quantified self, right? There's a whole bunch that we don't understand how to do yet. For example, I can think of a whole industry that tethers my FitBit to my nutrition. You know, like there's so much opportunity that for us to say, oh that's going to be the end of jobs, or the end of innovation or the end of capitalism, is insane. I think this just ushers in a whole new age of opportunity. And that's me, I'm just an optimist that way, you know. >> So the Luddites did famously try to destroy the machines. But the thing is, the Luddites weren't wrong. They did lose their jobs. So what about the people whose jobs are replaced, as you say net new, there's a net new number of jobs. But specific individuals, like people who manufacture cars for example, lose their jobs because a robot can do that job safer and better and faster than a human can do it. So what do we do with those humans? Because how do we get people to have new jobs and retrain themselves? >> I address some of these notions in the book. For example, one of the weird things that we're suffering from is the lack of welders in society today, cause welding has become this weird thing that we don't think we need people for, so people don't really get trained up in it because, you know, machines do a lot of welding but there's actually specialty welding that machines can't do. So I think the people who are really good at the things that they do will continue to have careers. I think their careers will become more niche. Therefore they'll be able to create, to demand a higher wage for it because almost like a carpenter, you know, a specialist carpenter will be able to earn a much higher wage today by having fewer customers who want really custom carpentry versus things that can be carved up by a machine. So I think what we end up seeing is that it's not that those jobs go away. It's they become more specialized. People still want Rolls Royces. People still want McLarens. Those are not done by machines. Those are hand-made, you know? >> That's an interesting point, so the value of something being hand-made becomes, instead of it being a worse product, it's actually- >> Tal: That's a big concept in the book. >> Oh okay, right. >> A big concept in the book is that we place a lot of value on the uniqueness of an object. And that parlays in multiple ways. So one of the examples that I use in the book is the value of a Big Mac actually coming from McDonald's. Like, you can make a Big Mac. We know the recipe for a Big Mac. But there is a weird sort of nacent value to getting a Big Mac from McDonald's. It's something in our brain that clicks that tethers it to an originality. Diamonds, another really good example. Or you know, we know there's synthetic diamonds. We still want the ones that get mined in the cave. Why? We don't know. Right, they're just special. >> Because De Beers still has really good marketing. (laughing) >> So I think there's- >> That's interesting, so the concept of uniqueness, which again comes to scarcity and so on. As an author, someone who is no doubt, signed a lot of his book, that means that that book is unique because it's signed by the author, unlike something which is mass produced and there is hopefully thousands and thousands of copies that you sell. >> Going into this, I actually thought about that a lot. And that's why I've created like multiple editions of the book. So like the first 500 people who pre-ordered it, they get like a special edition of the book that's like stamped and all this kind of stuff. I even used different pens. (laughs) I appreciate that because I'm also a collector. I collect music, I collect books. And you know, so I see those aspects in myself. So I know what I value about them, you know? >> And the crossover between music and books is interesting. So as someone who has a musical background, I know that there's a lot of musicians who'll come out with special editions, and you know, because this is an age where we can download it. You can download the book. Do you think there is something, is there something that is intrinsic to having a physical object in a virtual world? >> I think to our generation, yes. I'm not so sure about millennials, when they grow up. But there are, for example, I'm going to see U2 next week, I'm very lucky to see that. But part of the U2 buying experience, to get access to the presale, you need to be part of their fan club. To be a part of their fan club, you need to get, you get like a whole bunch of limited edition posters, limited edition vinyl, and all this kind of stuff. So there's an experience. It's no longer just about going to see U2 at a concert. There's like the entire package of you being a special U2 fan. And they surround it with uniqueness. It's not necessarily limited, but there's an enhanced experience that can't just be, it's not just about you having a ticket to a single concert. >> Justin: Yeah, okay. >> I'm curious, the genre, if you'd call it, is hard science fiction. >> Yes. >> The challenge with that is, you know, what is an extension of what we're doing, and what is fiction? And people probably poke at that. Have you had any interesting experience, things like that? I mean, I've listened to a lot of stuff like Andy Weir, like let the community give feedback before he created the final The Martian. (laughing) But so yeah, what's it like, cause we can, the geeks can be really harsh. >> Yes, I've learned from my Reddit experience that, so what's really funny about it is the first draft of this novel was hard as nails. It was crazy. And my publisher read it, and it would have made all the hard science fiction guys super happy. My publisher read it, he was