>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from the cube and ETR, this is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Organizations have considerable room to improve their performance without making expensive changes to their talent, their structure, or their fundamental business model. You don't need a slew of consultants to tell you what to do. You already know. What you need is to immediately ratchet up expectations, energy, urgency, and intensity. You have to fight mediocrity every step of the way. Amp it up and the results will follow. This is the fundamental premise of a hard-hitting new book written by Frank Slootman, CEO of Snowflake, and published earlier this year. It's called "Amp It Up, Leading for Hypergrowth "by Raising Expectations, Increasing Urgency, "and Elevating Intensity." Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights, powered by ETR. At Snowflake Summit last month, I was asked to interview Frank on stage about his new book. I've read it several times. And if you haven't read it, you should. Even if you have read it, in this Breaking Analysis, we'll dig deeper into the book and share some clarifying insights and nuances directly from Slootman himself from my one-on-one conversation with him. My first question to Slootman was why do you write this book? Okay, it's kind of a common throwaway question. And how the heck did you find time to do it? It's fairly well-known that a few years ago, Slootman put up a post on LinkedIn with the title Amp It Up. It generated so much buzz and so many requests for Frank's time that he decided that the best way to efficiently scale and share his thoughts on how to create high-performing companies and organizations was to publish a book. Now, he wrote the book during the pandemic. And I joked that they must not have Netflix in Montana where he resides. In a pretty funny moment, he said that writing the book was easier than promoting it. Take a listen. >> Denise, our CMO, you know, she just made sure that this process wasn't going to. It was more work for me to promote this book with all these damn podcasts and other crap, than actually writing the book, you know. And after a while, I was like I'm not doing another podcast. >> Now, the book gives a lot of interesting background information on Slootman's career and what he learned at various companies that he led and participated in. Now, I'm not going to go into most of that today, which is why you should read the book yourself. But Slootman, he's become somewhat of a business hero to many people, myself included. Leaders like Frank, Scott McNealy, Jayshree Ullal, and my old boss, Pat McGovern at IDG, have inspired me over the years. And each has applied his or her own approach to building cultures and companies. Now, when Slootman first took over the reins at Snowflake, I published a Breaking Analysis talking about Snowflake and what we could expect from the company now that Slootman and CFO Mike Scarpelli were back together. In that post, buried toward the end, I referenced the playbook that Frank used at Data Domain and ServiceNow, two companies that I followed quite closely as an analyst, and how it would be applied at Snowflake, that playbook if you will. Frank reached out to me afterwards and said something to the effect of, "I don't use playbooks. "I am a situational leader. "Playbooks, you know, they work in football games. "But in the military, they teach you "situational leadership." Pretty interesting learning moment for me. So I asked Frank on the stage about this. Here's what he said. >> The older you get, the more experience that you have, the more you become a prisoner of your own background because you sort of think in terms of what you know as opposed to, you know, getting outside of what you know and trying to sort of look at things like a five-year-old that has never seen this before. And then how would you, you know, deal with it? And I really try to force myself into I've never seen this before and how do I think about it? Because at least they're very different, you know, interpretations. And be open-minded, just really avoid that rinse and repeat mentality. And you know, I've brought people in from who have worked with me before. Some of them come with me from company to company. And they were falling prey to, you know, rinse and repeat. I would just literally go like that's not what we want. >> So think about that for a moment. I mean, imagine coming in to lead a new company and forcing yourself and your people to forget what they know that works and has worked in the past, put that aside and assess the current situation with an open mind, essentially start over. Now, that doesn't mean you don't apply what has worked in the past. Slootman talked to me about bringing back Scarpelli and the synergistic relationship that they have and how they build cultures and the no BS and hard truth mentality they bring to companies. But he bristles when people ask him, "What type of CEO are you?" He says, "Do we have to put a label on it? "It really depends on the situation." Now, one of the other really hard-hitting parts of the book was the way Frank deals with who to keep and who to let go. He uses the Volkswagen tagline of drivers wanted. He says in his book, in companies there are passengers and there are drivers, and we want drivers. He said, "You have to figure out really quickly "who the drivers are and basically throw the wrong people "off the bus, keep the right people, bring in new people "that fit the culture and put them "in the right seats on the bus." Now, these are not easy decisions to make. But as it pertains to getting rid of people, I'm reminded of the movie "Moneyball." Art Howe, the manager of the Oakland As, he refused to play Scott Hatteberg at first base. So the GM, Billy Bean played by Brad Pitt says to Peter Brand who was played by Jonah Hill, "You have to fire Carlos Pena." Don't learn how to fire people. Billy Bean says, "Just keep it quick. "Tell him he's been traded and that's it." So I asked Frank, "Okay, I get it. "Like the movie, when you have the wrong person "on the bus, you just have to make the decision, "be straightforward, and do it." But I asked him, "What if you're on the fence? "What if you're not completely sure if this person "is a driver or a passenger, if he or she "should be on the bus or not on the bus? "How do you handle that?" Listen to what he said. >> I have a very simple way to break ties. And when there's doubt, there's no doubt, okay? >> When there's doubt, there's no doubt. Slootman's philosophy is you have to be emphatic and have high conviction. You know, back to the baseball analogy, if you're thinking about taking the pitcher out of the game, take 'em out. Confrontation is the single hardest thing in business according to Slootman but you have to be intellectually honest and do what's best for the organization, period. Okay, so wow, that may sound harsh but that's how Slootman approaches it, very Belichickian if you will. But how can you amp it up on a daily basis? What's the approach that Slootman takes? We got into this conversation with a discussion about MBOs, management by objective. Slootman in his book says he's killed MBOs at every company he's led. And I asked him to explain why. His rationale was that individual MBOs invariably end up in a discussion about relief of the MBO if the person is not hitting his or her targets. And that detracts from the organizational alignment. He said at Snowflake everyone gets paid the same way, from the execs on down. It's a key way he creates focus and energy in an organization, by creating alignment, urgency, and putting more resources into the most important things. This is especially hard, Slootman says, as the organization gets bigger. But if you do approach it this way, everything gets easier. The cadence changes, the tempo accelerates, and it works. Now, and to emphasize that point, he said the following. Play the clip. >> Every meeting that you have, every email, every encounter in the hallway, whatever it is, is an opportunity to amp things up. That's why I use that title. But do you take that opportunity? >> And according to Slootman, if you don't take that opportunity, if you're not in the moment, amping it up, then you're thinking about your golf game or the tennis match that's going on this weekend or being out on your boat. And to the point, this approach is not for everyone. You're either built for it or you're not. But if you can bring people into the organization that can handle this type of dynamic, it creates energy. It becomes fun. Everything moves faster. The conversations are exciting. They're inspiring. And it becomes addictive. Now let's talk about priorities. I said to Frank that for me anyway, his book was an uncomfortable read. And he was somewhat surprised by that. "Really," he said. I said, "Yeah. "I mean, it was an easy read but uncomfortable "because over my career, I've managed thousands of people, "not tens of thousands but thousands, "enough to have to take this stuff very seriously." And I found myself throughout the book, oh, you know, on the one hand saying to myself, "Oh, I got that right, good job, Dave." And then other times, I was thinking to myself, "Oh wow, I probably need to rethink that. "I need to amp it up on that front." And the point is to Frank's leadership philosophy, there's no one correct way to approach all situations. You have to figure it out for yourself. But the one thing in the book that I found the hardest was Slootman challenged the reader. If you had to drop everything and focus on one thing, just one thing, for the rest of the year, what would that one thing be? Think about that for a moment. Were you able to come up with that one thing? What would happen to all the other things on your priority list? Are they all necessary? If so, how would you delegate those? Do you have someone in your organization who can take those off your plate? What would happen if you only focused on that one thing? These are hard questions. But Slootman really forces you to think about them and do that mental exercise. Look at Frank's body language in this screenshot. Imagine going into a management meeting with Frank and being prepared to share all the things you're working on that you're so proud of and all the priorities you have for the coming year. Listen to Frank in this clip and tell me it doesn't really make you think. >> I've been in, you know, on other boards and stuff. And I got a PowerPoint back from the CEO and there's like 15 things. They're our priorities for the year. I'm like you got 15, you got none, right? It's like you just can't decide, you know, what's important. So I'll tell you everything because I just can't figure out. And the thing is it's very hard to just say one thing. But it's really the mental exercise that matters. >> Going through that mental exercise is really important according to Slootman. Let's have a conversation about what really matters at this point in time. Why does it need to happen? And does it take priority over other things? Slootman says you have to pull apart the hairball and drive extraordinary clarity. You could be wrong, he says. And he admits he's been wrong on many things before. He, like everyone, is fearful of being wrong. But if you don't have the conversation according to Slootman, you're already defeated. And one of the most important things Slootman emphasizes in the book is execution. He said that's one of the reasons he wrote "Amp It Up." In our discussion, he referenced Pat Gelsinger, his former boss, who bought Data Domain when he was working for Joe Tucci at EMC. Listen to Frank describe the interaction with Gelsinger. >> Well, one of my prior bosses, you know, Pat Gelsinger, when they acquired Data Domain through EMC, Pat was CEO of Intel. And he quoted Andy Grove as saying, 'cause he was Intel for a long time when he was younger man. And he said no strategy is better than its execution, which if I find one of the most brilliant things. >> Now, before you go changing your strategy, says Slootman, you have to eliminate execution as a potential point of failure. All too often, he says, Silicon Valley wants to change strategy without really understanding whether the execution is right. All too often companies don't consider that maybe the product isn't that great. They will frequently, for example, make a change to sales leadership without questioning whether or not there's a product fit. According to Slootman, you have to drive hardcore intellectual honesty. And as uncomfortable as that may be, it's incredibly important and powerful. Okay, one of the other contrarian points in the book was whether or not to have a customer success department. Slootman says this became really fashionable in Silicon Valley with the SaaS craze. Everyone was following and pattern matching the lead of salesforce.com. He says he's eliminated the customer service department at every company he's led which had a customer success department. Listen to Frank Slootman in his own words talk about the customer success department. >> I view the whole company as a customer success function. Okay, I'm customer success, you know. I said it in my presentation yesterday. We're a customer-first organization. I don't need a department. >> Now, he went on to say that sales owns the commercial relationship with the customer. Engineering owns the technical relationship. And oh, by the way, he always puts support inside of the engineering department because engineering has to back up support. And rather than having a separate department for customer success, he focuses on making sure that the existing departments are functioning properly. Slootman also has always been big on net promoter score, NPS. And Snowflake's is very high at 72. And according to Slootman, it's not just the product. It's the people that drive that type of loyalty. Now, Slootman stresses amping up the big things and even the little things too. He told a story about someone who came into his office to ask his opinion about a tee shirt. And he turned it around on her and said, "Well, what do you think?" And she said, "Well, it's okay." So Frank made the point by flipping the situation. Why are you coming to me with something that's just okay? If we're going to do something, let's do it. Let's do it all out. Let's do it right and get excited about it, not just check the box and get something off your desk. Amp it up, all aspects of our business. Listen to Slootman talk about Steve Jobs and the relevance of demanding excellence and shunning mediocrity. >> He was incredibly intolerant of anything that he didn't think of as great. You know, he was immediately done with it and with the person. You know, I'm not that aggressive, you know, in that way. I'm a little bit nicer, you know, about it. But I still, you know, I don't want to give into expediency and mediocrity. I just don't, I'm just going to fight it, you know, every step of the way. >> Now, that story was about a little thing like some swag. But Slootman talked about some big things too. And one of the major ways Snowflake was making big, sweeping changes to amp up its business was reorganizing its go-to-market around industries like financial services, media, and healthcare. Here's some ETR data that shows Snowflake's net score or spending momentum for key industry segments over time. The red dotted line at 40% is an indicator of highly elevated spending momentum. And you can see for the key areas shown, Snowflake is well above that level. And we cut this data where responses were greater, the response numbers were greater than 15. So not huge ends but large enough to have meaning. Most were in the 20s. Now, it's relatively uncommon to see a company that's having the success of Snowflake make this kind of non-trivial change in the middle of steep S-curve growth. Why did they make this move? Well, I think it's because Snowflake realizes that its data cloud is going to increasingly have industry diversity and unique value by industry, that ecosystems and data marketplaces are forming around industries. So the more industry affinity Snowflake can create, the stronger its moat will be. It also aligns with how the largest and most prominent global system integrators, global SIs, go to market. This is important because as companies are transforming, they are radically changing their data architecture, how they think about data, how they approach data as a competitive advantage, and they're looking at data as specifically a monetization opportunity. So having industry expertise and knowledge and aligning with those customer objectives is going to serve Snowflake and its ecosystems well in my view. Slootman even said he joined the board of Instacart not because he needed another board seat but because he wanted to get out of his comfort zone and expose himself to other industries as a way to learn. So look, we're just barely scratching the surface of Slootman's book and I've pulled some highlights from our conversation. There's so much more that I can share just even from our conversation. And I will as the opportunity arises. But for now, I'll just give you the kind of bumper sticker of "Amp It Up." Raise your standards by taking every opportunity, every interaction, to increase your intensity. Get your people aligned and moving in the same direction. If it's the wrong direction, figure it out and course correct quickly. Prioritize and sharpen your focus on things that will really make a difference. If you do these things and increase the urgency in your organization, you'll naturally pick up the pace and accelerate your company. Do these things and you'll be able to transform, better identify adjacent opportunities and go attack them, and create a lasting and meaningful experience for your employees, customers, and partners. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks for watching. And thank you to Alex Myerson who's on production and he manages the podcast for Breaking Analysis. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social and in our newsletters. And Rob Hove is our EIC over at Silicon Angle who does some wonderful and tremendous editing. Thank you all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. And you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @dvellante or comment on my LinkedIn posts. And please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in enterprise tech. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. Be well. And we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (upbeat music)

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

>> Narrator: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world. This is a CUBE conversation. >> As you know by now, Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, is stepping aside from his CEO role and AWS CEO, Andy Jassy, is being promoted to head all of Amazon. Bezos, of course, is going to remain executive chairman. Now, 15 years ago, next month, Amazon launched it's simple storage service, which was the first modern cloud offering. And the man who wrote the business plan for AWS, was Andy Jassy, and he's navigated the meteoric rise and disruption that has seen AWS grow into a $45 billion company that draws off the vast majority of Amazon's operating profits. No one in the media has covered Jassy more intimately and closely than John Furrier, the founder of SiliconANGLE. And John joins us today to help us understand on theCUBE this move and what we can expect from Jassy in his new role, and importantly what it means for AWS. John, thanks for taking the time to speak with us. >> Hey, great day. Great to see you as always, we've done a lot of interviews together over the years and we're on our 11th year with theCUBE and SiliconANGLE. But I got to be excited too, that we're simulcasters on Clubhouse, which is kind of cool. Love Clubhouse but not since the, in December. It's awesome. It's like Cube radio. It's like, so this is a Cube talk. So we opened up a Clubhouse room while we're filming this. We'll do more live hits in studio and syndicate the Clubhouse and then take questions after. This is a huge digital transformation moment. I'm part of the digital transformation club on Clubhouse which has almost 5,000 followers at the moment and also has like 500 members. So if you're not on Clubhouse, yet, if you have an iPhone go check it out and join the digital transformation club. Android users you'll have to wait until that app is done but it's really a great club. And Jeremiah Owyang is also doing a lot of stuff on digital transformation. >> Or you can just buy an iPhone and get in. >> Yeah, that's what people are doing. I can see all the influences are on there but to me, the digital transformation, it's always been kind of a cliche, the consumerization of IT, information technology. This has been the boring world of the enterprise over the past, 20 years ago. Enterprise right now is super hot because there's no distinction between enterprise and society. And that's clearly the, because of the rise of cloud computing and the rise of Amazon Web Services which was a side project at AWS, at Amazon that Andy Jassy did. And it wasn't really pleasant at the beginning. It was failed. It failed a lot and it wasn't as successful as people thought in the early days. And I have a lot of stories with Andy that he told me a lot of the inside baseball and we'll share that here today. But we started covering Amazon since the beginning. I was as an entrepreneur. I used it when it came out and a huge fan of them as a company because they just got a superior product and they have always had been but it was very misunderstood from the beginning. And now everyone's calling it the most important thing. And Andy now is becoming Andy Jassy, the most important executive in the world. >> So let's get it to the, I mean, look at, you said to me over holidays, you thought this might have something like this could happen. And you said, Jassy is probably in line to get this. So, tell us, what can you tell us about Jassy? Why is he qualified for this job? What do you think he brings to the table? >> Well, the thing that I know about Amazon everyone's been following the Amazon news is, Jeff Bezos has a lot of personal turmoil. They had his marriage fail. They had some issues with the smear campaigns and all this stuff going on, the run-ins with Donald Trump, he bought the Washington post. He's got a lot of other endeavors outside of Amazon cause he's the second richest man in the world competing with Elon Musk at Space X versus Blue Origin. So the guy's a billionaire. So Amazon is his baby and he's been running it as best he could. He's got an executive team committee they called the S team. He's been grooming people in the company and that's just been his mode. And the rise of AWS and the business performance that we've been documenting on SiliconANGLE and theCUBE, it's just been absolutely changing the game on Amazon as a company. So clearly Amazon Web Services become a driving force of the new Amazon that's emerging. And obviously they've got all their retail business and they got the gaming challenges and they got the studios and the other diversified stuff. So Jassy is just, he's just one of those guys. He's just been an Amazonian from day one. He came out of Harvard business school, drove across the country, very similar story to Jeff Bezos. He did that in 1997 and him and Jeff had been collaborating and Jeff tapped him to be his shadow, they call it, which is basically technical assistance and an heir apparent and groomed him. And then that's how it is. Jassy is not a climber as they call it in corporate America. He's not a person who is looking for a political gain. He's not a territory taker, but he's a micromanager. He loves details and he likes to create customer value. And that's his focus. So he's not a grandstander. In fact, he's been very low profile. Early days when we started meeting with him, he wouldn't meet with press regularly because they weren't writing the right stories. And everyone is, he didn't know he was misunderstood. So that's classic Amazon. >> So, he gave us the time, I think it was 2014 or 15 and he told us a story back then, John, you might want to share it as to how AWS got started. Why, what was the main spring Amazon's tech wasn't working that great? And Bezos said to Jassy, going to go figure out why and maybe explain how AWS was born. >> Yeah, we had, in fact, we were the first ones to get access to do his first public profile. If you go to the Google and search Andy Jassy, the trillion dollar baby, we had a post, we put out the story of AWS, Andy Jassy's trillion dollar baby. This was in early, this was January 2015, six years ago. And, we back then, we posited that this would be a trillion dollar total addressable market. Okay, people thought we were crazy but we wrote a story and he gave us a very intimate access. We did a full drill down on him and the person, the story of Amazon and that laid out essentially the beginning of the rise of AWS and Andy Jassy. So that's a good story to check out but really the key here is, is that he's always been relentless and competitive on creating value in what they call raising the bar outside Amazon. That's a term that they use. They also have another leadership principle called working backwards, which is like, go to the customer and work backwards from the customer in a very Steve Job's kind of way. And that's been kind of Jobs mentality as well at Apple that made them successful work backwards from the customer and make things easier. And that was Apple. Amazon, their philosophy was work backwards from the customer and Jassy specifically would say it many times and eliminate the undifferentiated heavy lifting. That was a key principle of what they were doing. So that was a key thesis of their entire business model. And that's the Amazonian way. Faster, cheaper, ship it faster, make it less expensive and higher value. While when you apply the Amazon shipping concept to cloud computing, it was completely disrupted. They were shipping code and services faster and that became their innovation strategy. More announcements every year, they out announced their competition by huge margin. They introduced new services faster and they're less expensive some say, but in the aggregate, they make more money but that's kind of a key thing. >> Well, when you, I was been listening to the TV today and there was a debate on whether or not, this support tends that they'll actually split the company into two. To me, I think it's just the opposite. I think it's less likely. I mean, if you think about Amazon getting into grocery or healthcare, eventually financial services or other industries and the IOT opportunity to me, what they do, John, is they bring in together the cloud, data and AI and they go attack these new industries. I would think Jassy of all people would want to keep this thing together now whether or not the government allows them to do that. But what are your thoughts? I mean, you've asked Andy this before in your personal interviews about splitting the company. What are your thoughts? >> Well, Jon Fortt at CNBC always asked the same question every year. It's almost like the standard question. I kind of laugh and I ask it now too because I liked Jon Fortt. I think he's an awesome dude. And I'll, it's just a tongue in cheek, Jassy. He won't answer the question. Amazon, Bezos and Jassy have one thing in common. They're really good at not answering questions. So if you ask the same question. They'll just say, nothing's ever, never say never, that's his classic answer to everything. Never say never. And he's always said that to you. (chuckles) Some say, he's, flip-flopped on things but he's really customer driven. For example, he said at one point, no one should ever build a data center. Okay, that was a principle. And then they come out and they have now a hybrid strategy. And I called them out on that and said, hey, what, are you flip-flopping? You said at some point, no one should have a data center. He's like, well, we looked at it differently and what we meant was is that, it should all be cloud native. Okay. So that's kind of revision, but he's cool with that. He says, hey, we'll revise based on what customers are doing. VMware working with Amazon that no one ever thought that would happen. Okay. So, VMware has some techies, Raghu, for instance, over there, super top notch. He worked with Jassy, directly in his team Sanjay Poonen when they went to business school together, they cut a deal. And now Amazon essentially saved VMware, in my opinion. And Pat Gelsinger drove that deal. Now, Pat Gelsinger, CEO, Intel, and Pat told me that directly in candid conversation off theCUBE, he said, hey, we have to make a decision either we're going to be in cloud or we're not going to be in cloud, we will partner. And I'll see, he was Intel. He understood the Intel inside mentality. So that's good for VMware. So Jassy does these kinds of deals. He's not afraid he's got a good stomach for business and a relentless competitor. >> So, how do you think as you mentioned Jassy is a micromanager. He gets deep into the technology. Anybody who's seen his two hour, three hour keynotes. No, he has a really fine grasp of the technology across the entire stack. How do you think John, he will approach things like antitrust, the big tech lash of the unionization of the workforce at Amazon? How do you think Jassy will approach that? >> Well, I think one of the things that emerges Jassy, first of all, he's a huge sports fan. And many people don't know that but he's also progressive person. He's very progressive politically. He's been on the record and off the record saying things like, obviously, literacy has been big on, he's been on basically unrepresented minorities, pushing for that, and certainly cloud computing in tech, women in tech, he's been a big proponent. He's been a big supporter of Teresa Carlson. Who's been rising star at Amazon. People don't know who Teresa Carlson is and they should check out her. She's become one of the biggest leaders inside Amazon she's turned around public sector from the beginning. She ran that business, she's a global star. He's been a great leader and he's been getting, forget he's a micromanager, he's on top of the details. I mean, the word is, and nothing gets approved without Andy, Andy seeing it. But he's been progressive. He's been an Amazon original as they call it internally. He's progressive, he's got the business acumen but he's perfect for this pragmatic conversation that needs to happen. And again, because he's so technically strong having a CEO that's that proficient is going to give Amazon an advantage when they have to go in and change how DC works, for instance, or how the government geopolitical landscape works, because Amazon is now a global company with regions all over the place. So, I think he's pragmatic, he's open to listening and changing. I think that's a huge quality >> Well, when you think of this, just to set the context here for those who may not know, I mean, Amazon started as I said back in 2006 in March with simple storage service that later that year they announced EC2 which is their compute platform. And that was the majority of their business, is still a very large portion of their business but Amazon, our estimates are that in 2020, Amazon did 45 billion, 45.4 billion in revenue. That's actually an Amazon reported number. And just to give you a context, Azure about 26 billion GCP, Google about 6 billion. So you're talking about an industry that Amazon created. That's now $78 billion and Amazon at 45 billion. John they're growing at 30% annually. So it's just a massive growth engine. And then another story Jassy told us, is they, he and Jeff and the team talked early on about whether or not they should just sort of do an experiment, do a little POC, dip their toe in and they decided to go for it. Let's go big or go home as Michael Dell has said to us many times, I mean, pretty astounding. >> Yeah. One of the things about Jassy that people should know about, I think there's some compelling relative to the newest ascension to the CEO of Amazon, is that he's not afraid to do new things. For instance, I'll give you an example. The Amazon Web Services re-invent their annual conference grew to being thousands and thousands of people. And they would have a traditional after party. They called a replay, they'd have a band like every tech conference and their conference became so big that essentially, it was like setting up a live concert. So they were spending millions of dollars to set up basically a one night concert and they'd bring in great, great artists. So he said, hey, what's been all this cash? Why don't we just have a festival? So they did a thing called Intersect. They got LA involved from creatives and they basically built a weekend festival in the back end of re-invent. This was when real life was, before COVID and they turned into an opportunity because that's the way they think. They like to look at the resources, hey, we're already all in on this, why don't we just keep it for the weekend and charge some tickets and have a good time. He's not afraid to take chances on the product side. He'll go in and take a chance on a new market. That comes from directly from Bezos. They try stuff. They don't mind failing but they put a tight leash on measurement. They work backwards from the customer and they are not afraid to take chances. So, that's going to board well for him as he tries to figure out how Amazon navigates the contention on the political side when they get challenged for their dominance. And I think he's going to have to apply that pragmatic experimentation to new business models. >> So John I want you to take on AWS. I mean, despite the large numbers, I talked about 30% growth, Azure is growing at over 50% a year, GCP at 83%. So despite the large numbers and big growth the growth rates are slowing. Everybody knows that, we've reported it extensively. So the incoming CEO of Amazon Web Services has a TAM expansion challenge. And at some point they've got to decide, okay, how do we keep this growth engine? So, do you have any thoughts as to who might be the next CEO and what are some of their challenges as you see it? >> Well, Amazon is a real product centric company. So it's going to be very interesting to see who they go with here. Obviously they've been grooming a lot of people. There's been some turnover. You had some really strong executives recently leave, Jeff Wilkes, who was the CEO of the retail business. He retired a couple of months ago, formerly announced I think recently, he was probably in line. You had Mike Clayville, is now the chief revenue officer of Stripe. He ran all commercial business, Teresa Carlson stepped up to his role as well as running public sector. Again, she got more power. You have Matt Garman who ran the EC2 business, Stanford grad, great guy, super strong on the product side. He's now running all commercial sales and marketing. And he's also on the, was on Bezos' S team, that's the executive kind of team. Peter DeSantis is also on that S team. He runs all infrastructure. He took over for James Hamilton, who was the genius behind all the data center work that they've done and all the chip design stuff that they've innovated on. So there's so much technical innovation going on. I think you still going to see a leadership probably come from, I would say Matt Garman, in my opinion is the lead dog at this point, he's the lead horse. You could have an outside person come in depending upon how, who might be available. And that would probably come from an Andy Jassy network because he's a real fierce competitor but he's also a loyalist and he likes trust. So if someone comes in from the outside, it's going to be someone maybe he trusts. And then the other wildcards are like Teresa Carlson. Like I said, she is a great woman in tech who's done amazing work. I've profiled her many times. We've interviewed her many times. She took that public sector business with Amazon and changed the game completely. Outside the Jedi contract, she was in competitive for, had the big Trump showdown with the Jedi, with the department of defense. Had the CIA cloud. Amazon set the standard on public sector and that's directly the result of Teresa Carlson. But she's in the field, she's not a product person, she's kind of running that group. So Amazon has that product field kind of structure. So we'll see how they handle that. But those are the top three I think are going to be in line. >> So the obvious question that people always ask and it is a big change like this is, okay, in this case, what is Jassy going to bring in? And what's going to change? Maybe the flip side question is somewhat more interesting. What's not going to change in your view? Jassy has been there since nearly the beginning. What are some of the fundamental tenets that he's, that are fossilized, that won't change, do you think? >> I think he's, I think what's not going to change is Amazon, is going to continue to grow and develop their platform business and enable more SaaS players. That's a little bit different than what Microsoft's doing. They're more SaaS oriented, Office 365 is becoming their biggest application in terms of revenue on Microsoft side. So Amazon is going to still have to compete and enable more ecosystem partners. I think what's not going to change is that Bezos is still going to be in charge because executive chairman is just a code word for "not an active CEO." So in the corporate governance world when you have an executive chairman, that's essentially the person still in charge. And so he'll be in charge, will still be the boss of Andy Jassy and Jassy will be running all of Amazon. So I think that's going to be a little bit the same, but Jassy is going to be more in charge. I think you'll see a team change over, whether you're going to see some new management come in, Andy's management team will expand, I think Amazon will stay the same, Amazon Web Services. >> So John, last night, I was just making some notes about notable transitions in the history of the tech business, Gerstner to Palmisano, Gates to Ballmer, and then Ballmer to Nadella. One that you were close to, David Packard to John Young and then John Young to Lew Platt at the old company. Ellison to Safra and Mark, Jobs to Cook. We talked about Larry Page to Sundar Pichai. So how do you see this? And you've talked to, I remember when you interviewed John Chambers, he said, there is no rite of passage, East coast mini-computer companies, Edson de Castro, Ken Olsen, An Wang. These were executives who wouldn't let go. So it's of interesting to juxtapose that with the modern day executive. How do you see this fitting in to some of those epic transitions that I just mentioned? >> I think a lot of people are surprised at Jeff Bezos', even stepping down. I think he's just been such the face of Amazon. I think some of the poll numbers that people are doing on Twitter, people don't think it's going to make a big difference because he's kind of been that, leader hand on the wheel, but it's been its own ship now, kind of. And so depending on who's at the helm, it will be different. I think the Amazon choice of Andy wasn't obvious. And I think a lot of people were asking the question who was Andy Jassy and that's why we're doing this. And we're going to be doing more features on the Andy Jassy. We got a tons, tons of content that we've we've had shipped, original content with them. We'll share more of those key soundbites and who he is. I think a lot of people scratching their head like, why Andy Jassy? It's not obvious to the outsiders who don't know cloud computing. If you're in the competing business, in the digital transformation side, everyone knows about Amazon Web Services. Has been the most successful company, in my opinion, since I could remember at many levels just the way they've completely dominated the business and how they change others to be dominant. So, I mean, they've made Microsoft change, it made Google change and even then he's a leader that accepts conversations. Other companies, their CEOs hide behind their PR wall and they don't talk to people. They won't come on Clubhouse. They won't talk to the press. They hide behind their PR and they feed them, the media. Jassy is not afraid to talk to reporters. He's not afraid to talk to people, but he doesn't like people who don't know what they're talking about. So he doesn't suffer fools. So, you got to have your shit together to talk to Jassy. That's really the way it is. And that's, and he'll give you mind share, like he'll answer any question except for the ones that are too tough for him to answer. Like, are you, is facial recognition bad or good? Are you going to spin out AWS? I mean these are the hard questions and he's got a great team. He's got Jay Carney, former Obama press secretary working for him. He's been a great leader. So I'm really bullish on, is a good choice. >> We're going to jump into the Clubhouse here and open it up shortly. John, the last question for you is competition. Amazon as a company and even Jassy specifically I always talk about how they don't really focus on the competition, they focus on the customer but we know that just observing these folks Bezos is very competitive individual. Jassy, I mean, you know him better than I, very competitive individual. So, and he's, Jassy has been known to call out Oracle. Of course it was in response to Larry Ellison's jabs at Amazon regarding database. But, but how do you see that? Do you see that changing at all? I mean, will Amazon get more publicly competitive or they stick to their knitting, you think? >> You know this is going to sound kind of a weird analogy. And I know there's a lot of hero worshiping on Elon Musk but Elon Musk and Andy Jassy have a lot of similarities in the sense of their brilliance. They got both a brilliant people, different kinds of backgrounds. Obviously, they're running different things. They both are builders, right? If you were listening to Elon Musk on Clubhouse the other night, what was really striking was not only the magic of how it was all orchestrated and what he did and how he interviewed Robin Hood. He basically is about building stuff. And he was asked questions like, what advice do you give startups? He's like, if you need advice you shouldn't be doing startups. That's the kind of mentality that Jassy has, which is, it's not easy. It's not for the faint of heart, but Elon Musk is a builder. Jassy builds, he likes to build stuff, right? And so you look at all the things that he's done with AWS, it's been about enabling people to be successful with the tools that they need, adding more services, creating things that are lower price point. If you're an entrepreneur and you're over the age of 30, you know about AWS because you know what, it's cheaper to start a business on Amazon Web Services than buying servers and everyone knows that. If you're under the age of 25, you might not know 50 grand to a hundred thousand just to start something. Today you get your credit card down, you're up and running and you can get Clubhouses up and running all day long. So the next Clubhouse will be on Amazon or a cloud technology. And that's because of Andy Jassy right? So this is a significant executive and he continue, will bring that mindset of building. So, I think the digital transformation, we're in the digital engine club, we're going to see a complete revolution of a new generation. And I think having a new leader like Andy Jassy will enable in my opinion next generation talent, whether that's media and technology convergence, media technology and art convergence and the fact that he digs music, he digs sports, he digs tech, he digs media, it's going to be very interesting to see, I think he's well-poised to be, and he's soft-spoken, he doesn't want the glamorous press. He doesn't want the puff pieces. He just wants to do what he does and he puts his game do the talking. >> Talking about advice at startups. Just a quick aside. I remember, John, you and I when we were interviewing Scott McNealy former CEO of Sun Microsystems. And you asked him advice for startups. He said, move out of California. It's kind of tongue in cheek. I heard this morning that there's a proposal to tax the multi-billionaires of 1% annually not just the one-time tax. And so Jeff Bezos of course, has a ranch in Texas, no tax there, but places all over. >> You see I don't know. >> But I don't see Amazon leaving Seattle anytime soon, nor Jassy. >> Jeremiah Owyang did a Clubhouse on California. And the basic sentiment is that, it's California is not going away. I mean, come on. People got to just get real. I think it's a fad. Yeah. This has benefits with remote working, no doubt, but people will stay here in California, the network affects beautiful. I think Silicon Valley is going to continue to be relevant. It's just going to syndicate differently. And I think other hubs like Seattle and around the world will be integrated through remote work and I think it's going to be much more of a democratizing effect, not a win lose. So that to me is a huge shift. And look at Amazon, look at Amazon and Microsoft. It's the cloud cities, so people call Seattle. You've got Google down here and they're making waves but still, all good stuff. >> Well John, thanks so much. Let's let's wrap and let's jump into the Clubhouse and hear from others. Thanks so much for coming on, back on theCUBE. And many times we, you and I've done this really. It was a pleasure having you. Thanks for your perspectives. And thank you for watching everybody, this is Dave Vellante for theCUBE. We'll see you next time. (soft ambient music)

>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto and Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world, this is a CUBE Conversation. >> Hello everyone, this is Dave Vellante with theCUBE and welcome to this conversation. With me is Anil Singhal, who is the CEO of NETSCOUT. Anil, it's a pleasure to speak with you today. Thanks so much for coming on the program. >> Thank you. >> So I want to talk a little bit about NETSCOUT. We're kind of at theCUBE, we're sort of enamored by founder-led companies. I mean, you started NETSCOUT right around the same time that I entered the tech business, and you remember back then it was an industry dominated by IBM, monolithic systems were the norm, in the form of mainframes, you had mini computers, PCs, and things like PC local area networks, they were in their infancy. In fact, most of the PCs, as you remember, they didn't even have hard disks in them. So I want to start with, what was it that you saw 35 years ago that led you to start NETSCOUT and at the time, did you even imagine that you'd be creating a company with a billion dollars worth of revenue and a much larger market cap? >> Well, certainly I had not imagined where we'll be right now, and we didn't know that this'll be the outcome. I mean, we just happened to be at the right place at the right time, but we did have a vision. Some of you had the feeling, we are enamored by networking, and we thought that network will be the business. In fact, our business card in 91 said, "Network is the business." And so somehow we got that right, and we said, these things will be connected. And overall, we found then that the IP convergence first in the enterprise in 90s, and then internet, and carriers moving from analog to digital, (indistinct) talk about digital transformation in last few years, but this has been going on for the last 30 years. And as we add what we were doing, become relevant to more and more people over time. For example, now even power companies use our product. And we have IoT devices coming in. So basically what we do is we said we are going to provide visibility through looking at the traffic, through the lens and the vantage point of the network. A lot of people think we are just doing network monitoring or had been doing that. But actually we use the network as a vantage point, which other people are not doing, most of the people have accidental data from devices as the basis of visibility. And that turned out to be very successful, but at some point, different points in our life, we became responsible for the market, not just for NETSCOUT. And that changed the shape of the company, and what we did and how we drove the innovation. >> I want to get into some of that, but I'm still really enamored of and fascinated by the beginnings. I mean, I worked for a founder-led, a chairman, a guy named Pat McGovern who built a media empire. He had these 10 sort of core principles, he used to test us on 'em, we'd carry around little note cards, things that today still serve us. You know, stay close to the customer, you know, keep the corporate staff lean, promote from within, respect for individuals, things that are drilled into your head. I wonder, you know, what are the principles that, you know, sometimes they become dogma, but they're good dogma. I don't mean that as a pejorative. What are the things that you built your business on, the principles that you're sort of most proud of? >> Well, I think there is, so there are five, in fact, we call some of these tenets our five tenets. We call this high ambition leadership, which is more than just about making money. And just like the US is the leader of the free world, we have a responsibility beyond US. Same way, NETSCOUT has a responsibility beyond our own company and revenue and our stakeholders. So with that in mind, we have these five things, which I think I wouldn't have been able to articulate that 20 years ago, like this. But they were always there. So firstly, there's