like, you've written a really great hard science fiction book, and all five people who read it are going to love it. (laughing) You know, but like, I came here with my buddy Danny. He couldn't even get through the first three pages of it. He's like, he wanted to read it. So part of working through the editorial process is saying, look, I care a lot about the science because one of my deep goals is to write a STEM-oriented book that gets people excited about technology and present the future as not a dystopian place. And so I wanted the science to be there and have a sort of gravity to the narrative. But yeah, it's tough. I worked with a physicist, a biologist, a geneticist, an anthropologist, and a lawyer. (laughs) Just to try to figure out, how do we carve out, you know, what does the future look like, what does the evolution of each individual sciences, we talked about the mosquitoes, right? You know, we're already doing a lot of crazy stuff with mosquitoes. We're modifying them so that the males mate with females that carry the Zika virus, you know, give birth to offspring that never reach maturity. I mean, this is just crazy, it's science fiction. And now that they're working on modifying female mosquitoes into vaccine carriers instead of disease carriers. I mean, this is science fiction, right? Like who believes this stuff? It's crazy. >> Christopher is amazing. >> Yeah, I've loved, there's been a bunch of movies recently that have kind of helped to educate on STEM some, you know, Martian got a lot of people excited, you know, Hidden Figures, the one that I could being my kids that are teenagers now into it and they get excited, oh, science is great. So the movie, how much will you be involved? You know, what can you share about that experience, too, so far? >> It's been, it's very surreal. That's the word is use to describe it, the honest, god's honest truth, I mean. I've been very lucky in that my representation in Hollywood is this rock-solid guy called Howie Sanders. And he's this bigger-than-life Hollywood agent guy. He's hooked me up, we've made a lot of business decisions that we're focused less on the money and more on the team, which is nice to be, like when you're in your 40s and you're more financially settled, you're not in the kind of situation where you might be in your 20s and just going to sign the first deal that people give you. So we really focused on hooking up with like the director, James Bovin is, you know, he's the guy who co-created Flight of the Concords. He did the Muppets movie, you know, Alice Through the Looking Glass. Really professional guy but also really understands the tone of the book, which is like humorous, you know, kind of sarcastic. It's not just about the technology. It's also about the characters. Same thing with the production team. The two producers, Mandeville Productions, I was just talking to Todd Lieberman, and we're talking about just what is augmented reality, like how does it look like on the screen? So I'm not- >> It's not going to look like Blade Runner is what I'm hearing. >> (laughs) I don't know. It's going to look real. I imagine, I don't know, they're going to make whatever movie they're going to make, but their perspective, one of the things we talked about is keeping the movie very grounded. Like you know, one of the big questions they ask first going into it is before we even had any sort of movie discussions is like is this more of like a Looper, Gattica, or District Nine, or is it more like The Fifth Element, you know, I mean, is it like, do you want it to be this sort of grounded movie that feels authentic and real and near future or do you want this to be like completely alien and weird and out of it. And the story is more grounded. So I think a lot, hopefully what we display on the screen will not feel that far away from reality. >> Okay, yeah. >> You do marketing in your day job. >> I do. >> I'm curious as you look at this, kind of the balance of educating, reaching a broad audience, you have passion for STEM, what's your thoughts around that? Is it, I worry there's so much general, like television or things like that, when I see the science stuff, it like makes me groan. Because you know, it's like I don't understand that. >> I am the worst, because I got a security background too, so that's the one I get scrambled on. The war, I mean, like. >> Wait, thank goodness I updated my firewall settings because I saved the world from terrorists. >> Hang on, we're breaking through the first firewall. Now we're through the second firewall. (laughing) Now we're going through the third firewall, like 15 firewalls. And let me upload the virus, like all that stuff. It's difficult for me. I think that, you know, hopefully, there's also a group in Hollywood called the Hollywood Science and Entertainment Exchange. And they're a group of scientists who work with film makers on, you know, reigning things in. And film makers don't usually take all their advice, i.e. Interstellar, (laughing) but you know, I think (laughing) in many cases there's some really good ideas that come to play into it that hopefully bring up, like I think Jarvis for example, in Iron Man or the Avengers is a really cool implementation of what the future of AI systems might be like. And I know they used the Hollywood Science Exchange to figure out how is that going to work? And I think the marketing aspect is, you know, the reason I came up with the idea for this book is because my CEO of a company I used to work for, he had this whole conversation about teleportation, like teleportation was impossible. And he's like, it's not because the science, yes, the science is a problem right now, but we'll get over it. The main issue is that nobody would ever step foot into a device that vaporizes them and then printed them out somewhere else. And I said, well that's great, cause that's a marketing problem. (laughing) >> Yeah, you're dead every time you do it. But it's the same you, I can't tell the difference. >> Well, you say you're dead, I'm saying you're just moving. (laughing) >> Artificial intelligence, you know, kind of a big gap between the hype to where we need to go. What's your thoughts on that space in general? >> I think that we have, it's a great question because I feel like that's a term that gets thrown around a lot, and I think as a result it's becoming watered down. So you've this sort of artificial intelligence that comes with like, you know, Google building an app that can beat the world's best Go player, which is a really, really difficult puzzle. The problem is, that app can do one thing, and that's play Go. You put in it a chess game, and it's like I don't know what's going on. >> It's a very specialized kind of intelligence, yeah. >> Now with Open AI, you know, they just had some pretty interesting implementations where they actually played video games with a real live competition and won. Again, you know, but without the smack talk, which really I think would add a lot. Now you got to get an AI to smack talk. So I think the problem is we haven't figured out a really good way of creating a general purpose AI. And there's a lot of parallels to the evolution of computing in general because if you look at how computers were before we had general purpose operating systems like Unix, every computer was built to do a very, very specific function, and that's kind of what AI is right now. So we're still waiting to have a sort of general purpose AI that can do a lot of specialized activities. >> Even most robots are still very single-purpose today. >> That's the fundamental problem. But you're seeing the Cambridge guys are working on sort of the bipedal robot that can do lots of things. And Siri's getting better, Cortana's getting better, Watson's getting better, but we're not there. We still need to find a really good way of integrating deep knowledge with general purpose conversational AI. Cause that's really what you need to like, Stu, what do you need? Here, let me give it to you, you know? >> Do you draw a distinction between AI that's able to simply sort of react as a fairly complex machine or something that can create new things and add something? >> That's in the book as well. So the fundamental thing that I don't think we get around even in the future is giving computers the ability to actually come up with new ideas. There's actually a career, the main job of the protagonist in the book, his job is a salter. And his job is to salt AI algorithms to introduce entropy so they can come up with new ideas. >> Okay, interesting. >> So based off the sort of chaos theory. >> Like chaos monkey, right? >> Yeah. And that's really what you're trying to do is like, okay, react to things that are happening because you can't just come up with them on their own. There's a whole, I don't want to bore you, but there's a whole bunch of stuff in the book about how that works. >> It's like hand-carving ideas that are then mass produced by machines. >> Yeah, I don't know if you guys are going to have Simon Crosby on here, he's kind of like an expert on that. He was the Dean of Kings College, which is where Turing came from. So he really knows a lot about that. He's got a lot of strong ideas about it. But I learned a lot from him in that regard. There's a lot of like, the snarky spirit of Simon Crosby lives on in my book somewhere. But he's just funny cause he's, coming from that field, he immediately sees a lot of BS right off the bat, whenever anybody's presenting. He's got like the ability to just cut through it. Because he understands what it would actually take to make that happen, you know? So I tried to preserve some of that in the book. >> That is refreshing in the tech industry. >> So Tal, I need to let you, you know, wrap this up. Give us a plug for the book, tell us, when are we going to be able to see this on the big screen? >> I don't know about the big screen, but the Punch Escrow is now available. You can get it on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, anywhere books are sold. It's been optioned by Lionsgate. The director attached to it is James Bovin, production team is Mandeville Productions. I'm very excited about it. Go check it out. It's a pretty quick read, reads like a technothriller. It's not too hard. And it's fun for the whole family. I think one of the coolest things about it is that the feedback I've been getting has been that it really is appealing to everybody. I've got mother-in-laws reading it, you know, it's pretty cool. Initially I sold it, my initial audience is like us, but it's kind of cool, like, Stu will finish the book, he'll give it to, you know, wife, daughter, anything, and they're really digging it. So it's kind of fun. >> Justin: Thanks a lot. >> Tal Klein, really appreciate you coming. Congratulations on the book, we look forward to the movie. Maybe, you know, we'll get the Cube involved down the road. (laughing) >> And we're giving away 75 copies of it here at Lakeside booth, if you guys want to come. >> Tal Klein, author of The Punch Escrow, also CMO of Lakeside, who is here in the thing. But yeah, (laughing) a lot of stuff. Justin and I will be back with more coverage here from VMWorld 2017. You're watching the Cube. (bright music)