guardians of the connected world, which you see it on our website, guardians care about their asset, it's not just about money. We are going to solve problems in the connected world, which nobody else is able to solve, or have the passion or have the resources and willpower to do it. So that's the overall theme of the company. Guardians of the connected world, connected world is changing, new problems are coming. Our goal is there are pros and cons of every new thing. Our goal is to remove all the cons so you can enjoy the pros. So that's guardian of the connected world. Then our mission is accelerate digital transformation, meaning remove the roadblocks. People are looking at enablers, but there are barriers also. How do you remove the barriers for our customers, so they can improve the fruits of digital transformation? For example, going to the cloud allows you to outsource some of us, especially in these times of agility and dependency, you can cut your costs, but that comes with a price that you lose control. So our product brings the control back. So now you can enjoy the pros and the cons and I call it sometimes how do you change the wheels of your car while driving? If you change four wheels, then car is going to fall down, but how do you put one wheel in the cloud? Well, that's what our vision is. Visibility without borders. We'll give you the same information, which is the third part. That's why we have this tagline and therefore the company. And then we have the mission, accelerating digital transformation, but our vision is visibility without borders. When you run your application, no matter where you run, we'll give you the same piece of information. That allows the people to make this migration transparent from a monitoring and visibility point of view. And then the fourth area is about our technology. We call it smart data technology, and the whole world is talking about artificial intelligence, machine learning. But what are you going to learn, is your AI really authentic or is it truly artificial? And that comes from smart data. Data is the oil of the new industry. That's the oil, and people are not focusing on that. They're saying, "I have lots of data," but you don't have the data which we have. In the past, we said, we are not going to share the data with third parties. And recently we have changed that, and say, "Yeah, there is a price for that. We'll do that." So we are branding ourselves as a smart data company, where the whole industry is talking about smart analytics. And I said, "We make smart people smarter." And lastly, the value system of NETSCOUT is called lean, but not mean, okay? Anybody can get lean. If you get fat, you can get the operation. But how do you do lean decision making so you never have to be in mean? Like NETSCOUT never had to lay off in the last 35 years, we have ups and down, our stock has gone to $3 and has gone to $40, but companies continued to invest, and that's why we have this reputation we have, whether it's (indistinct). The tenure at NETSCOUT is 10, 15 years minimum, even in sales, and people don't realize the power of that because some of our customers tell us, "Hey, your salespeople are around longer than our employees." And that (indistinct) builds a franchise of loyalty in the customer base. We underestimate that, this continuity part. So that in many aspect of not, what is the definition of not being mean, that lean and mean is sort of people are very proud of that. And I think you can be lean without being mean. And then how do you become lean, is don't hire when in good times, unless you need them. The reason people are able to do it, is because they think "I can fire anytime, so let's build up the fat." So there a lot of decision-making we do around this, and that's what I talk about in the book, it's not about technology, and this is, I would say is just one of the five tenets, but it's probably one of the most important ones. And it's one of the biggest differentiators of NETSCOUT. >> Well, it's obviously served you well, I mean, no layoffs in 35 years, the retention metric is very impressive. I mean, again, I go back to my experience. I was at IDG for 15 years. My passion was always to start my own company, but I didn't want to leave 'cause it was such a great culture, and it seems like you've created something similar. You know, I talk to CIOs and CTOs a lot too about, it's always people, process, technology. And of course we want to talk about tech 'cause we love talking about tech, but they always tell me, "Look, tech comes and goes," it's the processes that you put in place, the culture that you have in place, we could deal with the tech, and it sounds like you've created a similar dynamic. And I think back again, when you started, there were proprietary networks, it was IBM SNA, DEC network, every mini computer had its own network. Then, you know, TCP/IP came in and the whole world changed and exploded. But yet you said guardians of the connected world, and that's kind of been your focus from really day one. You know, I loved what you said about the business. The network is the business. Remember the network is the computer that Scott McNealy popularized. So really kind of a similar dynamic there. So it seems, Anil, that that framework that you just laid out, those core principles, have actually allowed you to ebb, to flow, to deal with stock prices and still retain people for very long periods of time. >> Maybe one more thing to add there is that on the lean but not, many talk about generalities. We don't look any different. Like everyone cares about happy customers. They care about happy employees and they care about happy stakeholders, shareholders. Everyone, including us. But what's the order? Where do you start? So we start with employees. We say happy employees, then we get happy customers. And then because of that, they buy more stuff and we create happy shareholders. Whereas if you start with happy shareholders, you may not get happy employees. And so all I'm saying is that everyone probably believes in what we are saying or what I'm saying, but how they implement it, and then like really walking the talk is the most important part. >> Well, I think you're right. I mean, I think the financials is a by-product of happy employees, which drive happy customers. If you take care of employees and customers, then good things will happen. If you start with trying to micromanage the finances. Of course, we all attempted to do that. I wonder if we could talk a little bit about, so just to bring it forward a little bit, we're talking about how NETSCOUT has essentially from a cultural standpoint, been able to withstand the ups, the downs, I mean, you've seen since, you know, it's over 35 years, a lot of the downturns and the tech softness, the tech bubbles, the great recession. Obviously now we're in the middle of a pandemic. And I wonder if you could talk to that specifically. So the data that we have from our survey partner, ETR, Enterprise Technology Research, shows that before the pandemic around 16% of employees worked from home, we're talking about truly remote workers, not, you know, a couple of days a week. And when we talk to CIOs today, they tell us it's well over 70% now, but they fully expect that when, you know, the world comes back to the new abnormal, I call it, that number's going to, that 16% is going to double to, more than double to 34%. So it puts stress on the network. It changes the direction of the traffic. It changes the security emphasis. Maybe you could talk a little bit about that just in terms of how you are helping your customers respond, specifically. >> So I always talk about like, is this a new problem or is the bad problem getting worse? So I contend that bad problem getting worse. So if you make the bad to zero, then you can't multiply. So I think it's highlighting some of the problems which are already there, are being highlighted by, a lot of people are telling, "Are you seeing more attacks?" No, we are becoming more conscious of the attacks we always had. We have more time, by the way, hackers have more time too, because they're also sitting at home doing things. So what I feel is that, two parts. One is that I think people should not, when the new normal comes, or new abnormal, then I think people should not make people work from home for the wrong reason. Certain people are saying, "Oh, I can save money." That's the wrong reason. But if it's efficient, we should do that. So we are doing some interesting things for home users to feel how they can feel that they're really working from the office. And so, yeah, there are some new challenges on how we monitor, because when the user complains now about the performance to IT, because they can't get their work, they don't know whether it's our network or is the ISP, or is their wifi network. So we try to provide the root cause analysis as quickly as possible, which we call mean time to know. And one of the things I didn't mention earlier, about what is the uniqueness of our technology when we use the network vantage point to drive visibility, it's almost like the blood test. When you have a problem, if you tell the doctor, I say "Hey, what is my problem?" And they start looking at all kinds of things. It's going to take forever. But if I take the blood test, I will know what the next thing to do. So in a way, we are doing the blood test of the user experience, security problems. And when we do that, we can come up with some very unique things. So we think that we'll be moving on into other areas, or the visibility is the means to an end, the end could be performance management, could be visibility, troubleshooting, and could be security forensics. Like blood tests can be used for DNA evidence also. And so we have all the technology, so we are moving on, as we move to the home user, we are applying that our techniques, not just for service assurance or end user experience monitoring, but also for security forensics. And one example I give you the, I always talk more than you'll see that in my book, being different before being better. First be different, get the ear flecks out of the ideas before you tell the story. And you don't do that, even though we are very big, we are very small compared to a lot of companies in the industry, compared to big players like Cisco, IBM, and all those. So the new thing which we are looking at in security is, the security industry is catching the act. We are going to catch the actors. If I can get into the, what they were doing before the act, before they did the ransomware, what were they doing? Well, that requires continuous monitoring of the traffic. And that's what we do. So when we do catch the actor, catching the thief, not what they're stealing, then you're preventing tomorrow's attack. And that's basically the innovation part of NETSCOUT, which we have been pushing for. But we somehow decided not to apply that to security because we had other problems to be solved as guardians of the connected world from a monitoring point of view. And so those are some of the things we'll be applying as we move forward. And I feel that those are equally applicable before the pandemic and after the pandemic. And it's just polarized more, because more people are working from home. >> It's interesting what you're saying about the blood test. That's a great analogy because it kind of eliminates the guesswork, and removes the opaqueness. It goes right to sort of the heart of the matter, you called it mean time to know. And it's interesting too, to look at productivity. I mentioned some of the survey work, when we talk to organizations, they say to us that actually productivity has gone up since the pandemic. And my response to that is, "Yeah, no kidding. 'Cause people are working 15 hour days." You can't keep that up. And the silent killer of productivity is the not, having an elongated mean time to know, and having to guess. And so my premise is that this productivity gain, if in fact it exists, is not sustainable because we're doing it on the backs of our employees and it's going to burn 'em out. >> I'm not sure whether it's real also, see, there are both sides. It's not possible, practical, as you are saying, because for example, you are a salesperson and you are working six, seven hours and you're traveling six hours. You can't be on the phone for 12 hours with a customer right now. So I don't talk and then be productive, there are both sides going, some people are overworked. And so definition of productivity itself is in question. And how do you measure that? And so that's what we'll have to look, I think basically all I'm saying is we should do it, whatever we do after the pandemic is over, about how many people work from home, should be based on your business model, your expectation, not just based on cost. And a lot of people are looking at once again, "Oh, this is another cost saving exercise." And that should not be the reason, that's the wrong reason, because then they're measuring the productivity in terms of reduced cost, not everything else. Plus at least in NETSCOUT, is a company which, I mean, every meeting I go to, I use chalkboard, and it's very very hard for other companies, somebody like IBM, where most of the people work, there are 50 offices. What is the easy transition? It's not easy for NETSCOUT. And so right now we focus on safety, but we need to come up with a good hybrid model later on, and different people will set up differently. But what we do will be relevant in all cases. >> Yeah, but I think you're making a good point that it's not some kind of mandate to drive costs down. Or we saw last decade, there were a couple of prominent companies that were mandating actually working in the office, eliminating work from home. So obviously the wrong side of history, you know, they didn't know a pandemic was coming, but so how will you make that decision? Will you, is it really a discussion case by case with the employees or what's the framework for you guys to decide that? >> Well, I think so right now, our focus is on safety. So it's completely optional. In fact, we don't even allow more than 20%, and that's only in the headquarters, other places, we have less than 5% people coming, and only essential workers, manufacturing and all those. So right now it's completely optional. But my personal preference when there is no risk is people should come to work like they were coming before. We like to make it as close as possible to the old normal, but that's not going to be the case for other companies because they're bigger in size, they have other things at play, but certainly we are not going to do it, "Oh, because it's cheaper for NETSCOUT, when people work from home." And so we we'll see how it goes. I think it will be a transition, but I can see going back to new normal in a year from now, if things start winding down in six months, within a year or so, we should be getting back to some normalcy. But that doesn't mean going to be true for our customers. So from a product point of view, we are doing several things so we can help the customer through this transition. And by the way, one other thing I wanted to mention earlier, when we talk about the blood test, how does it relate to guardians of the connected world? If you believe in that, what did the industry do? They made sure needles were not painful. That blood test was reliable. There is no hygiene issues or no issues like that. The cost has come down. As the guardian of the connected world, because we do that, that's what we have been doing. We are removing the barriers to a great idea, but not all other companies give up. And then they have different strategies and some of them are successful, some are not. So as the guardian of the connected world, our goal is to continue to make this practical use. Imagine if blood test industry had not done that, where we'll be right now. And that's what I meant by guardian of the connected world. This is not easy to do and sustain that for a period of 20, 30 years. But we have been able to do that, and we get a lot of challenges from naysayers, "Oh, this will not work at high speed." When I started NETSCOUT, it was 10 megabit internet. Now we have 100 gig internet, and we are still able to handle it. And nobody had thought in those days that you can even get to 100 megs. People were questioning us. But what happens is other things keep working in the market. Intel is making improvements, lot of people are doing work to solve the problem, and we leverage that. And that's how we are able to sort of sustain this guardian of the connected world team. >> The other key aspect of the guardian of the connected world, and again, not to overdo the blood test analogy, but the time to results is very important. If you have an issue and you have to wait weeks for the results and your doctor, you can't get ahold of her. And so you're successfully dealing with that in real time or near real time, and that to me is critical. >> Very important point, thanks for reminding because I forgot today, that's one of the things I say all the time, "Hey, this one of the big thing we have done, and blood test industry has done it. How long take to get results?" Nowadays you can get results done in like two hours, and doctors can get a report in couple of hours. That's what we had done. That's like mean time to know, which we talked about. With our technology, I think we had basically all the issues, you can't even breathe without doing something on the network. So if you're listening to the traffic or hearing what the conversation, you can form an independent view of what is happening. And that's the smart data, which then becomes the basis of analytics, whether analytics in the security space or not. And so that one thing we have not changed, this technique. Now, the outcomes are different. What are we doing with our visibility is different. Is keep changing the number of customers and the type of customers are different. But ultimately that part interestingly has not changed. >> I wonder if I could ask you, I'd like to ask CEOs, especially those that are technologists and business leaders, their thoughts on the cloud. I mean, our data shows that the public cloud is growing in the 30% plus range annually, the big three public cloud players now account this year, probably for close to $75 billion in revenue, maybe even a little bit more, what do you see driving this growth? What does it mean for your customers? >> I think first of all, we have a big announcement coming out called smart cloud monitoring to address this. But what's the meaning of that? I think what our customers are looking for is that it's not all or nothing. It's not that everything is in the cloud or everything is in the on-prem, it could be private cloud, public cloud, (indistinct), the way VPNs are laid out. So they want to make sure that they can use our technology to do this (indistinct) and analytics, regardless of what decision they make. And even five years from now, there'll be enough non-cloud stuff, okay? So that's what we are striving to do. That's what is visibility without borders, and when they do that, they're saying that helps them decide what's the best mode of operation for them, for what application. Moving blindly to the cloud is a problem. Not going into that area is also a problem. But I think this, the two new things that have happened recently, I will say one is sort of, because of this crisis, people don't want to own, like the hospitality industry. This would, I mean, they're obviously having big issues with them, but if they own a lot of the infrastructure, they could have turned off some of that. And so that's driving more movement to the cloud, but I think there is now other choices available, about a year or two ago, I think affordable pricing model, multiple choices, not just AWS, and technology maturing where you can really implement and have a good experience. I think those have become big enablers. And so I think now it is possible to get to massive movement to the cloud, but then they want to make sure that I'm outsourcing my problem, but I'm not outsourcing my vision to the cloud vendors, because previously the way in the IT industry, a lot of problems were solved is, it was called the war room. Let's get everyone who reports to me and everyone who reported to you, but now everyone doesn't report to you. So how do you maintain the control? Man, I complain to my CIO, "Hey, my WebEx is slow," or "Office (indistinct)," and how do they resolve that problem? Because they cannot tell me, "Oh, we outsourced them, so I can't tell you that," well, we should not have outsourced them to the cloud. So how do you drive this collaboration between the providers and the consumers? Is going to be key to accelerating this transformation. Because otherwise the cost of CapEx cost of a deduction of moving to the cloud will be offset by the increase in OpEx and customer satisfaction for the customer. And so if we can help deal with one of the parts, industry is already doing the other big part of making cloud work, I think then we'll have the best chance of success. >> Yeah. And of course the security has implications on the security model. You were talking earlier about that, as an opportunity, people sometimes think, "Oh yeah, I put my data in the cloud. I'm good on security." But there's a shared responsibility. Again, we talked about different traffic patterns. You've got work from home going on. And it's interesting when you juxtapose the sort of industry narrative on security, which is it gets harder and harder and harder, and you hear some of the cloud players say, "Hey, the state of security is really good," but when you talk to CISOs, they'll talk about the lack of talent, the challenges they have, the tools creep, the fact that they spend more, but the adversaries just keep getting stronger and stronger and stronger. It's a really serious problem. I mean, maybe we close there. I mean kind of, how do you see it from your vantage point? >> Let's look at the blood test. So I look at, if you do the technique which we are talking about, at least in the dimension of security monitoring, then you are going to do a lot of little things, because you're doing little things, you're going to be (indistinct) tool creep, and because of that, you have a talent issue. And I think if we can make the right stuff work, then you will not have this talent issue, and I feel that we are always looking at solving yesterday's problem, okay? Because we are not watching what led to the attack. We are just dealing with the attack as an incident, a security issue. So I think continuous monitoring of traffic allows you to look at the deviation of the normal. So signature-based security is a big portion, but how do you know the signature of tomorrow? And while you know that because you know the normal, but the only way you know normal is if you have been monitoring what was going on, not for a specific event, but deviation from normal. That's what our approach is going to be, anomalous behavior detection through our smart data. And then you apply machine learning and AI algorithms to that. I think that would be Nirvana. But we don't have all the smart people for analytics, but we can feed our data to those smart people. And that's something we are going to bring up, and the reason I feel it will be successful because this idea has been wildly successful for NETSCOUT in the non-security space. >> Yeah. I think you're bringing up another point that I've talked about a lot, which is the industry has gone from sort of an industry of products to platforms, and now ecosystems is really driving a lot of the innovation. That's exactly what you're talking about. Feeding data to other partners, data partners. Now you start thinking about IoT and the edge, and machines talking to machines. I mean, I put video cameras up in my house to make my environment more secure, but of course I'm scared to death that those things could get hacked. It's a very complicated situation, and the power of many is going to trump the resources of one. And so I'm glad you brought that out. Maybe give us your final thoughts, Anil. It really has been a pleasure talking to you. >> Well, I think one of the things people ask me is, "Why didn't you start another company?" Especially in Silicon Valley, I say, "We did start many companies, but they all happen to be called NETSCOUT." NETSCOUT 1.0 or 2.0 or 3.0, actually, we are into the 4.0. I sometimes say, "You know George Foreman's four sons, they're all called George Foreman." So every time we do something different, and now we are in the process of launching NETSCOUT 5.0, it was partly because, maybe accelerated because of what's going on with the pandemic, because there are some new challenges which (indistinct), and we are entering the security space. So I'm very excited about repeating what we did in the traditional monitoring space, service insurance space, both for enterprise and carriers, to the security space. And people will question us how come it took so long. Well, we were solving other problems, which are more interesting than this for NETSCOUT. And now we want to bring that technology and all of our tenets, guardian of the connected world, smart data, to the security space. And also, I mean, people are around for long term, we are also building the next generation of leaders at NETSCOUT. And so we have our hands full over the next two, three years, in building the next generation of NETSCOUT, solving some of the problems the industry is facing, without abandoning our tenets and the culture. And if we can do that, I think there'll be, we'll be going to the next level, in terms of NETSCOUT branding and leadership. >> Well, given the guiding principles that you shared with us earlier, the fundamental technology that you have around visibility, I think that's served you very well. And I think there's no shortage of opportunity for NETSCOUT. So, Anil, thanks so much for sharing your story and coming on theCUBE. >> Good. Thank you. >> And thank you for watching everybody. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE. We'll see you next time. (calm music)

>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of AWS reinvent 2020 sponsored by Intel, AWS and our community partners. >>Hello and welcome back to the cubes Virtual coverage of AWS reinvent 2020. Um, John for your host with a cube virtual were not there in person, but we're gonna do it our job with the best remote we possibly can. Where? Wall to wall coverage on the AWS reinvent site as well as on demand on the Cube. Three new 3 65 platform. We got some great power panel analysts here to dig in and discuss Partner Day for a W S what it means for the customer. What it means for the enterprise, the buyer, the people trying to figure out who to buy from and possibly new partners. How can they re engineer and reinvent their company to partner better with Amazon, take advantage of the benefits, but ultimately get more sales? We got Tim Crawford, star Beat Joel and Day Volonte, Friends of the Cube. We all know him on Twitter, You guys, the posse, the Cube policy. Thanks for coming on. I'm sure it's good guys entertaining and we're >>hanging out drinking beer. Oh, my God. That'd be awesome. You guys. >>Great to have you on. I wanted to bring you on because it's unique. Cross section of perspectives. And this isn't This is from the end user perspective. And, Tim, you've been talking about the c x o s for years. You expert in this? Sorry. You're taking more from a cloud perspective. You've seen the under the hood. What's happening? Let's all put it together. If your partner Okay, first question to the group. I'm a partner. Do I win with Amazon, or do I lose with Amazon? First question. >>Yeah, I'll jump in. I'll say, you know, regardless you win, you win with Amazon. I think there's a lot of opportunity for partners with Amazon. Um, you have to pick your battles, though. You have to find the right places where you can carve out a space that isn't too congested but also isn't really kind of fettered with a number of incumbents. And so if you're looking at the enterprise space, I think that there is a ton of potential because, let's face it, >>Amazon >>doesn't have all of the services packaged in a way that the enterprise can consume. And I think that leaves a lot of fertile ground for s eyes and I SVS to jump in and be able to connect those dots so I'd say it's win, win >>start be if you're like a so cohesively onstage. Jackson's coming out talking about China, the chips and data. If you're like a vendor and I s V you're a startup or your company trying to reinvent How do you see Amazon as a partner? >>Yeah, I see Amazon as a big market for me. You know, it increased my sort of tam, if you will. Uh, the one big sort off trend is that the lines between technology providers and service providers are blurred. Actually, it's flipping. I believe it will flip at some time. We will put consume technology from service providers, and they are becoming technology providers. Actually, they're not just being pipe and power kind of cloud. They are purely software, very high sort of highly constructed machinery, if you will. Behind the scenes with software. >>That's >>what Amazon is, uh, big machine. If you are, and you can leverage that and then you can help your customers achieve their business called as a partner. I think's the women and the roll off. Actually, Assize is changing, I believe a size. Well, I thought they were getting slow, sidetracked by the service providers. But now they have to actually change their old the way they they used to get these, you know, shrink wrap software, and then install and configure and all that stuff. Now it's in a cloud >>on >>they have to focus a little more on services, and and some of the s eyes are building tools for multi cloud consumption and all that. So things are changing under under this whole big shift to go out. >>I mean, I think if you're in S I and you're lifting and shifting, you make a few bucks and helping people do that deal with the tech. But I think we're the rial. Money is the business transformation, and you find the technology is there, it's it's another tool in the bag. But if you can change your operating model, that's gonna drive telephone numbers to the bottom line. That's a boardroom discussion, and that's where the real dollars are for s eyes. That's like that's why guys like Accent you're leading leading into the cloud Big time >>e think I think you're absolutely right, David. I think that's that's one aspect that we have to kind of call out is you can be one of those partners that is focused on the transaction and you'll be successful doing that. But you're absolutely right. If you focus on the long game. I think that is just like I said, completely fertile ground. And there are a lot of opportunities because historically Amazon was ah was a Lego parts, uh, type of cloud provider, right? They provided you with the basic building blocks, which is great for Web scale and startups not so good for enterprise. And so now Amazon is starting to put together in package part, so it's more consumable by enterprises. But you still need that help. And as Sarpy just mentioned, you also have to consider that Amazon is not the only aspect that you're gonna be using. You're gonna be using other providers to. And so I think this again is where partners they pick a primary, and then they also bring in the others where appropriate. >>All right, I want to get into this whole riff. I have a cherry chin on day one. Hey, came on the special fireside chat with me and we talked about, um, cloud errors before cloud Amazon. And now I'll call postcode because we're seeing this kind of whole new, you know, in the cloud kind of generation. And so he said, OK, this pre cloud you had Amazon generation, whereas lift and shift. Ah, lot of hybrid And you have everything is in the cloud like a snowflake kind of thing. And he kind of call it the reptiles versus the amphibians you're on. See your inland, your hybrid, and then you're you're in the water. I mean, so So he kind of went on, Took that another level, meaning that. Okay, this is always gonna be hybrid. But there's a unique differentiation for being all in the cloud. You're seeing different patterns. Amazon certainly has an advantage. See, Dev Ops guru, that's just mining the data of their entire platform and saying Okay, Yeah, do this. There's advantages for being in the cloud that aren't available. Hybrid. So amphibian on land and sea hybrid. And then in the cloud. How do you guys see that if you're a partner. You wanna be on the new generation. What's the opportunity to capture value? He has hybrid certainly coexist. But in the new era, >>remember Scott McNealy used to talk about car makers and car dealers. And of course, Sun's gone. But he used to say, We want to be a carmaker. Car dealers. They got big houses and big boats, but we're gonna be a carmaker. Oh, I think it's some similarities here. I mean, there's a lot of money to be made as a as a car dealer. But you see, companies like Dell, H P E. You know, they want to be carmakers. Obviously Google Microsoft. But there are gonna be a lot of successful really big carmakers in this game. >>Yeah, I believe I believe I always call it Amazon Is the makers cloud right, So they are very developer friendly. They were very developer friendly for startups. Uh, a stem said earlier, but now they are very developer, friendly and operations friendly. Now, actually, in a way for enterprises, I believe, and that the that well, the jerry tend to sort of Are you all all in cloud are sitting just in the dry land. Right now, I think every sort off organization is in a different sort off mature, at different maturity level. But I think we're going all going towards a technology consumption as a service. Mostly, I think it will be off Prem. It can be on Prem in future because off age and all that. And on that note, I think EJ will be dominated by Tier one cloud providers like crazy people who think edge will be nominally but telcos and all that. I think they're just, uh, if >>I made Thio, if I may interject for a second for the folks watching, that might not be old enough to know who Scott McNealy is. He's the founder of Sun Microsystems, which was bought by Oracle years ago. Yeah, basically, because many computer, there's a lot of young kids out there that even though Scott McNealy's But remember, >>do your homework, Scott, you have to know who Scott Scott McNealy >>also said, because Bill Gates was dominant. Microsoft owns the tires and the gas to, and they want to own the road. So remember Microsoft was dominating at that time. So, Tim Gas data is that I mean, Amazon might have everything there. >>I was gonna go back to the to the comment. You know, McNeely came out with some really, really good analogies over his tenure. Um, it's son and you know, son had some great successes. But unfortunately, Cloud is not as simplistic as buying a car and having the dealership and the ecosystem of gas and tires. And the rest you have to think about the toll journey. And that journey is incredibly complicated, especially for the enterprise that's coming from legacy footprints, monolithic application stacks and trying to understand how to make that transition. It's almost it's almost, in a way mawr analogous to your used to riding a bike, and now you're gonna operate a semi. And so how do you start to put all of the pieces into place to be able to make that transition? And it's not trivial. You have to figure out how your culture changes, how your processes changes. There are a lot of connected parts. It's not a simple as the ecosystem of tires and gas. We have to think about how that data stream fits in with other data streams where analytics are gonna be done. What about tying back to that system of record that is going to stay on the legacy platform. Oh, and by the way, some of that has to still stay on Prem. It can't move to the cloud yet. So we have this really complicated, diverse environment that we have to manage, and it's only getting more complicated. And I think that's where the opportunity comes in for the size and s visas. Step into that. Understand that journey, understand the transitions. I don't believe that enterprises, at least in the near term, let alone short term, will be all in cloud. I think that that's more of a fantasy than reality. There is a hybrid state that that is going to be transitory for some period of time, and that's where the big opportunity is. >>I think you're right on time. I think just to double down on that point, just to bring that to another level is Dave. Remember back in the days when PCs where the boom many computers with most clients there was just getting started? There was a whole hype cycle on hard drives, right? Hard drives were the thing. Now, if you look out today, there's more. Observe, ability, startups and I could count, right? So to Tim's point, this monolithic breakdown and component izing decomposing, monolithic APs or environments with micro services is complex. So, to me, the thing that I see is that that I could relate to is when I was breaking in in the eighties, you had the mainframes. Is being the youngun I'm like, Okay, mainframes, old monolithic client server is a different paradigm thing. You had, uh, PCs and Internet working. I think all that change is happening so fast right now. It's not like over 10 years to Tim's points, like mainframes to iPhones. It's happening in like three years. Imagine crunching all that complexity and change down to a short window. I think Amazon has kind of brought that. I'm just riffing on that, But >>yeah, you're absolutely right, John. But I think there's another piece and we can use a very specific example to show this. But another piece that we have to look at is we're trying to simplify that environment, and so a good place to simplify that is when we look at server lis and specifically around databases, you know, historically, I had to pick the database architecture that the applications would ride on. Then I have to have the infrastructure underneath and manage that appropriately so that I have both the performance a swell, a security as well as architecture. Er and I have to scale that as needed. Today, you can get databases of service and not have to worry about the underpinnings. You just worry about the applications and how those data streams connect to other data streams. And so that's the direction that I think things were going is, and we see this across the enterprise we're looking for. Those packaged package might be a generalized term, but we're looking for um, or packaged scenario and opportunity for enterprises rather than just the most basic building blocks. We have to start putting together the preformed applications and then use those as larger chunks. And >>this is the opportunity for a size I was talking before about business transformation. If you take, take Tim's database example, you don't need somebody anymore. Toe, you know, set up your database to tune it. I mean, that's becoming autonomous. But if you think about the way data pipelines work in the way organizations are structured where everything because it goes into this monolithic data lake or and and And it's like generic content coming in generic data where the business owner has to get in line and beg a data scientist or quality engineered or thio ingest a new data source. And it's just like the old data warehouse days where I think there's tremendous opportunities for s eyes to go in a completely re architect. The data model. Sergeant, This is something you and I were talking about on Twitter. It's That's why I like what snowflakes doing. It's kind of a AWS is trying to do with lasted glue views, but there's a whole business transformation opportunity for s eyes, which I just think is huge. Number l >>e all talk. Go ahead. Sorry. Yeah, >>I think we >>all talk, but we know we all agree on one thing that the future is hybrid for at least for next. You know, 10 years, if not more. Uh, hybrid is hard. The data proximity is, uh, very important. That means Leighton see between different workloads, right? That's super important. And I talk about this all the time and almost in every conversation I have about about. It's just scenario, is that there three types of applications every every enterprise systems or fractured systems, systems of engagement and the systems of innovation and my theory of cloud consumption tells me that sooner or later, systems off record. We'll move into SAS SAS world. That's that's how I see it. There's no other way around, I believe, and the systems off engagement or systems off differentiation something and call it. They will leverage a lot off platforms, the service and in that context context, I have said it many times the to be a best of the breed platform. As a service, you have to be best off the breed, um, infrastructure as a service provider. And that's Amazon. And that is that's also a zero to a certain extent, and then and and Google is trying to do that, too. So the feature sort off gap between number one cloud and two and three is pretty huge. I believe I think Amazon is doing great data democratization through several less. I just love serving less for that Several things over. Unless there is >>a winning formula is no doubt about several times I totally agree. But I think one of the things that I miss it has done is they've taken server lists. They brought their putting all the I as and the chips, and they're moving all the value up to the service layer, which gives them the advantage over others. Because everyone else is trying to compete down here. They're gonna be purpose built. If you look what Apple is doing with the chips and what the Amazon is doing, they're gonna kind of have this chip to chip scenario and then the middle. Where in between is the container ization, the micro services and Lambda? So if you're a developer, you approach is it's programmable at that point that could that could be a lock spec. I think for Amazon, >>it absolutely could be John. But I think there's another aspect here that we have to touch on, especially as we think about partners and where the opportunities come in. And that is that We often talk about non cloud to cloud right, how to get from on Prem to cloud. But the piece that you also have thio bring into the conversation is Theo edge to cloud continuum and So I think if you start to look at some of the announcements this week from AWS, you start looking at some of the new instance types uh, that are very ai focused. You look at the two new form factors for outposts, which allows you to bring cloud to a smaller footprint within an on premise premises, situation, uh, different local zones. And then Thea other piece that I think is really interesting is is their announcements around PCs and eks anywhere being able to take cloud in kubernetes, you know, across the board. And so the challenge here is, as I mentioned earlier, complexity is paramount. It's concern for enterprises just moving to cloud. You start layering in the edge to cloud continuum, and it just it gets exponentially more complicated. And so Amazon is not going to be the one to help you go through that. Not because they can't, but frankly, just the scale of help that is going to be needed amongst enterprises is just not there. And so this is really where I think the opportunity lies for the s eyes and I SVS and partners. You >>heard how Jassy defined hybrid John in the article that you wrote when you did your one on one with him, Tim and the in the analyst call, you answered my question and then I want to bring in Antonio near his comment. But Jassy basically said, Look, we see the cloud bring We're gonna bring a W s to the edge and we see data centers. This is another edge node and San Antonio Neary after HP is pretty good quarter uh came out and said, Well, we heard the public cloud provider talking about hybrid welcome, you know? >>Yeah, they were going and then getting here jumped on that big time. But we'll be looking hybrid. Tim nailed The complexity is the is the evil is friction is a friction area. If the complexity could be mastered by the edge provider closest to the customer, that's gonna be valuable, um, for partners. And then we can do that. Amazon's gonna have to continue to remove the friction and putting that together, which is why I'm nervous about their channel partners. Because if I'm a partner, I asked myself, How do I make money with Amazon? Right? At the end of the day, it's money making right. So how can I be successful? Um, not gonna sell more in the marketplace. Will the customer consumer through there? Is it friction or is a complex So this notion of complexity and friction becomes a double edged sword Tim on both sides. So we have five minutes left. Let's talk about the bottom side Complexity, >>friction. So you're absolutely right, John. And you know, the other thing that that I would say is for the partner, you have to look beyond what Amazon is selling today. Look at where the customers are going. And you know, David, I think you and I were both in an analyst session with Andy Jassy several years ago where one of the analysts asked the question. So you know, what's your perspective on Hybrid Cloud? In his response, candidly was, while we have this particular service and really, what he was talking to is a service that helps you on board to Amazon's public cloud. There was there was not an acknowledgment of hybrid cloud at the time, But look at how things have changed just in a short few years, and I understand where Jassy is coming from, but this is just exemplifies the fact that if you're a partner, you have to look beyond what Amazon is saying and think toe how the customer is evolving, how the enterprise is evolving and get yourself ahead of them. That will position you best for both today. And as you're building for the future. >>That's a great point, Dave. Complexity on buying. I'm a customer. You can throw me a marketplace all you want, but if I'm not gonna be tied into my procurement, how I'm consuming technology. Tim's point. Amazon isn't the only game in town. I got other suppliers. >>Yeah, well, certainly for some technology suppliers, they're basically could bring their on prem estate if it's big enough into the cloud. Uh, you know what is big enough? That's the big question here. You know, our guys like your red hats big enough. Okay, we know that Nutanix pure. They're sort of the next layer down. Can they do? They have enough of a customer base that they could bring into the cloud, create that abstraction layer, and then you got the born in the cloud guy Snowflake, Colombia or two good examples. Eso They've got the technology partners and then they're the size and consultants. And again, I see that is the really big opportunity is 10 points out? Amazon is acknowledging that hybrid Israel in in a newly defined way, they're going out to the edge, find you wanna call data center the edge. How are they going to support those installations? How are they gonna make sure that they're running properly? That they're connected to the business process? Those air That's s I whitespace. Huge. >>Guys, we have to wrap it up right now. But I just end on, you know, we'll get everyone go A little lightning around quick soundbite on the phrase with him, which stands for what's in it from me. So if I'm a partner, I'm a customer. I look at Amazon, I think. What's in it for me? Yeah. What a za customer like what do I get out of this? >>Yeah, having done, like more than 100 data center audits, and I'm seeing what mess up messes out there and having done quite a few migrations to cloud migrations of the messy messages piece, right? And it doesn't matter if you're migrating 10% or 20 or 30 it doesn't matter that how much you're migrating? It's a messy piece, and you cannot do with our partners that work. Actually, you need that. Know how you need to infuse that that education into into your organization, how to consume cloud, how toe make sense of it, how you change your processes and how you train your people. So it touches all the products, people and processes. So on three years, you gotta have partners on your side to make it >>so Hey, I'll go quick. And, Tim, you give you the last word. Complexity is cash. Chaos is cash. Follow the complexity. You'll make cash. >>Yeah, you said it, David. I think anyway, that you can help an enterprise simplify. And if you're the enterprise, if you're the customer, look for those partners. They're gonna help you simplify the journey over time. That's where the opportunity really lies. >>Okay, guys, Expert power panel here on Cuba live program, part of AWS reinvent virtual coverage, bringing you all the analysis from the experts. Digital transformations here. What's in it for me is a partner and customer. Help me make some money, master complexity and serve my customer. Mister Cube. Thanks for watching >>que Yeah, from around the globe. It's the cute