>> Hi, I'm Stu Miniman, with theCUBE, and we're here at the Winslow Technology Group Dell EMC User Group, and happy to have on the program multi-time guest of theCUBE, Scott Winslow, who is the president and founder of Winslow Technology Group. Scott, thanks so much for having us here. >> Good to be here, Stu, good afternoon. >> Alright, so, you opened up the event here, I think you've said you got between 150 and 175 users, and, if I remember right, your first user event was actually here, and it was like, what, eight users? So, you know, great location here in Boston, you know, Fenway right behind. You're taking your users to the game. Tell us a little bit about the history of the company, and this event. >> Yeah, when we started the user group 13 years ago, it was here at the Hotel Commonwealth, and it's been a great venue for us. Really it started with eight customers around a conference room table, we had Marty Sanders, the CTO from Compellent, Phil Soran, one of my mentors is the CEO of Compellent and founder, and I think we were talking about, how do we improve the GUI on the Enterprise manager for Compellent, and that was how it started, and kind of last minute, we decided to go to a ball game afterwards, and that was kind of the roots of this event, but you know, it's changed over the 13 or 14 years, but we try to provide really good education for our customers, give them some things to think about in their infrastructure and their environments, we try to be a thought-leader, and it's kind of evolved around that theme for the last 13 or 14 years. Obviously a lot bigger now than it was. We've grown up; the challenge for us is how do we continue to have our customers have a white-glove experience, as we continue to grow, but we're really excited about, where Compellent took us to Dell, and Dell led us to Dell EMC, and you know, here we are. >> Yeah, so, Compellent to Dell, Dell to Dell EMC, and we're still talking to the storage industry about making their user interfaces better, right? >> (laughs) We are, we are. Well, I mean, we are in one sense, but in another sense is you move into hyper-converged, you know, that really is kind of the backdrop for that story, right? Because, as you get into hyper-converged infrastructures, you're talking about, you know, one-click upgrades of server storage networking hypervisor, so I think it really is kind of a good backdrop, and we've seen that evolve over the years. >> Yes, Scott, when I look at your portfolio, it started out very much storage, you now have server storage network hyper-converged, the PC and mobile cloud, you know, how many people do you have in the company now, and how do you manage that kind of change and expanse of your portfolio without getting a mild wide and an inch deep? >> Yeah, we've got 37 people in the company now, so we've added six this year already. I think we try not to go too wide in terms of number of vendors. We've tried to focus on a few key strategic partners, so for us that's, you know, Dell EMC, it's Nutanix, it's VMware, and try to really specialize in those areas. We think customers are looking for a partner that's got deep technical expertise, really good sales acumen. I guess a fair criticism of us would be, "you don't go wide enough, you're not partnered "with Cisco or HP," but we'll accept that. We think it's led to 35% growth over the last three years, and we think it's been a good strategy for us. >> Yeah, no, strong growth absolutely. What are you hearing from your users, you know, how much does this digital transformation, pulling them along, and driving them to kind of that breadth of solutions that you're offering? >> Yeah, I mean we're having conversations with them every day, and in the conversation, often times, is do we continue kind of down the path we've been? We're very comfortable with a 3-2-1 solution, for us, a lot of times that's a Dell server, Dell networking, Dell Compellent, we're very comfortable providing that, but you know, as they look and say, "Hey, we built this wonderful car, but it's probably "going to run out of gas at some point," do we move into more of a hyper-converged solution? Do we look at, you know, a cloud solution? And, you know, how do they continue to evolve their environments? And that's provided a great role for us to consult with them, in that regard. >> Yeah, all of your partners, Dell, Nutanix, VMware, all trying to figure out how they live in kind of this hybrid or multi-cloud world. How are your partners doing, what you as kind of the voice of the customer, do you want to see from them to kind of mature these solutions even further? >> Well, I think we've seen it already, if you think about like at .NEXT, you know, Nutanix announces cloud integration with Google, I think we're looking for solutions where we can provide a really good on-prem solution for some of the data, but then you have to have the ability to go off-prem and have cloud integration, and if I look at Nutanix, Dell EMC, VMware, I think they're providing that. If you look at, like, an NSX solution from VMware, for example, you know, we've seen the virtualization of, with VMware we've seen the virtualization of storage with products like Compellent and others, and now you've got a virutalization layer and abstraction layer in the networking with NSX, and that provides some real benefits in terms of what can be done around operating efficiencies of networking, microsegmentation, etc. So, we see those vendors providing those kinds of solutions. >> Yeah, so, NSX is going to be one of the critical components when we get VMware on AWS, I'm curious whether that, Microsoft Azure Stack, or Jeremy Burton was talking this morning about Virtustream being able to go on-premesis. Those solutions, do they excite you, do they excite