absolutely I think if I were to net it out Jeff what I'm sensing is there is a whole movement to shift security left which is this whole idea of IT stepping up as the first line of defense reduce cyber exposure take care of patching multi-factor authentication reduce their tax surface intrinsic security right so you know DevOps active ops take care of it right up front with all the apps even get built right then there is another movement to shift things right which is take care of the new new aspects of the attack surface right what the hackers always take advantage of of other areas where in a sense we are unprepared and for a long time they've seen us being unprepared in terms of reducing the attack surface and then they go after the new aspects of the tak surface and what are those IT I ot ot data as as an attack surface and the edge right so so these are areas where there's a lot of activity a lot of innovation you know on the on the air on the floor here if you walk the corners shifting left shifting right as in all the new aspects of the tax F is I'm seeing a lot of conversations a lot of innovation in that area I think it also boils down to real-world examples we've been really understand the demographics that we're working for I think today it's the first time really in history that we have four generations working side-by-side in the workforce so we have to understand that people learn differently training should be adjusted to the type of people that we're teaching but phishing doesn't just oil down to clicking on links phishing teaches also it boils down to tricking somebody getting someone's trust and it can come in different forms for example think of social media how do people connect we're connecting across social media on many different platforms I'll give a very easy example LinkedIn LinkedIn is for business have form we're all connected on LinkedIn why we connect on LinkedIn because that's a social platform that people feel safe on because we're able to connect to each other in a business form I want to think of the person who's getting the first job with an organization their first job in maybe their project manager and they're working for Bank a excited to be working for Bank a hey I'm gonna list all the projects I'm working for so here's now my resume on LinkedIn I'm working on project ABCD and this is my manager I report to perfect there's some information sitting there on LinkedIn now what else I will tell you is that you might have somebody who's looking to get into that Bank what will they do let's look for the lowest hanging fruit who this new project manager oh I see they're working on these projects and they're reporting in to someone well I'm not a project manager I'm a senior project manager from a competing bank I'm gonna befriend them and tell them that I'm really excited about the work they're doing here there's social engineering their way into their friendship into the good graces into their trust once done the video becomes a trusted source people share information freely so people are putting too much information out there on social trusting too easily opening the door for more than a phishing attack and things are just rapidly going out of control right so my co-founder and I both came from the world of being practitioners and we saw how limited the space wasn't actually changing human behavior I was given some animated powerpoints that use this to keep the Russians out of your Network which is a practical joke unless your job is on the line I took a huge step back and I said there are other fields that have figured this out behavioral science being one of them they use positive reinforcement gamification marketing and advertisement has figured out how to engage this human element just look around the RSA floor and there are so many learnings of how we make decisions as human beings that can be applied into changing people's behaviors and security so that's what we did adventure so this is my first early stage company we're still seeking series a we're a young company but our mantras we are the data value company so they have had this very robust analytics engine that goes into the heart of data I can track it and map it and make it beautiful and Along Came McNeely who actually sits on our board Oh does he and they said we need someone who's this week it's all happening so they asked Scott McNealy who is the craziest person in privacy and data that you know and he said oh my god get the done any woman so they got the den of a woman and that's what I do now so I'm taking this analytics value engine I'm pointing it to the board as I've always said Grace Hopper said data value and data risk has to be on the corporate balance sheet and so that's what we're building is a data balance sheet for everyone to use to actually value data for me it starts with technology that takes look we've only got so many security practitioners in the company actually defend your email example we've got to defend every user from those kinds of problems and so how do I find technology solutions that help take that load off the security practitioners so they can focus on the niche examples that are really really well-crafted emails and and and help take that load off the user because users just you're not going to be able to handle that right it's not fair to ask them and like you said it was just poorly timed that helps protect it so how do we help make sure that we're taking that technology load off identify the threats in advance and and protect them and so I think one of the biggest things that Chris and I talk a lot about is how do our solutions help make it easier for people to secure themselves instead of just providing only a technology technology advantage so the virtual analyst is able to sit on premises so it's localized learning collector has to understand the nature of those strats collect to be able to look at the needles of the needles if you will make sense of that and then automatically generate reports based off of that right so it's really an assist tool that a network in min or a security analyst was able to pick up and virtually save hours and hours of time so we have this we call it a thread research group within the company and their job is to take all the data from the sensors we have I mean we have we look at about 25 petabytes of data every day all our solutions are cloud solutions as well as on forum so we get the benefit of basically seeing all the data's that are hitting our customers every day I mean we block about 1 million attacks every minutes like every minute 1 billion attacks every minute minute right we protect over 3 million databases and you know we've mitigated some of the largest DDoS attacks that's ever been reported so we have a lot of date right that we're seen and the interesting thing is that you're right we are having to always we're using that threat research data to see what's happening how the threat landscape is changing therefore guiding us on how we need to augment and add to our products to prevent that but interestingly we're also consuming AI and machine learning as well on our products because we're able to use those solutions to actually do a lot of attack analytics and do a lot of predictive and research for our customers that can kind of guide them about you know where things are happening because what's happening is that before a lot of the tacks were just sort of fast and furious now we're seeing a pattern towards snow snow and continuous if that makes sense we're seeing all these patterns and threats coming in so we're fighting against those technologies like AI Barossa using those technologies to help us soon you know decide where we need to continue to add capabilities to stop it you know the whole bad box thing wasn't a problem right a number of years ago and so it's it's ever-changing your world which frankly speaking makes it an interesting place to be yes who wants to be in a static in a boring place right well I mean we do you're a good package or a bad package you have to traverse the network to be interesting we've all you know put our phones in airplane mode at blackhat or events like that but we don't want to be on it they're really boring when they're offline but they're also really boring too attackers when they're offline as soon as you turn them on you have a problem or could have a problem but as things traverse the network what better place to see who and what's on your network and on the gear and end of the day we're able to provide that visibility we're able to provide that enforcement so as you mentioned 2020 is now the year of awareness for us so the threat aware network we're able to do things like look at encrypted traffic do heuristics and analysis to figure out should that even be on my network because as you bring it into a network and you have to decrypt it a there's privacy concerns of that in these times but also it's computationally expensive to do that so it becomes a challenge from a both a financial perspective as well as a compliance perspective so we're helping solve s even kind of offset that traffic and be able to ensure your network secure so when we started developing our cyber recovery solution about five years ago we used the NIST cybersecurity framework which is a very well known standard that defines really five pillars of how organizations can think about building a cyber resilience strategy a cyber resilience strategy really encompasses everything from perimeter threat detection and response all the way through incident response after an attack and everything that happens in between protecting the data and recovering the data right and critical systems so I think of cyber resilience is that holistic strategy of protecting an organization and its data from a cyberattack yeah I think the human element is the hardest part you know in mind of this conference and its theme the human element the hardest part about this job is that it's not just mechanical issues and routing issues and networking issues but is about dealing with all types of humans innocent humans that do strange and bad things unknowingly and it's in malicious people who do very bad things that is by design and so the research suggests that no matter what we do in security awareness training some four percent of our employee base will continually bail security awareness that's what we fished and actively and so one of the things that we need to do is use automation and intelligence so that you can comb through all of that data and make a better informed decision about what risks are going to mitigate right and for this four percent are habitually abusing the system and can't be retrained well you can isolate them right and make sure that they're separated and then they're not able to to do things that may harm the organization you

>> Announcer: From San Francisco, it's theCUBE! Covering RSA Conference 2020 San Francisco. Brought to you by SiliconANGLE Media. >> Hey welcome back, get ready, Jeff Frick here with theCUBE, we're at RSA 2020, here at Moscone, it's a really pretty day outside in San Francisco, unfortunately we're at the basement of Moscone, but that's 'cause this is the biggest thing going in security, it's probably 15,000 people, we haven't got the official number yet, but this is the place to be and security is a really really really big deal, and we're excited to have our next guest, I haven't seen her for a little while, since data privacy day. I tried to get Scott McNealy to join us, he unfortunately was predisposed and couldn't join us. Michelle Finneran Dennedy, in her new job, the CEO of DrumWave. Michelle, great to see you. >> Great to see you too, I'm sorry I missed you on privacy day. >> I know, so DrumWave, tell us all about DrumWave, last we saw you this is a new adventure since we last spoke. >> It's a new adventure, so this is my first early stage company, we're still seeking series A, we're a young company, but our mantra is we are the data value company. So they have had this very robust analytics engine that goes into the heart of data, and can track it and map it and make it beautiful, and along came McNealy, who actually sits on our board. And they said we need someone, it's all happening. So they asked Scott McNealy, who is the craziest person in privacy and data that you know and he said "Oh my God, get the Dennedy woman." So, they got the Dennedy woman and that's what I do now, so I've taken this analytics value engine, I'm pointing it to the board as I've always said, Grace Hopper said, data value and data risk has to be on the corporate balance sheet, and so that's what we're building is a data balance sheet for everyone to use, to actually value data. >> So to actually put a value on the data, so this is a really interesting topic, because people talk about the value of data, we see the value of data wrapped up, not directly, but indirectly in companies like Facebook and Google and those types of companies who clearly are leveraging data in a very different way, but it is not a line item on a balance sheet, they don't teach you that at business school next to capital assets and, right, so how are you attacking the problem, 'cause that's a huge, arguably will be the biggest asset anyone will have on their balance sheet at some point in time. >> Absolutely, and so I go back to basic principles, the same as I did when I started privacy engineering. I look and I say "Okay, if we believe the data's an asset," and I think that at least verbally, we all say the words "Yes, data is an asset," instead of some sort of exhaust, then you have to look back and say "What's an asset?" Well an asset, under the accounting rules, is anything tangible or intangible that is likely to cause economic benefit. So you break that down, what is the thing, well you got to map that thing. So where is your data? Well data tells you where it is. Instead of bringing in clip boards and saying "Hey, Jeff, my man, do you process PII?" We don't do that, we go to your system, and when you go on DrumWave, you're automatically receiving an ontology that says what is this likely to be, using some machine learning, and then every single column proclaims itself. And so we have a data provenance for every column, so you put that into an analytics engine, and suddenly you can start asking human questions of real data. >> And do you ask the questions to assess the value of the data, or is the ultimate valuation of that data in the categorization and the ontology, and knowing that I have this this this and this, or I mean we know what the real value is, the soft value is what you can do with it, but when you do the analytics on it, are you trying to get to unlock what the potential, underlying analytic value is of that data that you have in your possession? >> Yeah, so the short answer is both, and the longer answer is, so my cofounder, Andre Vellozo, believes, and I believe too, that every conversation is a transaction. So just like you look at transactions within the banking context, and you say, you have to know that it's there, creating a data ontology. You have to know what the context is, so when you upload your data, you receive a data provenance, now you can actually look at, as the data controller, you open what we call your wallet, which is your portal into our analytics engine, and you can see across the various data wranglers, so each business unit has put their data on, because the data's not leaving your place, it's either big data, small data, I don't really care data. Everything comes in through every business unit, loads up their data set, and we look across it and we say "What kind of data is there?" So there's quantitative data saying, if you took off the first 10 lines of this column in marketing, now you have a lump of data that's pure analytics. You just share those credentials and combine that dataset, you know you have a clean set of data that you can even sell, or you can create an analytic, because you don't have any PII. For most data sets, you look at relative value, so for example, one of the discussions I had with a customer today, we know when we fail in privacy, we have a privacy breach, and we pay our lawyers, and so on. Do you know what a privacy success is? >> Hopefully it's like an offensive lineman, you don't hear their name the whole game right, 'cause they don't get a holding call. >> Until they put the ball in the hole. So who's putting the ball in the hole, sales is a privacy success. You've had a conversation with someone who was the right someone in context to sign on the bottom line. You have shared information in a proportionate way. If you have the wrong data, your sale cycle is slower. So we can show, are you efficiently sharing data, how does that correlate with the results of your business unit? Marketing is another privacy success. There's always that old adage that we know that 50% of marketing is a waste, but we don't know which 50%. Well now we can look at it and say "All right," marketing can be looked at as people being prepared to buy your product, or prepared to think in a new, persuasive way. So who's clicking on that stuff, that used to be the metric, now you should tie that back to, how much are you storing for how long related to who's clicking, and tying it to other metrics. So the minute you put data into an analytics engine, it's not me that's going to tell you how you're going to do your data balance sheet, you're going to tell me how dependent you are on digital transactions versus tangible, building things, selling things, moving things, but everyone is a digital business now, and so we can put the intelligence on top of that so you, the expert in value, can look at that value and make your own conclusions. >> And really, what you're talking about then is tying it to my known processes, so you're almost kind of parsing out the role of the data in doing what I'm trying to do with my everyday business. So that's very different than looking at, say, something like, say a Facebook or an Amazon or a Google that are using the data not necessarily, I mean they are supporting the regular processes, but they're getting the valuation bump because of the potential. >> By selling it. >> Or selling it, or doing new businesses based on the data, not just the data in support of the current business. So is that part of your program as well, do you think? >> Absolutely, so we could do the same kind of ontology and value assessment for an Apple, Apple assesses value by keeping it close, and it's not like they're not exploiting data value, it's just that they're having everyone look into the closed garden, and that's very valuable. Facebook started that way with Facebook Circles way back when, and then they decided when they wanted to grow, they actually would start to share. And then it had some interesting consequences along the line. So you can actually look at both of those models as data valuation models. How much is it worth for an advertiser to get the insights about your customers, whether or not they're anonymized or not, and in certain contexts, so healthcare, you want it to be hyper-identifiable, you want it to be exactly that person. So that valuation is higher, with a higher correlation of every time that PII is associated with a treatment, to that specific person with the right name, and the same Jr. or Sr. or Mrs. or Dr., all of that correlated into one, now your value has gone up, whether you're selling that data or what you're selling is services into that data, which is that customer's needs and wants. >> And in doing this with customers, what's been the biggest surprise in terms of a value, a piece of value in the data that maybe just wasn't recognized, or kind of below the covers, or never really had the direct correlation or association that it should've had? >> Yeah, so I don't know if I'm going to directly answer it or I'm going to sidewind it, but I think my biggest surprise wasn't a surprise to me, it was a surprise to my customers. The customers thought we were going to assess their data so they could start selling it, or they could buy other data sources, combine it, enrich it, and then either sell it or get these new insights. >> Jeff: That's what they brought you in for. >> Yeah, I know, cute, right? Yeah, so I'm like "Okay." The aha moment, of course, is that first of all, the "Oh my God" moment in data rarely happens, sometimes in big research cases, you'll get an instance of some biometric that doesn't behave organically, but we're talking about human behavior here, so the "Aha, we should be selling phone data "to people with phones" should not be an aha, that's just bad marketing. So instead, the aha for me has been A, how eager and desperate people are for actually looking at this, I really thought this was going to be a much more steep hill to climb to say "Hey, data's an asset," I've been saying this for over 20 years now, and people are kind of like "Yeah, yeah, yeah." Now for the first time, I'm seeing people really want to get on board and look comprehensively, so I thought we'd be doing little skinny pilots, oh no, everyone wants to get all their data on board so they can start playing around with it. So that's been really a wake-up call for a privacy gal. >> Right, well it's kind of interesting, 'cause you're kind of at the tail end of the hype cycle on big data, with Hadoop, and all that that represented, it went up and down and nobody had-- >> Michelle: Well we thought more was more. >> We thought more was more, but we didn't have the skills to manage it, and there was a lot of issues. And so now you never hear about big data per say, but data's pervasive everywhere, data management is pervasive everywhere, and again, we see the crazy valuations based on database companies, that are clearly getting that. >> And data privacy companies, I mean look at the market in DC land, and any DCs that are looking at this, talk to mama, I know what to do. But we're seeing one feature companies blowing up in the marketplace right now, people really want to know how to handle the risk side as well as the value side. Am I doing the right thing, that's my number one thing that not CPOs are, because they all know how crazy it is out there, but it's chief financial officers are my number one customer. They want to know that they're doing the right thing, both in terms of investment, but also in terms of morality and ethics, am I doing the right thing, am I growing the right kind of business, and how much of my big data is paying me back, or going back to accountancy rules, the definition of a liability is an asset that is uncurated. So I can have a pencil factory, 'cause I sell pencils, and that's great, that's where I house my pencils, I go and I get, but if something happened and somehow the route driver disappeared, and that general manager went away, now I own a pencil factory that has holes in the roof, that has rotting merchandise, that kids can get into, and maybe the ceiling falls, there's a fire, all that is, if I'm not utilizing that asset, is a liability, and we're seeing real money coming out of the European Union, there was a hotel case where the data that they were hoarding wasn't wrong, it was about real people who had stayed at their hotels, it just was in the 90s. And so they were fined 14.5 million Euros for keeping stale data, an asset had turned into a liability, and that's why you're constantly balancing, is it value, is it risk, am I taking so much risk that I'm not compensating with value and vice versa, and I think that's the new aha moment of really looking at your data valuation. >> Yeah, and I think that was part of the big data thing too, where people finally realized it's not a liability, thinking about "I got to buy servers to store it, "and I got to buy storage, and I got to do all this stuff," and they'd just let it fall on the floor. It's not free, but it does have an asset value if you know what to do with it. So let's shift gears about privacy specifically, because obviously you are the queen of privacy. >> I like that, that's my new title. >> GDPR went down, and now we've got the California version of GDPR, love to get your update, did you happen to be here earlier for the keynotes, and there was a conversation on stage about the right to be forgotten. >> Jennifer: Oh dear god, now, tell me. >> And is it even possible, and a very esteemed group of panelists up there just talking about very simple instances where, I search on something that you did, and now I want to be forgotten. >> Did no one watch Back to the Future? Did we not watch that show? Back to the Future where all their limbs start disappearing? >> Yes, yes, it's hard to implement some of these things. >> This has been my exhaustion with the right to be forgotten since the beginning. Humanity has never desired a right to be forgotten. Now people could go from one village to the next and redo themselves, but not without the knowledge that they gained, and being who they were in the last village. >> Jeff: Speaking to people along the way. >> Right, you become a different entity along the way. So, the problem always was really, differential publicity. So, some dude doesn't pay back his debtors, he's called a bad guy, and suddenly, any time you Google him, or Bing him, Bing's still there, right? >> Jeff: I believe so. >> Okay, so you could Bing someone, I guess, and then that would be the first search term, that was the harm, was saying that your past shouldn't always come back to haunt you. And so what we try to do is use this big, soupy term that doesn't exist in philosophy, in art, the Chimea Roos had a great right to be forgotten plan. See how that went down? >> That was not very pleasant. >> No, it was not pleasant, because what happens is, you take out knowledge when you try to look backwards and say "Well, we're going to keep this piece and that," we are what we are, I'm a red hot mess, but I'm a combination of my red hot messes, and some of the things I've learned are based on that. So there's a philosophical debate, but then there's also the pragmatic one of how do you fix it, who fixes it, and who gets to decide whose right it is to be forgotten? >> And what is the goal, that's probably the most important thing, what is the goal that we're trying to achieve, what is the bad thing that we're trying to avoid, versus coming up with some grandiose idea that probably is not possible, much less practical. >> There's a suit against the Catholic Church right now, I don't know if you heard this, and they're not actually in Europe, they live in Vatican City, but there's a suit against, about the right to be forgotten, if I decide I'm no longer Catholic, I'm not doing it, Mom, I'm hearing you, then I should be able to go to the church and erase my baptismal records and all the rest. >> Jeff: Oh, I hadn't heard that one. >> I find it, first of all, as someone who is culturally Catholic, I don't know if I can be as saintly as I once was, as a young child. What happens if my husband decides to not be Catholic anymore? What happens if I'm not married anymore, but now my marriage certificate is gone from the Catholic Church? Are my children bastards now? >> Michelle's going deep. >> What the hell? Literally, what the hell? So I think it's the unintended consequence without, this goes back to our formula, is the data value of deletion proportionate to the data risk, and I would say the right to be forgotten is like this. Now having an indexability or an erasability of a one-time thing, or, I'll give you another corner case, I've done a little bit of thinking, so you probably shouldn't have asked me about this question, but, in the US, when there's a domestic abuse allegation, or someone calls 911, the police officers have to stay safe, and so typically they just take everybody down to the station, men and women. Guess who are most often the aggressors? Usually the dudes. But guess who also gets a mugshot and fingerprints taken? The victim of the domestic abuse. That is technically a public record, there's never been a trial, that person may or may not ever be charged for any offense at all, she just was there, in her own home, having the crap beat out of her. Now she turns her life around, she leaves her abusers, and it can happen to men too, but I'm being biased. And then you do a Google search, and the first thing you find is a mugshot of suspected violence. Are you going to hire that person? Probably not. >> Well, begs a whole discussion, this is the generation where everything's been documented all along the way, so whether they choose or not choose or want or don't want, and how much of it's based on surveillance cameras that you didn't even know. I thought you were going to say, and then you ask Alexa, "Can you please give me the recording "of what really went down?" Which has also been done, it has happened, it has happened, actually, which then you say "Hm, well, is having the data worth the privacy risk "to actually stop the perp from continuing the abuse?" >> Exactly, and one of my age-old mantras, there's very few things that rhyme, but this one does, but if you can't protect, do not collect. So if you're collecting all these recordings in the domestic, think about how you're going to protect. >> There's other people that should've hired you on that one. We won't go there. >> So much stuff to do. >> All right Michelle, but unfortunately we have to leave it there, but thank you for stopping by, I know it's kind of not a happy ending. But good things with DrumWave, so congratulations, we continue to watch the story evolve, and I'm sure it'll be nothing but phenomenal success. >> It's going to be a good time. >> All right, thanks a lot Michelle. She's Michelle, I'm Jeff, you're watching theCUBE, we're at RSA 2020 in San Francisco, thanks for watching, we'll see you next time. (techno music)

>>from Menlo Park, California In the heart of Silicon Valley, it's the Cube covering cloud now. Awards 2020 Brought to you by Silicon Angle Media. Now here's Sonia category. >>Hi and welcome to the Cube. I'm your host Sonia category, and we're on the ground at Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park, California covering Cloud now's top women entrepreneurs in Cloud Innovation Awards. Joining us today is Tao Johnson, who's the CEO and founder of Kaizen Technology Partners. Now welcome to the Cube. Thank you. Thank you for having me. So give us a brief overview of your background. >>Sure, I actually have a finance degree and have no idea what technology was. I started as a finance analyst at Sun Microsystems and had no idea who they were or what job awas but having the interest to be a CFO one day, our CEO in another company, I figured I'd go into sales and really understand what drives a company growth and revenue. So I was actually trained by Scott McNealy's best of the best program and was in sales class with him and his with his sister in law. And, um, I never left sales after them, >>so um So you mentioned that you have a finance background? How do you think that background has helped you to become a successful CEO versus, say, a technical background? >>And I think having the finance background is very important because your cash flow management is one of the biggest reasons companies fail. You know, before they can get their next round of funding, they run out of their overhead costs, their monthly overhead costs. The other thing is really to understand how to sell in our ally and total cost of ownership to the decision powers that be at the CFO level and CEO CIO. >>Okay, Um, so you're on the cloud now advisory board to tell us, How did you join And how was that experience? Like, I think >>it grew organically having been a participant to a few of the events with Jocelyn and then helping her. Where can I help? How can I get speakers for you or winners? And over time, just like just came to me and said, You know, you have such a network, Why don't you join our board and help us where we can? Hence we have mailing today, um, as our keynote because of our network. >>And speaking of entrepreneurs, you, um, I just want to mention that you are at this program for Harvard, for entrepreneurs. Can you talk more about that? >>Sure, it's an amazing program. I wish that there were more women who applied and were able to invest the money and time into the program. It's, ah, owners and entrepreneurs who have companies around the world. There's 41 countries represented. Unfortunately, only about 17% of women of 151 participants in class. We meet three times once a year, and we go through three weeks of intensive training to discuss marketing finance how to scale operations. But the best thing you get out of it is 1 30% of it is learning this case studies method and Harvard, the other 30% is really the network and the different industry's. You get to meet. We have film. As you know, we've talked about retail and other industries there that you can self reflect on. How does that involve with technology? Um, and then the other 30 self reflection time. A lot of entrepreneurs, especially CEOs, don't have the time to get away from their business, and it really forces you to not be the operator. Walk away and be able to self reflect on Where do you want to take the business >>today >>and speaking about networking? What's your advice on networking within the industry? What are some tips and tricks >>in my belief? You know, we have social media, but the best way to meet people is through other people. So going to events like this and really having an idea of your goals at the event when you're going there, who's going to help you get to that person? Um, and having a focus, not. I want to meet 100 80 people, and I don't know who they're going to be really being able to say, Who do I want to meet at that event who can help me get there and preparing plan as much triple the time that you're gonna be even at the event? >>Yes, the networking can be really difficult. So as an entrepreneur, what do you think makes a great entrepreneur? >>You know, entrepreneurship is very hard because you really have to touch all facets of a company and find the right people to trust to do certain areas, but then be able to understand all the different parts of the company, right, from supply chain to partnerships to sales and finance. So what, you really have to be diverse and ambidextrous, and that makes it very difficult for some people who are only analytical or only sales e to be able to run a company in scale. >>And what advice do you have for female technologists who maybe feel that so it's really difficult to navigate in this male dominated industry? I would >>say to them they're stand out, make your different standout, right? Why make it a negative? The positive is you are female and you stand out so less men get called on by you and you might have a chance to get in the door. But you better have your ideas in line and your resource is and you better be >>kick ass. But use it to your >>advantage that you are different and that they're not used to hearing from women. >>So you've been with carved out for many years now. Where do you hope to see cloud now in the future, I >>would love to see cloud now be more, uh, geographically worldwide as we're doing more work in my non profit for women Rwanda, in Afghanistan as entrepreneurs, Um and I think, you know, we've upped and stepped up so much more with Facebook bringing in investments to us to compared to what we've done before, Um, I think just the awareness and may be doing this on a, um, twice a year basis instead of only once a year to be ableto celebrate these wonderful women. >>Don, thank you so much for being on the Cube. This has been really knowledgeable. Thank you for having me. I'm Sonia Tagaris. Thank you for watching the Cube stay tuned for more. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

>> Narrator: Live from London, England. It's theCUBE. Covering AWS Summit London 2019. Brought to you by Amazon Web Services. >> Hello and welcome to the AWS Summit here at the XL Center in London. I'm Susannah Streeter and Dave Vellante is my co-host on The CUBE today. So much to talk about. It is immense this Summit. Thousands upon thousands of attendees talking about everything to do with the Cloud, of course. AI machine learning, but privacy keeps coming up again and again. And I'm please to say that Bill Mew is here. He's a privacy campaigner and tech consultant and is now CEO of crisisteam.co.uk. Now Bill, we have talked a lot really about the growth of AWS and also the start-ups using the public Cloud. It's interesting that that growth is intensified even though the GDPR regulations came into force and right now lobbyists are really hard at work, 6aren't they? Particularly in the United States trying to limit the impact of coming regulations. Do you think that they'll be successful? >> Well, I think there was a big argument when we first looked at the introduction of regulation around privacy and sort of ethical issues. But it would be a big restraint on innovation and I think what we're seeing here at this AWS Summit is the fact that innovation is well, and it's alive, and it's really healthy and there's a great deal happening. We just need to be careful with what we do with people's data and there's a very good reason for this. It really matters to people. You, me, people in the street, consumers. Number one issue, now, for most people is security and privacy and how their data is handled. It's interesting that only six months, eight months ago, if you surveyed the same group of people, they might have said diversity or sustainability. Now, because of a number of the horror stories around data breaches, the number one issue out there is now how their data is handled. And therefore, companies need to take it very seriously. And obviously AWS has got an enormous infrastructure and it's claiming that it's GDPR compliant in the way it handles it's own data. But there are a lot of people that host on its platform and they're sometimes vulnerable. So, what I'm doing is I'm helping to influence where some of the regulation is going to try and head things off, to ensure we have the right balance between meaningful protections because that needs to be in place, but ensuring that meaningful protections don't hinder innovation or economic and social value. But at the same time, I also work, I was apart of the crisis team with some of the top lawyers in Cyber Law and a whole bunch of crisis management experts, or ex UN or whoever, and we help step in when things go wrong for companies. Not only helping them come together with a legally defensible position, helping them communicate it effectively, and actually across our social media campaign and our reach and some of the other channels like this that we use, we help to counter some of the hysteria and misinformation that is often inevitable in that type of situation. So, there's a whole spectrum there and an enormous scope for debate. >> So you're talking there about fake news in particular, are you? >> Well, I think that when a story breaks there can be a lot of misinformation about exactly what happened. Things can get a little bit out of hand and hysteria can take off. You can talk about alternative facts, you can talk about hysteria, you can talk about fake news. What we try and do is not only help companies formulate what is likely to be the most realistic defensible position they have, but also to make sure that they're countering some of the really terrible hysteria that can occur at a time when typically their own credibility in the market is an all time low. And maybe there are, if you've got some credible privacy campaigners, some real thought leaders in the market who can step in and say, "Hold on guys, look, there's a little bit of reality we need to touch on here. This isn't quite what happened, this may have happened, and this is what they're doing to try to address it". Then maybe we can counter some of that hysteria. We can help people who might be unduly concerned, and also we can help protect some brands out there that are sometimes facing a lot of reputational harm. >> So Scott McNealy famously said one day that, he was the former CEO of Sun Microsystems, a very successful company that was sold to Oracle, but he said, "There is no privacy in the internet, get over it". And that was before social media took off. Social media obviously has affected this discussion. But, for years, and still, people put stuff on the social channels that is absurdly private. Yet, it's open for the public. So- >> Yeah, but I think there was a level of naivety once upon a time. If we were to ask a number of questions a while ago about privacy, I think people would not be really too concerned, but they've seen some of the breeches like the Equifax breech, where there was some really very sensitive information made available. Sometimes. that led to very real concerns around people. But also, we're looking at new technologies that are going to come along. We've got AI on the horizon, we've got facial recognition. These kind of technologies are actually going to dominate our lives in the future. And we're already seeing in countries like China, where they're using facial recognition to score people, a bit like you have a credit score, you have a citizenship score, a how good a citizen you are, whether you jaywalk, whether you do all sorts of other different things. And your access to credit, your access to travel opportunities, your access to a whole load of services is based on your score. I think there will be a lot of people in the possibly democratic western societies who might see that as a little bit Big Brother. >> Even though you are still seeing some states and cities already bringing in regulations to limit some of the advances we see here. >> Yeah, it's interesting, I think in Washington state in the U.S., there have been a number of different proposals put forward in terms of how they introduce the sort of privacy regulations we've already seen California and elsewhere. And some of the proposals there would be nigh on sort of a banning facial recognition entirely because the barometric constraints were really quite severe. And I think, part of what I've been doing, I work with a lot of privacy campaigners, but I also work with other corporates to see how we can strike the right balance. We want meaningful protections, absolutely, because there's some really sensitive data out there. And the way it's used can affect our lives. At the same time, we don't want to stifle innovation, the type of innovation we're seeing here at the AWS Summit. We want maximize the economic and social value. And that's a really delicate balance to strike. >> Susannah: It's a tight rope, isn't it? >> It sounds good, but so, I think of the cloud, how it's enabled small businesses to have access to IT infrastructure that's the same quality as large companies. In a way, doesn't this stack the deck for large companies who can actually afford the compliance officers and all the infrastructure necessary in the software and the people to actually comply with these new regulations. >> I think there is some truth in that, because there is absolutely an overhead, but I don't think we need to get away from the fact that data is really important and it needs to be protected. I don't think we're just looking at privacy here, we're also looking at data protection and I don't think you should underestimate the vulnerability that we now see. I mean, we are more of an inter connected society than we have ever been. The number of attacks that are on the horizon are growing exponentially. We are also seeing the fact that the number of opportunities, the threat landscape, is increasing. We've got massive numbers of IOT devices and other things. It's going to be very, very difficult. It's going to be a full time challenge. Indeed it's a sort of AI arms race as either side use AI to discover either vulnerabilities to introduce attacks, or vulnerabilities in order to introduce patches. >> We hear a lot about just how valuable our data is. And we were even discussing at one point that it's more valuable than oil for many companies. Do you think that consumers have really woken up to the fact, just how valuable their data is? And could you foresee a time where by actually the consumers say, "You want my data, you've really got to pay me for it"? >> I think there have been some proposals along that front in terms of how we separate private data and give people control over it. The right to be forgotten was a step in that direction. But, if we can have some sort of infrastructure that does allow people separate their own private data and allow access to it on a permissions basis, then that could provide a future internet. There's been a lot of discussion along that front from Tim Berners-Lee and a number of other really top thinkers in that particular arena. But the value of that data possibly was overlooked in the past. Plus also the vulnerability as well, and therefore I think people are waking up to it now. That's why they care so much more about it now then they ever have in the past. >> Well there's certainly a lot of talk in the Blockchain and crypto world about using that technology to allow the users to own their own data, to control their own data. I mean take Facebook for example, there's a built in incentive for them to appropriate our data, so they can sell ads to us. But, what if, as the theory goes, the user could control it, the user could monetize his or her own data. So there is some discussion going on there, there is some technology development going on there at the low level protocol. What do you think about that? >> I certainly think that technology will provide the answer. Exactly how we do a sort of new version of the internet that allows that sort of control, is still open to discussion and there are a lot of opinions both on, on either side here. Interestingly enough, Blockchain has been put forward as a possible solution, but there's a slight irony in the fact that Blockchain's immutability's actually at odds with GDPR's right to be forgotten. So, the two are actually mutually incompatible. So there's some real difficult issues for us to address here. >> So technology got us into this problem, it can potentially help us get out of this problem, but maybe not is what I'm hearing. >> It's not entirely straight forward, and actually if we are going to be moving in a direction where we give users more control over their data, it's actually gonna have to be an internationally adopted standard. At the moment, GDPR has come forward as a standard here in Europe, but it is set sort of the golden benchmark against which other regulations are now going to be measured. >> Susannah: And are you seeing signs of that? Do you expect the U.S. to adopt a model which is very much based on the one Europe has. >> It may not be exactly GDPR like, but there will be things in common. I think many of the organizations world wide that really care about their user's data, and I told you earlier about the attitudinal surveys that have been out there. Companies are very wise if they wake up to this and actually take proactive steps to change the culture in their organization, to have a digital ethics culture. It means not only are they going to care for data more often, more carefully, they're going to be less prone to the type of inadvertent leaks, as well as a sort of hacks. But at the same time, a culture of that nature helps them to deal with a situation if it even does occur. It's actually having the right culture. And those companies that have a truly digital ethics oriented culture have not only adopted GDPR in Europe, they've chosen to adopt it globally. >> I think there's a sentiment in the U.S., that look, we're doing this for European consumers, we might as well adopt the same standards globally. >> Bill: Yeah. >> We've got the processes in place, they seem to be working for Europe, why not use them? It's just more convenient, it's going to be lower cost to do that, so it just makes sense. >> That's why GDPR has emerged as a global benchmark. And many of the other countries, in India and America and elsewhere are measuring their potential regulations against GDPR. >> I've heard it criticized on this show as a socialist agenda, but it seems to having quite a bit of momentum, and a lot of sensible parts of GDPR. >> Well it, I'm not sure we could call it socialist or whatever. >> Dave: Not my words, (laughter) I'm just quoting somebody. >> What I think we've seen is a change in the balance, where actually previously, people's right to privacy wasn't recognized at all. And we had a sort of the tech revolution where people didn't really care. Facebook were talking all about a sharing culture and that was their orientation. We've seen the tech backlash where Facebook and others have all been punished and there's been a sort of sudden switch or pivot towards privacy. What we need to do is look beyond those because we need to have a level playing field. We need to have an equilibrium where we're absolutely balancing the right protections, meaningful protections, with absolutely maximizing the sort of innovation you see here and the economic and social value that's going to underpin our lives. >> Self governance is not likely to work, let's face it. >> I think we've seen, and Facebook is an example, we'll be oft quoted in this respect, that self regulation doesn't work necessarily in this way because it's just too tempting to use data in the way that you see fit. Unwinding some of the mistakes they've made in the past is not going to be easy for them, but we'll see how well they keep to the new promise of their pivot to privacy. >> Dave: I think it'll define their legacy, personally. >> Yeah. >> Well, Bill it's been fascinating having you on here, because you've really been at the forefront of all of these changes, so it's great to hear your thoughts. So, thank you very much. Bill Mew, CEO of crisisteam.co.uk. And you've been watching theCUBE at the AWS Summit in London. (tech music)