your customers? You know, what do you say? >> They do, they do excite our customers. I would say right now, I don't think they excite our CFOs much. We're having a lot of conversations with customers about the things like NSX. I wouldn't say it's been a big revenue driver for us. We're still driving a lot of revenue through some of the traditional, you know, server storage networking hyper-converged solutions, but I would say, as it relates to like an NSX for example, it's a topic that customers want to talk about, security's very much top of mind, and it hasn't translated yet into a lot of revenue, but it's definitely a part of the building blocks that our customers are looking at. >> Yeah, you bring up your CFO, and I'm curious, how does the customers looking to kind of change Capex into Opex, how does that affect you, are service providers in the public cloud, are those an opportunity for you, for partnership? Are they a challenge for the kind of the channel's business model? >> Yeah, it's a good question. I think we've seen a lot of the partners that we work with try to provide an operating, Opex model, and try to be more cloud-like in their solutions, so if you look at the Nutanix's and VxRail's, you know, having a solution from Dell EMC or from Nutanix where you can present it up almost like a cloud solution where they only have to commit to maybe 40% of the overall payment, or they can grow it very quickly like they would a cloud solution. So we're seeing a lot of that type of activity, I would say, you know, and at the same time, we're reaching out to the cloud providers, the Amazons and the Azures, to figure out, can we be partnered with them, and what does that model look like, and it's certainly not going to be a lot of margin working with those types of providers, but you can build a big consulting practice around it. So we're heavily engaged in those kind of discussions. >> Alright, Scott, last thing is, your users, as they walk away from this year's event, what do you want them to think about, their relationship with you, and kind of their big takeaway from the event? >> Yeah, I mean, for us, we try to be the trusted advisor, right, that's our role. You've got a number of OEMs out there. We're putting solutions together, that's why we call our engineering team the solutions architects, because we're piecing it all together for them. I look at the manufacturers kind of like as a big aircraft carrier, and they're good aircraft carriers, but we're a little speedboat, right? We can go back and forth, we're very nimble, we can demo stuff quickly. So I want them to think about us as a solution provider, as a trusted advisor, and to think about some of the new technologies that we presented up today. They're so busy working through day-to-day problems that, in one afternoon, to be able to come out here and here about, like, a cloud solution, like Virtustream, NSX, to hear about what's going on in hyper-converge, what's going on in managed security market, I'm hoping they'll take away some of those ideas and think about how it might apply in their business. >> Alright, well, Scott, really appreciate you bringing theCUBE here, looking forward to talking to a lot of your customers as well as some of the partners and, you know, everyone here at the show. I've been Stu Miniman, this is theCUBE.

>> Announcer: Live from Santa Clara, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE. Covering Cloud Foundry Summit 2017. Brought to you by the Cloud Foundry Foundation and Pivotal. >> Welcome back. I'm Stu Miniman, joined by my cohost John Troyer. Happy to welcome back to the program, friend of theCUBE, James Watters SVP of Product at Pivotal. James, great to see you, and thanks for helping to get theCUBE to Cloud Foundry Summit. >> Yeah, I was just saying, this is the first time theCUBE is at CF Summit, so we're official now. We're all grown up. We're out in the daylight and you know you made it when theCUBE shows up, so excited to have you here. >> Absolutely. So a lot of things going on. We had Chip on talking about some of the big announcements. >> James: Yeah. >> From Pivotal's standpoint, what's some of the important milestones in releases happening. >> Yeah, I think in the simplest terms, the big new thing came out of our collaboration with Google is called Kubo, which is Kubernetes on BOSH. And I think that was a big move that got a lot of applause in the keynote when it was announced yesterday. And I think it shows two things. One is that Cloud Foundry really is going to embrace multiple ways of deploying artifacts and managing things, and that we're really the cloud native platform and willing to embrace container abstractions, app abstractions, data abstractions pretty uniquely, which is, there hasn't been another platform out there that embraces those with specialized ways of doing them. And I'm really excited about the customer response to that approach. >> Yeah, James, help us unpack that a little bit. So we look at the term seems this year, everybody, it's multi-cloud, we're all talking back-- >> James: Yeah. >> I think back to the days when we talked about platform as a service. One of the pieces was, oh, well, I should be able to have my application and move lots of places. That's what I heard when I talked about Cloud Foundry. When Docker came out everybody was like, oh PAS's dead, Docker's going to do this. When Kubernetes came out, oh wait, this takes the core value of what platform as a service has done. And today you're saying Kubo, Cloud Foundry, and Kubernetes with some BOSH, pulling it all together. Walk us through, 'cause it's nuanced. And there's pieces of that. So help us