>> live from Las Vegas. It's the queue covering del Technologies. World twenty nineteen, brought to you by Del Technologies and its ecosystem partners. >> Okay, welcome back. Everyone's cubes. Live coverage. Day three wrap up of Del Technologies World twenty nineteen Java is Dave a lot. There's too many men on set one. We get set to over there blue set, White said. We got a lot of content. It's been a cube can, in guise of a canon of content firing into the digital sphere. Great gas. We had all the senior executive players Tech athletes. Adele Technology World. Michael Dell, Tom Sweet, Marius Haas, Howard Ally As we've had Pat Kelsey, rco v M were on the key partner in the family. They're of del technology world and we had the clients guys on who do alien where, as well as the laptops and the power machines. Um, we've had the power edge guys on. We talked about Hollywood. It's been a great run, but Dave, it's been ten years Stew. Remember, the first cube event we ever went to was DMC World in Boston. The chowder there he had and that was it wasn't slogan of of the show turning to the private cloud. Yeah, I think that was this Logan cheering to the private cloud that was twenty ten. >> Well, in twenty ten, it was Cloud Cloud Cloud Cloud Cloud twenty nineteen. It's all cloud now. That difference is back then it was like fake cloud and made up cloud and really was no substance to it. We really started to see stew, especially something that we've been talking about for years, which is substantially mimicking the public cloud on Prem. Now I know there are those who would say No, no, no, no, no. And Jessie. Probably in one of those that's not cloud. So there's still that dichotomy is a cloud. >> Well, Dave, if I could jump in on that one of the things that's really interesting is when Veum, where made that partnership with a ws It was the ripple through this ecosystem. Oh, what's that mean for Del you know Veum, wherein Del not working together Well, they set the model and they started rolling out bm where, and they took the learnings that they had. And they're bringing that data center as a service down to the Dell environment. So it's funny I always we always here, you know, eight of us, They're learning from their partners in there listening and everything like that. Well, you know, Dylan Veum where they've been listening, they've been learning to in this, and it brings into a little bit of equilibrium for me, that partnership and right, David, you said, you know that you could be that cloud washing discussion. And today it's, you know, we're talking about stacks that live in eight of us and Google and Microsoft. And now, in, you know, my hosted or service lighter or, you know, my own data center. If that makes sense, >> I mean, if you want to just simplify the high order bit, Dave Cloud. It's simply this Amazon's trying to be enterprised everyone, the enterprise, trying to claw Amazon, right? And so what? The what that basically means is it's all cloud. It's all a distributed computer system. OK, Scott McNealy had it right. The network is the computer. If you look at what's going on here, the traditional enterprise of vendors over decades of business model and technology, you know, had full stack solutions from mainframe many computers to PC the local area networking all cobble together wires it up creates applications, services. All that is completely being decimated by a new way to roll out storage, computing and networking is the same stuff. It's just being configured differently. Throw on massive computer power with Cloud and Moore's Law and Data and A. I U have a changing of the the architecture. But the end of the day the cloud is operating model of distributed computing. If you look at all the theories and pieces of computer science do and networking, all those paradigms are actually playing out in in the clouds. Everything from a IIE. In the eighties and nineties you got distributed networking and computing, but it's all one big computer. And Michael Dell, who was the master of the computer industry building PCs, looks at this. Probably leg. It's one big computer. You got a processor and subsystems. So you know this is what's interesting. Amazon has done that, and if they try to be like the enterprise, like the old way, they could fall into that trap. So if the enterprise stays in the enterprise, they know they're not going out. So I think it's interesting that I see the enterprise trying to like Amazon Amazon trying to get a price. So at the end of the day, whoever could build that system that's scalable the way I think Dell's doing, it's great. I was only scaleable using data for special. So it's a distributed computer. That's all that's going on in the world right now, and it's changing everything. Open source software is there. All that makes it completely different, and it's a huge opportunity. Whoever can crack the code on this, it's in the trillions and trillions of dollars. Total adjustable market >> well, in twenty ten we said that way, noted the gap. There's still a gap between what Amazon could do and what the on Prem guys Khun Dio, we'd argue, is a five years is seven years, maybe ten years, whatever it is. But at the time we said, if you recall, lookit, they got to close the gap. It's got to be good enough for I t to buy into it like we're starting to see that. But my view, it's still not cloud. It doesn't have to scale a cloud, doesn't have the economics cloud. When you peel the onion, it doesn't certainly doesn't have the SAS model and the consumption model of cloud nowhere close yet. Well, and you know, >> here's the drumbeat of innovation that we see from the public cloud. You know where we hit the shot to show this week, the public have allowed providers how many announcements that they probably had. Sure, there was a mega launch of announcements here, but the public lives just that regular cadence of their, you know, Public Cloud. See a CD. We're not quite there yet in this kind of environment, it's still what Amazon would say is. You put this in an environment and it's kind of frozen. Well, it's thought some, and it's now we can get data set. A service consumption model is something we can go. We're shifting in that model. It's easier to update things, but you know, how do I get access to the new features? But we're seeing that blurring of the line. I could start moving services that hybrid nature of the environment. We've talked a few times. We've been digging into that hybrid cloud taxonomy and some of the services to span because it's not public or private. It's now truly that hybrid and multi environment and customers are going to live in. And all of >> the questions Jonah's is good enough to hold serve >> well. I think the reality is is that you go back to twenty ten, the jury in the private cloud and it's enterprises almost ten years to figure out that it's real. And I think in that time frame Amazon is absolutely leveled. Everybody, we call that the tsunami. Microsoft quickly figures out that they got to get Cloud. They come in there, got a fast followers. Second, Google's trying to retool Oracle. I think Mr Bo completely get Ali Baba and IBM in there, so you got the whole cloud game happening. The problem of the enterprises is that there's no growth in terms of old school enterprise other than re consolidate in position for Cloud. My question to you guys is, Is there going to be true? True growth in the classic enterprise business or, well, all this SAS run on clouds. So, yes, if it's multi cloud or even hybrid for the reasons they talk about, that's not a lot of growth compared to what the cloud can offer. So again, I still haven't seen Dave the visibility in my mind that on premises growth is going to be massive compared to cloud. I mean, I think cloud is where Sassen lives. I think that's where the scale lives we have. How much scale can you do with consolidation? We >> are in a prolonged bull market that that started in twenty ten, and it's kind of hunger. In the tenth year of a of a decade of bull market, the enterprise market is cyclical, and it's, you know, at some point you're going to start to see a slowdown cloud. I mean, it's just a tiny little portion of the market is going to continue to gain share cloud can grow in a downturn. The no >> tell Motel pointed out on this, Michael Dell pointed out on the Cubans, as as those lieutenants, the is the consolidation of it is just that is a retooling to be cloud ready operationally. That's where hybrid comes in. So I think that realization has kicked in. But as enterprises aren't like, they're not like Google and Facebook. They're not really that fast, so So they've got to kind of get their act together on premises. That's why I think In the short term, this consolidation and new revitalisation is happening because they're retooling to be cloud ready. That is absolutely happen. But to say that's the massive growth studio >> now looked. It is. Dave pointed out that the way that there is more than the market growth is by gaining market share Share share are areas where Dell and Emcee didn't have large environment. You know, I spent ten years of DMC. I was a networking. I was mostly storage networking, some land connectivity for replication like srd Evan, like today at this show, I talked a lot of the telco people talk to the service of idle talk where the sd whan deny sirrah some of these pieces, they're really starting to do networking. That's the area where that software defined not s the end, but the only in partnership with cos like Big Switch. They're getting into that market, and they have such small market share their that there's huge up uplift to be able to dig into the giant. >> Okay, couple questions. What percent of Dell's ninety one billion today is multi cloud revenue. Great question. Okay, one percent. I mean, very small. Okay. Very small hero. Okay? And is that multi cloud revenue all incremental growth isat going to cannibalize the existing base? These? Well, these are the fundamentals weighs six local market that I'm talking to >> get into this. You led the defense of conversations. We had Tom Speed on the CFO and he nailed us. He said There's multiple levers to shareholder growth. Pay down the debt check. He's got to do that. You love that conversation. Margin expansion. Get the margins up. Use the client business to cover costs. As you said, increased go to market efficiency and leverage. The supply chain that's like their core >> fetrow of cash. And that all >> these. The one thing he said that was mind blowing to me is that no one gets the valuation of how valuable Del Technologies is. They're throwing off close to seven billion dollars in free cash flow free cash flow. Okay, so you can talk margin expansion all you want. That's great, but there got this huge cash flow coming in. You can't go out of business worth winning if you don't run out of cash >> in the market. When the market is good, these guys are it is good a position is anybody, and I would argue better position than anybody. The question on the table that I'm asking is, how long can it last? And if and when the market turns down and markets always cyclical we like again. We're in the tenth year of a bull market. I mean, it's someone >> unprecedented gel can use the war chest of the free cash flow check on these levers that they're talking about here, they're gonna have the leverage to go in during the downturn and then be the cost optimizer for great for customers. So right now, they're gonna be taking their medicine, creating this one common operating environment, which they have an advantage because they have all the puzzle pieces. You A Packer Enterprises doesn't have the gaping holes in the end to end. They can't address us, >> So that is a really good point that you're making now. So then the next question is okay. If and when the downturn turn comes, who's going to take advantage of it, who's going to come out stronger? >> I think Amazon is going to be continued to dominate, and as long as they don't fall into the enterprise trap of trying to be too enterprising, continue to operate their way for enterprises. I think jazz. He's got that covered. I think DEL Technologies is perfectly positioned toe leverage, the cash flow and the thing to do that. I think Cisco's got a great opportunity, and I think that's something that you know. You don't hear a lot of talk about the M where Cisco war happening. But Cisco has a network. They have a developer ecosystem just starting to get revitalized. That's an opportunity. So >> I got thoughts on Cisco, too. But one of things I want to say about Del being able to come out of that stronger. I keep saying I've said this a number of times and asked a lot of questions this week is the PC business is vital for Del. It's almost half the company's revenue. Maybe not quite, but it it's where the company started it. It sucks up a lot of corporate overhead. >> If Hewlett Packard did not spin out HP HP, they would be in the game. I think spinning that out was a huge mistake. I wrote about a publicly took a lot of heat for it, but you know I try to go along with the HPD focus. Del has proven bigger is better. HP has proven that smaller is not as leverage. And if it had the PC that bee have the mojo in gaming had the mojo in the edge, and Dale's got all the leverage to cross pollinate the front end and edge into the back and common cloud operate environment that is going to be an advantage. And that's going to something that will see Well, let me let me >> let me counter what you just said. I agree. You know this this minute. But the autonomy was the big mistake. Once hp autonomy, you know what Meg did was almost a fatal complete. They never should've bought autonomy >> makers. Levi Protector he was. So he was there. >> But she inherited that bag of rocks. And then what you gonna do with it? Okay, so that's why they had to spend out and did create shareholder value. If they had not purchased autonomy, then he would return much better shape, not to split it up. And they would be a much stronger competitor. >> And I share holder Pop. They had a pop on value. People made some cash with long game. I think that >> going toe peon base actually done pretty well for a first year holding a standalone PC company. So, but again, I think Del. With that leverage, assuming pieces, it's going to be really interesting. I don't know much about that market. You were loving that PC conversation, but the whole, you know, the new game or markets and and the new wayto work throwing an edge in there, I don't know is ej PC and edges that >> so the peanut butter. And so the big thing that Michael get the big thing, Michael Dell said on the Cube was We're not a conglomerate were an integrated company. And when you have an integrated company like this, with the tech the tech landscape shifting to their advantage, you have the ability to cross subsidize. So strategy game. Matt Baker was here we'd be talking about OK, I can cross subsidize margin. You've brought it up on the client side. Smaller margins, but it pays a lot of the corporate overhead. Absolutely. Then you got higher margin GMC business was, you know, those margins that's contributing. And so when you have this new configuration. You can cross, subsidize and move and shift, so I think that's a great advantage. I think that's undervalued in the market place. And I think, you know, I think Del stock price is, well, undervalue. Point out the numbers they got VM wear and their question is, What what point is? VM where blink and go All in on del technology stew. Orcas Remember that Gus was gonna partner. You don't think the phone was ringing off the hook in Palo Alto from their parties? What? What's this as your deal? So Vienna. There's gotta be the neutral party. Big problem. The opportunity. >> Well, look, if I'm a traditional historical partner of'Em are, it's not the Azure announcement that has me a little bit concerned because all of them partner with Microsoft to it is how tightly combined. Del and Veum, where are the emcee, always kept them in arms like now they're in the same. It's like Dave. They're blending it. It's like, you know Del, from a market cap standpoint, gets fifty cents on the dollar. VM wears a software company, and they get their multiples. Del is not a software company, but VM where well, people are. Well, if we can win that a little bit, maybe we could get that. >> Marty still Isn't it splendid? No, no, I think the strategy is absolutely right on. You have to go hard with VM wear and use it as a competitive weapon. But, Stuart, your point fifty cents and all, it's actually much worse than that. I mean the numbers. If you take out of'Em, wears the VM wear ownership, you take out the core debt and you look at the market value you're left with, like a billion dollars. Cordell is undervalued. Cordell is worth more than a billion or two billion dollars. Okay, so it's a really cheap way to buy Veum. Where Right that the Tom Sweet nailed this, he said. You know, basically, these company those the streets not used to tech companies having such big debt. But to your point, John, they're throwing off cash. So this company is undervalued, in my view. Now there's some risks associated with that, and that's why the investors of penalizing them for that debt there, penalizing him from Michael's ownership structure. You know, that's what this is, but >> a lack of understanding in my opinion. I think I think you're right. I just think they don't understand. Look at Dale and they think G You don't look a day Ellen Think distributed computing system with software, fill in those gaps and all that extra ten expansion. It's legit. I think they could go after new market opportunities as as a twos to us as the client business. I mean mere trade ins and just that's massive trillions of dollars. It's, I think I think that is huge. But I'm >> a bull. I'm a bull on the value of the company. I know >> guys most important developments. Del technology world. What's the big story that you think is coming out of the show here? >> Well, it's definitely, you know, the VM wear on del I mean, that is the big story, and it's to your point. It's Del basically saying we're going to integrate this. We're going to hard, we're going to go hard and you know Veum wear on Dell is a preferred solution. No doubt that is top for Dell and PacBell Singer said it. Veum wearing eight of us is the first and preferred solution. Those are the two primary vectors. They're going to drive hard and then Oh, yeah, we'Ll listen to customers Whatever else you want Google as you're fine, we're there. But those two vectors, they're going to Dr David >> build on that because we saw the, um we're building out of multi cloud strategy and what we have today is Del is now putting themselves in there as a first class citizen. Before it was like, Oh, we're doing VX rail and Anna sex and, you know, we'LL integrate all these pieces there, but infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure now it is. It is multi cloud. We want to see that the big table, >> right, Jeff, Jeff Clarke said, Why are you doing both? Let's just one strategy, one company. It's all one Cash registers that >> saying those heard that before. I think the biggest story to me is something that we've been seeing in the Cuban laud, you know, been Mom. This rant horizontally scaleable operating environment is the land grab and then vertically integrate with data into applications that allow each vertical industry leverage data for the kind of intimate, personalized experiences for user experiences in each industry. With oil and gas public sector, each one has got their own experiences that are unique. Data drives that, but the horizontal and tow an operating model when it's on premises hybrid or multi cloud is a huge land grab. And I think that is a major strategic win for Dell, and I think, as if no one challenges them on this. Dave, if HP doesn't go on, emanate change. If H h p e does not do it em in a complete changeover from strategy and pulling, filling their end to end, I think that going to be really hurting I think there's gonna be a tell sign and we'LL see, See who reacts and challenges Del on this in ten. And I think if they can pull it off without being contested, >> the only thing I would say that the only thing I would say that Jonah's you know, HP, you know very well I mean, they got a lot of loyal customers and is a huge market out there. So it's >> Steve. Look at economic. The economics are shifting in the new world. New use cases, new step function of user experiences. This is this is going to be new user experiences at new economic price points that's a business model. Innovation, loyal customers that's hard to sustain. They'Ll keep some clutching and grabbing, but everyone will move to the better mousetrap in the scenario. So the combination of that stability with software it's just this as a big market. >> So John twenty ten Little Table Back Corner, you know of'em See Dylan Blogger World double set. Beautiful says theatre of present lot of exchange and industry. But the partnership in support of this ecosystem. It's something that helped us along the way. >> You know, when we started doing this, Jeff came on board. The team has been amazing. We have been growing up and getting better every show. Small, incremental improvements here and there has been an amazing production, Amazing team all around us. But the support of the communities do this is has been a co creation project from day one. We love having this conversation's with smart people. Tech athletes make it unique. Make it organic, let the page stuff on on the other literature pieces go well. But here it's about conversations for four and with the community, and I think the community sponsorship has been part of funding mohr of it. You're seeing more cubes soon will be four sets of eight of US four sets of V M World four sets here. Global Partners sets I'm used to What have we missed? >> Yeah, it's phenomenal. You know, we're at a unique time in the industry and honored to be able to help documented with the two of you in the whole team. >> Dave, How it Elias sitting there giving him some kind of a victory lap because we've been doing this for ten years. He's been the one of the co captains of the integration. He says. There's a lot of credit. >> Yeah, Howard has had an amazing career. I I met him like literally decades ago, and he has always taken on the really hard jobs. I mean, that's I think, part of his secret success, because it's like he took on the integration he took on the services business at at AMC U members to when Joe did you say we're a product company? No services company. I was like, Give me services. Take it. >> It's been on the Cube ten years. Dave. He was. He was John away. He was on fire this week. I thought bad. Kelsey was phenomenal. >> Yeah, he's an amazing guest. Tom Tom Suite, You know, very strong moments. >> What's your favorite Cuban? I'LL never forget. Joe Tucci had my little camera out film and Joe Tucci, Anna. One of the sessions is some commentary in the hallway. >> Well, that was twenty ten, one of twenty eleven, I think one of my favorite twenty ten moments I go back to the first time we did. The cue was when you asked Joe Tucci, you know why a storage sexy. Remember that? >> A He never came on >> again. Ah, but that was a mean. If you're right, that was a cube mean all for the next couple of years. Remember, Tom Georges, we have because I'm not touching. That was >> so remember when we were critical of hybrid clouds like twenty, twelve, twenty, thirteen I go, Pat is a hybrid cloud, a halfway house to the final destination of public loud. He goes to a halfway house, three interviews. This was like the whole crowd was like, what just happened? Still favorite moment. >> Oh, gosh is a mean so money here, John. As you said, just such a community, love. You know, the people that we've had on for ten years and then, you know, took us, you know, three or four years to before we had Michael Dell on. Now he's a regular on our program with luminaries we've had on, you know, but yeah, I mean, twenty ten, you know, it's actually my last week working for him. See? So, Dave, thanks for popping me out. It's been a fun ride, and yeah, I mean, it's amazing to be able to talk to this whole community. >> Favorite moment was when we were at eighty bucks our first show. We're like, We still like hell on this. James Hamilton, Andy Jazzy Come on up, Very small show. Now it's a monster, David The Cube has had some good luck. Well, we've been on the right waves, and a lot of a lot of companies have sold their companies. Been part of Q comes when public Unicorns New Channel came on early on. No one understood that company. >> What I'm thrilled about to Jonah's were now a decade, and we're documenting a lot of the big waves. One of one of the most memorable moments for me was when you called me up. That said, Hey, we're doing a dupe world in New York. I got on a plane and went out. I landed in, like, two. Thirty in the morning. You met me. We did to dupe World. Nobody knew what to do was back then it became, like, the hottest thing going. Now nobody talks about her dupe. So we're seeing these waves and the Cube was able to document them. It's really >> a pleasure. The Cube can and we got the Cube studios sooner with cubes Stories with Cube Network too. Cue all the time, guys. Thanks. It's been a pleasure doing business with you here. Del Technologies shot out the letter. Chuck on the team. Sonia. Gabe. Everyone else, Guys. Great job. Excellent set. Good show. Closing down. Del Technologies rose two cubes coverage. Thanks for watching