understand. >> Yeah, I like to say that even though sometimes you have open source communities have their own sense of identity, there's really not a god abstraction in cloud programming. Like there's not one abstraction that does it all. The simplest way you can see that is that people are interested in function as a service today. They're also interested in container as a service. Well, those two are not, they're not compatible. Right, like you don't deploy your whole Docker image to Amazon Lambda, but people are interested in both of those. And then, at the same time, there's this hyper growth of Spring Boot, which is, I think, the most efficient way of doing Java programming in the cloud, which is really at the core of our app abstraction. And so we see people, there's hyper growth, and function as a service, app as a service, especially with Spring Boot, and then also container. And I think the approach that we've had is beause there's not one god abstraction, that our platform needs to embrace all of those. And that actually, it's pretty intuitive, once you start using them, and you get beyond the slides and the buzz words. When to use one versus the other. And I think that's what users have been really excited about, is that Pivotal and Cloud Foundry communities embraced kind of that breadth, in terms of, different approaches to cloud native. Does that make sense to you, John? >> Yeah it's starting to, right? A lot of people like to do all or nothing about everything, right? >> James: Yeah. >> It's all going to be, we're going to be serverless by next year. And that doesn't make any sense at all. >> James: That's right. >> And so you have multiple programming models, like you said, multiple different kinds of abstractions, so when would somebody want to use, say containers, as a service, or container orchestration, versus some of the other application models. >> Yeah, it's a really, really great question. And I just had a really productive customer meeting this morning, where we went through that. They had some no-JS developers, that they said, look, these developers just want to get their code to production. They don't want to think about systems, they don't want to think about operating systems, they don't want to think about clusters. They're just like, here's my app, run it for me. And that's the core trick that Cloud Foundry's done the best of any platform in the world, which is CF Push, and so, for a no-JS developer, here's my app, run it for me, load balance it, health management, log aggregate it, give me quotas on my memory usage, everything. That's a good example of that. Then, they also had a team that was deploying Elasticsearch and some packaged applications. And they needed the level of control that Kubernetes in terms of pods, co-location, full control of a system image, the ability to do networking in certain ways, the ability to control storage. And you don't just take Elasticsearch and say here's my Elasticsearch tarball, run it for me. You actually start to set up a system, and that's where Kubernetes container as a service is perfect. Then the other question is how do you stitch those together, and you've seen the Kubernetes community adopt the Service broker API, the open Service Broker API out of Cloud Foundry, as a common way of saying, oh, I have an Elasticsearch over here, but I want to bind it to an application. Well, they use the CF services API. I think it's early days, but there's actually a coherent fabric forming across these different approaches, and it's also immediately intuitive. Like we didn't know, when we first conceived of adding Kubo to the mix, we didn't know what the educational level of education we have to provide, but it's been intuitive to every client I've talked so far, so that's fun for me to watch you say a few words like, oh, we get it. Yeah, we use that for this and this for this. >> All right, James, I have to up-level it a little bit, there. >> James: Little deep? >> You travel way more than I do. We kind of watch on social media. Prove me wrong, but i can't imagine when you're talking in the C-suite of a Fortune 100, pick your financial, or insurance company, that they are immersed in the languages and platform discussions that the hoodie crowd is. So where are you having those discussions? >> James: Yeah. >> One of the things, I come into the show and say Pivotal and Cloud Foundry are helping customers with that whole digital transformation. >> James: We are. >> And making that reality. So help us with that disconnect of, I'm down in the weeds trying to build this very complex stack, and the C-suite says, I want to be faster. >> I'll tell you what the C-suite has to solve. They've got to solve two things. One is they've got to deliver faster and more efficiently than ever before. That's their language, and our core app abstraction has been killer for digital transformation. Deliver apps faster, find your value line, and approach problems that way. They get that. That's why we've been succeeding economically, that's been a bit hit. But they also have another problem is, they want to retain talent, and when they're trying to retain talent some of those times, those folks are saying, well, we want little bit more control. We want to be able to use a container if we want, or think about something like Spring Cloud Data Flow to do high-end pipelines. And so they do care about having a partner in Pivotal and in Cloud Foundry, they can embrace those new trends. Because they've got to be able to not be completely top down in how they're enabling their organizations, while also encouraging efficiency. And so that's where the message of multiple abstractions really hits home for them, because they don't always want to referee some of the emerging trends and tech, and telling their team what they have to use. So by providing function, app, container, and data service, we can be the one partner that doesn't force that a priori in the discussion. Does that make sense? >> Is there friction ever, when saying, okay here, we've got this platform that actually is rather opinionated versus, hey, go choose everything open source and do whatever you want. I think that there's political boundaries between different parts of organization, this is a lot of what DevOps, I think, as a movement has been so important. Which is saying actually, you need to blur the political boundaries in the organization to get to faster end-to-end throughput and collaboration. So I think that's definitely a reality. At the same time, the ability that we've had to embrace these different approaches allows the level of empowerment that I think is appropriate. Like I think what we've been trying to do is not necessarily cater to a free-for-all, we've been saying, what are the right tools in the tool chest that people need to get their job done. So I think that's been very warmly received. So I guess I'd say that hasn't been a big problem for us. >> I want to ask you about the ecosystem. I think back when the ecosystem started, IBM, HPE, Cisco were big players. I come in this week, and it's Google Cloud, Microsoft Cloud, and Pivotal still is, last time I checked it was what, 70% of the code base created by Pivotal. >> James: I think it's 60 or 55 now. >> The change in the ecosystem what that means, and what that means to kind of open source, open core. >> Yeah, so I think in addition to the Kubo work that we've done, the other big news this week is that Microsoft joined the Cloud Foundry Foundation. So, essentially the largest software company in the world-- >> Wait, wait, Microsoft loves open source, I hear. Did you hear that one? >> They do. >> I know, it's still shocking for a lot of us that have known Microsoft for a long time, don't you think? And I'm not trying to be facetious, they totally are involved, I've talked to lots of Microsoft people. Kudos to them, they're doing a really good job. Even if I look at the big cloud guys and throw in VMware in there, Microsoft is one of the leaders in participating and embracing open source. >> They are and I think Corey Sanders, who got on stage, announced this, he leads the Azure virtual machine service, and a lot of the other Azure services for them, I think that their strategy is they want to run every workload. Like if you talk to Corey about it, he's like, you got workload, we want to be your partner. And I think that's been the change at Microsoft, is once you go into cloud, it's sort of like Pivotal embracing multiple program abstractions, right, once you have a platform you want as much critical mass on it as you can. And I think that's really helped Microsoft embrace the open source community in a very pragmatic way. Because they are a business, a company, right? And I think open source is required to do business in software these days, right, like in a way that it wasn't 10 years ago. As you look at your customer set and multi-cloud, right? From the very beginning multi-cloud was baked into the concept of Cloud Foundry. Like you said, just push, right? >> James: Yeah. >> So what do you see as common patterns? We've talked to folks already who, on-prem. Obviously, you all are running your CF service in partnership, your main one, your partnership with Google, You work with Amazon, what do you see in customer base, right? >> Yeah, so, let me just share a little bit from a good customer. This is a prospect conversation more, like someone who's starting the journey. They were currently running on-prem, on an OpenStack environment, which had some cost of maintenance for them. They were considering also using their vServer environment, to maybe not have to do as much customization of OpenStack. But there were certain geographies that they wanted to get into. They didn't want to build data centers. And what they were confronting was, they'd have to go learn networking and app management on a couple different clouds they wanted to use. And what they liked about our CF Fabric, across that, was that they said, oh, this is one operating model for any of those clouds. And that's the pattern that we see is that companies want to have one cloud operating model while there's five major cloud players today. So like how do those two forces in the market combine? And I think that's where multi-cloud becomes powerful. It's not necessarily multi-cloud for it's own sake, but it is the idea that you can engage and use multiple resources from these different data center providers without having to completely change your whole organization around it. Because taking on, how you run vServer versus OpenStack is different, as you know, right? >> Right, right, and talking about change, right? You and I were together at VMware when you launched this thing. >> James: Yeah. >> And there was a profound kind of conceptual chasm to leap for the VMware operators to figure out what was going on here. >> James: Yeah. >> So in this new world of services operation in multi-cloud, how are you seeing people, how's the adoption going, you just launched, or the foundation's launched its new certification stuff, can you talk a little bit about the new skill set needed, or how you're seeing people, the people formerly known as sys admins are now actually doing cloud operations. >> Well, I'm not sure if you saw Pat Gelsinger's announcement at Dell World, Dell EMC World, about developer-ready infrastructure. And I think this is a critical evolution that our partnership with VMware is more important than ever. Which is they're now saying all of these people that have been doing traditional system administration, you need to now offer developer-ready infrastructure. And this is an infrastructure that all the networking and network micro segmentation rules need to be there, all of the great things that the VMware admins have provided before needs to be there, but it needs to be turnkey for a developer. That developer shouldn't just get what we had and 2009, when you and I were working there together, which is like, here's a virtual machine, go build the rest of the environment. It should look more like, here's my application, run it for me. Here's my container, run it for me. And so what we're seeing is a lot of people upping their game now. To say, oh, the new thing is providing these services for developers 'cause that ties into digital transformation, ties into what the business is doing, ties into productivity. So I'm seeing a Renaissance of sys admins having a whole new set of tools. So that makes me excited. And one of the cool things we're seeing, I'd love to get your opinion on this is, this cool operating ratio of, we've had our clients present. Their administers of Cloud Foundry instances are able to run tens of thousands of apps in containers with two to four to five people. And so now they've got this super power, which is like, hey bring as many of the applications as the business needs to me. I can go run 10,000 app containers with a small team of people with a good lifestyle. To me, that's actually kind of incredible to see that leverage. >> Yeah, I think it's a huge shift, right? 'Cause you aren't setting up the VLANs and the micro segmentation and the rest of the stuff. >> Yeah, it's not all by hand, and so now the idea with our NSX partnership, is I'm really excited about, fun to talk to you about it. We used to work in Building E and have lunch out there, is that when you provision a CF app, we're working with the NSX team that all the segmentation will align with the app permissions. And this is a big deal, because it used to be that the network team and the app team didn't really have a good conduit of communication. So now it's like, okay I'm going to bind my app to this data service. I want NSX to make sure that permission is followed. To me, that's going to be a revolution of getting the app, and the DevOps teams and the networking teams to work together, clearly. So I'm pumped about that. >> Running low on time. A couple of quick questions about Pivotal. Number one is, now that you're doing Kubo, could we expect to see Pivotal join the CNCF? So EMC is is joining the CNCF. We have friendly relations with the CNCF, I don't think that's at all out of the cards. I just know current, I don't have any news on that today. But we've been very friendly with them, and we started working with Google on that, so no immediate plans there, but we'd be open to that, I believe. >> Okay, and secondly, my understanding, the last announcement on revenue, you can't speak to the IPO or anything, James, above your pay grade, but $275 million in billing on PCF, did I get that right? What do you see is kind of the mix of how you're revenued, are you a software company, a services company? The big data versus the cloud piece. How do we look at Pivotal going forward? >> Yeah, what'd I say is I primarily oversee the Cloud Foundry portion of what we do. And services are an incredibly important part of our mix, Pivotal labs. When you think about this developer-ready infrastructure tend, like a lot of the way you organize your developers can change too. So we talked about how the sys admins jobs change. They gets this platform scale, well the developer's job has changed now, too. They have to learn how to do CICD, they've got to learn how to potentially turn around agile requirements from the business on a weekly basis versus every six months. So Pivotal labs has certainly been critical to that mix for us. But PCF in and of itself, has been a very successful software business. And I think, I believe can grow into the billions of dollars a year in software, and that's what kind of keeps me excited about every day. >> All right, James, I want to give you the final word. You speak to so many customers. >> James: A few. >> The whole digital transformation thing, what are you seeing? How do we help customers along that moving faster. >> That's a, it's a big topic. And the thing that's really interesting about what PCF does is, that it helps people change their organizations, not just their technology. And this has certainly happened in the vServer environment, right? Like it would change your organization, but we're even going higher, which is like, how are your developers organized? How operating teams organize. How you think about security. How you think about patching. Like the reason why I agree that it's transformative, is that it's not just a change of technology, it's these new technologies allow you to rebuild your organization end-to-end, of how it delivers business results. And that makes it both a humbling and an exciting time to be in the industry, because I personally, don't have all the answers every time. People ask about organizations and what to do there. Those are complex issues, but I think we've tried to partner with them to go on that journey together. >> Unfortunately, James, we're going to have to leave it there. We will definitely catch up with you at many more events later this year. And we'll be back with more coverage here from the Cloud Foundry Summit 2017. You're watching theCUBE. (techno music)