>> So welcome to the special. Keep conversation here in Palo Alto, California John, for a host of the Cube. We're here with two co founders. Adam Casella was the CTO and Glenn Sullivan's cofounder. Snap Route Hot Start up, guys. Welcome to this Cube conversation. Thank you. Thank you. So left on the founders in because you get the down and dirty, but you guys are launching. Interesting product is for Cloud Cloud Native Super sighting. But first, take a man to explain what is snap brought. What do you guys do? What's the main core goal of the company? >> Right? So your your audience and you familiar with white Box now working disaggregated networking, where you're buying your hardware and your software from different companies. There's a lot of different Network OS is out there, but there's nobody doing what we're doing for the now ergo es, which is a cloud native approach to that where it's a fully containerized, fully micro serviced network OS running on these white box, which is >> test your background. How did you guys start this company? Where'd you come from? What was the epiphany? Was the motivation? >> Sure. So our heritage is from operations running at some of the largest Edison is in the world. We came from Apple. Ah, and running the networks there. And the issues and problems that we saw doing that is what led us to found stabbed. >> And what are some of the things that apples you guys notice on a huge scale? Yep. I mean, Apple. You know, a huge market share most probable company. I think it's now the largest cat. Microsoft was there for a while, but and apples, the gold standard, get from privacy to scale. What were some of the things that you saw, that what was the authority? >> So, I mean, there was a couple of things going on there, one we were driving driving too, doing white box for more control. So we wanted to have a better sense of what we could do with the network operating system on those devices. And we found very quickly that the operating systems that were out there, whether they be from a traditional manufacturer Ah, we and the planes or from someone from a disaggregated marketplace were basically using the same architecture. And this was this old, monolithic single binary item that goes in the pleasant device, and you know that worked in, you know, back in the day when you know applications didn't move, they were static there, One particular location. But as we were seeing, and one things that we were really pushing on is being able to dynamically have move workloads from one location to another quickly to meet demand. The network was not able to keep up with that, and we believe that it really came down to the architecture that was there. Not being flexible enough and not allowing our control to be able to put in the principles would actually allow us to allow that that application time to service be faster. >> You know, one of these on personally fascinated, you know, seeing startups out there and living in this cloud error and watching those like Facebook and Apple, literally build the new kind of scale in real time. It's like you have, you know, changing the airplane engine out of thirty five thousand feet. As the expression goes, you have to be modern. I mean, there's money on the line that's so much scale, and when you see an inefficiency, you've got to move on it Yeah, this is like, what, you guys did it. Apple. What were some of the things that yet you observed was that the box is Was it the software? A CZ? You wanted to be more agile. What was the the problem that you saw? >> So it it's really in fragility, right? It's it's basically, this Network OS is as they were, our design in a way so that you don't touch him right. If you look at the code releases and how often they, you know, fixed security vulnerabilities or you know they have patches or even knew regular versions right there. The cycle isn't weekly. It's not daily like you see in some C I C. Environments, right? You might have a six month or a twelve month or an eighteen month cycle for doing this sort of a new release for for, you know, whatever issue new features or or fixes, right. And the problem that we would see is we would be we would be trying to test a version in the lab, right? We would be qualifying code and say there's a security vulnerability. You know, something like heart bleed, right? That comes out the guys on the server side, they push a new patch using, you know, answerable Scheffer puppet and, you know, two days later, everything's good, even two hours later in some environments. But we had to wait for the new release to come from one of the traditional vendors we had to put in our lab, and we get this sort of kitchen sink of every other fix. There'd be enhancements to be GP that we didn't ask for. There'd be enhancements to, you know, Spanish or that we didn't ask for. Even if they patched it, you'd still get this sort of all in one update. And by the time you're done qualifying, there might be another security vulnerability. So you got to start over. So you'd be in this constant cycle of months of qualified, you know, qualifying the image because you you'd be testing everything that's in the image. And not just that. The update. And that's really the key difference between what we're >> going to work involves shapes you eventually chasing your tail. Exactly. One thing comes in and opens up a lot of consequences, but that's what systems over >> all about this consequences, right? This is right systems are challenging. And what it does is it is it creates this culture and no from the network folks, right? Because the network folks are basically, like, not in my backyard. You want to add this new thing? No. Because they're judged by up time. They're judged by how long the network is up and how long the applications available. They're not judged by how quickly they can put a new feature out or how how quickly they can roll an update. Their They're literally judged in most organizations by up time. How many nines are they giving? So if I'm judged by up time and somebody wants to add something new, my first answer as a network person has anybody really is gonna be No, no, no, don't touch anything. It's it's fragile >> because they're jerks or anything. They just know the risk associate with what could come from the consequence exactly touching something. So, yes, it's hard right now to yes, Okay, so I gotta ask you guys a question. How come the networking industry hasn't solved this problem? >> Well, there's a There's a few different reasons I feel it is, and that's because we've had very tightly coupled, very tightly controlled systems that have been deployed his appliances without allowing operators to go ahead and add their innovations onto those items. So if you look at the way thie compute world is kind of moved along in the past fifteen, you know, fifty, thirty years, you mean, really a revolution started to athletics, right? From their particular perspective, you have Lennox. You can open up the system, you get people constructing open source items everyone knows just end. A story that makes the most is the most successful, monolithic, you know, piece of code base that's ever existed, right? It took fifteen years later for anyone in the network industry to even run the linens on a switch. I mean, that's that's pretty, you know, huge in my mind, right? That's that's that's called like Yeah, and so and even when they've got it on the particular switch to running older versions of Colonel, they're running different things. They don't you know, back Porter versions of code that don't work with the most modern applications that are out there, and they really have it in their tight, little walled garden that you can't adjust things with and >> that was their operational mode at the time. I mean, networks were still stable. They weren't that complicated. And hence the lag and many felt had been left >> behind. Theocracy. Inefficiencies that may have function when you have dozens of devices doesn't function when you have hundreds and thousands of devices. And so when you look at, like even from the way they they presented their operating system from a config standpoint, it is a flat config file that's loaded from filing booted. That's the same paradigm people of file for forty years. Why do we still think that hotel today compute has left that behind? They're going the programmatic AP diversions with you know whether it be you know, Cooper netease war with Doctor, where they have everything built into one ephemeral container that gets deployed. Why it hasn't been working in the same thing. And I really believe it's for that close ecosystem that hasn't allowed. People look to put their innovations onto their Yeah, it's >> almost as a demarcation point in time. You think about history and him and how we got here, where it's like, Okay, we got perimeters. We got firewalls and switches top Iraq stuff. So you got scale. It's bolted down, it's secure. And incomes Cloud comes I ot So there's almost a point, You know, it almost picked. The year was a two thousand eight doesn't through two thousand twelve. You started to see that philosophy. So the question I've asked for you is that what was the tipping point? So because, you know, the fire being lit under the butts of networking guys finally hit and someone saying, Well, they don't evolve to be like the mainframe guys. I was like, not really, because mainframes is just different from client server. Networks aren't going away there around. What's the tip was the tipping point. What made the network industry stand up? >> So yeah, what it is, is it's it's being able to buy infrastructure with a credit card, Right? Because as soon as I've got a problem as an application owner was a developer, I say, Hey, I've got this thing that I've got a release, right and I go to the network came and said, I've got this new thing and I get any sort of pushback. Now you look a cloud, right? Eight of us is our Google, like all the different options out there. Fine. I don't need these guys anymore. When the grab credit card slide it, boom. Now I can buy my infrastructure. That's that's really the shift. That's what's pushing folks away from using those kind of classic network infrastructure is because they could do something else, right? >> So cloud clearly driving it, think >> I would. I would say so. Yeah, absolutely. All >> right, So the path of solve these problems, you guys have an interesting solution. What's the path? What's the solution that you guys are bringing to market? Sure. >> So the way I had kind of view, the way the landscape is set up is really if you look at you know where this innovation has happened in the compute side in the last little bit Weatherby Cloud, whether it be, you know, some of the club native items would come out there. They've all come for the operators. I haven't been a vendor to sitting there and going to play. They've kind of mirth, morph himself into vendors. But they didn't originate as vendors, right to go and supply these systems. And so what I see from the solution to that is sort of enabling operators and people who are running networks to be ableto controller their own destiny to manage how their networks are deployed right. And this boils down from our perspective to a micro services containerized network operating system that is not be spoke, not proprietary, but is using the ecosystem has been built from this P people on the computes side specifically the cloud native universe in a cloud native world and applying those perimeters and shims onto network >> learned, learned from the cloud, Right? Like don't try to make something better. Look at the reasons why folks are going to the cloud Look at the AP structures looking. He's of launching instances. Look, att the infrastructure you build with a few clicks and say, What can I learn from that environment to Moto? Mimic that in my private environment? >> Yeah, and this is why we kinda looked at cu burnett. He's is a really big piece of our infrastructure and using the company as a p I as the main interface in tor device. So that you, Khun, you know multi different reasons, is expandable. You could do, you know, a bunch of different custom options to expand that a P i But it allows people who are either in. Deva loves to look at that and go. I understand how this works. I know how these shims function and started getting in the realization that networking is not that much different than what the computer world is. >> So you guys embraced integration, his deployment, CCD pipeline, all that good stuff. And Cooper netease even saw Apple at sea Ncf conference that they have a booth there. No one would talk, but certainly communities is getting part that cloud native. What's the important solution that you guys are building to solve to solve from the problems that you're going after with now the cloud needed because Dev ops ethos is trickling down, helping down the stack. Certainly we know what cloud is, so it's So what is specifically the problem that you solved >> So a couple things that air So obviously you have your, you know, application time of service. The faster you can double your application, the faster you can get up and running the factory. People using out it is, you know, you get more money, you save money, right? Um, you have security. No one wants to be in that that, you know, that box of having a security voluntarily happened on there, but they >> were non compliance, >> Yes, or non compliance with particular thing with a P i. P. I C P C high socks and all in all things that come along with that. And finally it's the operational efficiency of day two operations. We've gotten pretty good as industry as deploying Day one operations and walking away. We don't do anything. No, no, no. We can't change the network anymore. It's really that next day when you have to to things like apply those applications or have a new application, it gets moved. Containers are ephemeral. The average container last two to three days. Viens last twenty three days. Monolithic caps last for years. That air that are not in those things that are just compute bare metal piece. So when we start moving to a location or a journey of having a two to three day ephemeral app that can be removed or moved, replace different location. The network needs to be able to react to that, and it needs to be able to take that and ensure that that not only up time but availability is there for that, >> and it's not management tools that are going to fix it, right? This is this is sort of our core argument is that you look at all of the different solutions that have come out for the last seven, eight, nine years in the networking in the open networking space. This trying to solve this from management perspective with, you know, different esti n profiling different, different solutions for solving this management. Day two operations issues, right. And our core argument is that the management layers on top aren't what needs to change. That can change. If you adopt communities, you get that kind of along with it. But you need to change the way the network OS itself is built so that it's not so brittle so that it's not so fragile breaking into micro services, breaking the containers so that you can put it into a CCD pipeline. You try to take a monolithic network OS and put it in your C. C I. C D Pipeline. You're going to be pushing a rock up. Help. >> It's funny. We've had Scott McNealy on the Cube founder Sun Microsystems and we said, You know, he has from one time. Hey, you know what about the cloud he goes? I should I had network is the computer was his philosophies. I should should we call the cloud? So if the network is the computer kind of concept thie operating environment management's not aki sub system of the network. It's a component, but the operating system has subsystems. So I like this idea of a network, operates system talk about what you guys do with your work operating system and what is day to mean. What is actually that means >> sure. So when you take your services and you divide them up into containers and, you know, call the micro services, basically taking a single service, putting container and having a bunch of dependency that might be associate with that, what you end up doing is having your ability to, uh, you know, replace or update that particular container independently of the other components on the system. If an issue happens, or if you want to get a new feature functionally for that, the other thing you could do is you, Khun Slim, down what you're running. So you don't have to run these two hundred plus features, which is the average amount you see and just a top Iraq device. And you only use maybe ten to twenty percent of those. Why do I have all these extra features that I have to qualify that may introduce a bug into my particular environment. I want to run the very specific items that I know I need to give my application, uh, up and running and the ability to go ahead and pull in the cloud native environment and tools to do that allows you to get the efficiencies that they've learned from not only the cloud way, but also even doing some on Prem communities. You know, private cloud items to get those efficiencies on their forwarding, your network running your applications. >> It's learning from the hyper sailors to write like this. This is Well, I mean, we had this when we were running networks, right? You put every protocol on the board on a white board, and then you'd start crossing them off and you start arguing in a room full of people saying, Why do I need this feature? Why do I need this other feature and it's like you have to justify it. And we know this is happening up the road at, you know, places like Facebook because, like Google, right, we know that they're that they're saying, Hey, the fewer features I have running the simple or my environment is the easier it is to troubleshoot, the less that can go wrong and the less security vulnerabilities. I have these air all. It's all goodness to run less right. So if you give people the ability to actually do that, they have a substantially better network. Yeah, >> what's unique about what you guys doing? How would you describe the difference between what you're doing and what people mean she might be looking at? >> So if you look at what you know other folks, that you know that we're going to see that look at collaborative Riku Burnett ys everything they do is a bolt on until his old architecture that's been around for twenty five years. So it's like a marriage between these two items. It's how you go ahead and have this plug in that interacts with that. Forget all that you're going to get up in the same spot with another thing you're adding on to another thing you're adding on to another thing. Hearing onto it seized these abstraction layers on top of distraction layers were taking the approach where it is native to the non core operating system. You know, Cooper, Daddy's Docker, Micro Services and containers. They're native to the system. We're not anything on. We're not bolting anything on there. That's how it is. Architect designed to be run. >> And that's key, right? The thing that we were really walking away from from our operational experience, we know that the decisions being made at that, you know, CEO Seo level and even in the you know, director of infrastructure level are going to be We're looking to build an on Prem solution, Mr Customers saying I need it to be orchestrated by an open, nonproprietary platform that gets rid of all of the platforms that are currently out there by the traditional network. Oh, yeah, Bs right. If you start out saying my orchestration platform has to be shared from compute storage network and it has to be open and has to be not proprietary, that pretty much leaves communities is you're really only choice and combinations important. It's hugely important to us, right? We knew that when we broke everything into, you know, containerized Micro Services. You need something to orchestrate those. So what we've done is we said, Hey, we're going to use this Cuban eighties tool. We're going to embed it on the device itself, and we're going to run it natively so that it can be the control point for all the different containers that are running on the system. >> That's awesome, guys. Great Chef will go forward to chatting more final question. What words of wisdom you have for other folks out there, Because there are a lot of worlds colliding as we look at the convergence of a cloud architect, which, by the way, is not a well defined position >> where you >> have infrastructure, folks who have gone through machinations of roles. Network engineer this that the other thing programmable networks air out there. You seeing this thing really time data? I oh, ti's. Also, you're all coming together yet. So what, you gotta re evaluating? What's your advice to folks out there? Who who are either evaluating running POC is rethinking their architecture. >> So the first thing that you know I think this is pretty common from folks that to hear is that evolve, or you're not going to be relevant anymore. You need to actually embrace these other items you can't ignore. Cloud. You can't pretend like I have a network. These applications will never move because eventually they will and you're going to be out of a job. And so we need you to start looking at some of the items that are out there from the cloud native universe to couldn't see Cooper nineties universe and realizing that networking is not a special Silent is completely different from, you know, dev ops every items they need to be working together. And we need to get these two groups and to communicate to each other, to actually move the ball forward for getting applications out there faster for customers. >> Don't let the thing I would say to infrastructure, folks, especially those that are going to cloud strategy is don't let the Ivy and the Moss grow on your own prime solution yesterday. Right? Go into your multi cloud strategy with I'm gonna have some stuff in eight of us and have some stuff deserve. I'm not stuff some stuff and Google. I might have some stuff overseas because the data sovereignty. But I'm also gonna have things that are on prep. Look at your on from environment and make it better to reflect what you could do in the cloud. Because once you're developers get using the AP structures in the cloud. They're going to want something very similar on Prem. And if they don't have it than your own, Prem is going to rot. And and you're going to have some part of your business that has to be on Prem and you're going to give it a level of service that isn't as good as the cloud, and nobody wants to be in that situation. >> Glenn, Adam Thanks so much for sharing. Congratulations on the launch of Snap Out every year and thanks for coming and sharing conversation. >> Thanks. Great. >> I'm John for here in Palo Alto. The Cube Studios for Cube Conversation with Snapper Out. Launching. I'm shot for you. Thanks for watching

>> Live from Barcelona, Spain. It's the cue covering Sisqo. Live Europe. Brought to you by Cisco and its ecosystem partners. >> Welcome back to sunny Barcelona. Everybody watching the Cube, the leader and live tech coverage. We go out to the events, we extract the signal from the noise we hear There's our third day of coverage that Sisqo live. Barcelona David Lot. John Furrier. This here stew Minutemen all week. John, we've been covering this show. Walter Wall like a canon ae is here is a distinguished engineer and product line. CTO for Cisco Analytics. Welcome to the Cube. You see you again. Welcome back to the Cube. I should say thank you very much. So tell us about your role. You're focused right now on malware encryption. We want to get into that, but but set it up with your roll >> first. Well, I'm trying to raise the cost to the bad guy's hiding in your network. I mean, basically it's it. It it's an economics thing because one there's a lot of places for them to hide. And and they they are innovating just as much as we are. And so if I can make it more expensive for them to hide and operate. Then I'm doing my job. And and that means not only using techniques of the past but developing new techniques. You know, Like I said, it's It's really unlike a regular job. I'm not waiting for the hard drive to fail or a power supply to fail. I have an active adversary that's smart and well funded. So if I if I shipped some innovation, I forced them to innovate and vice versa. >> So you're trying to reduce their our ally and incentives. >> I want to make it too expensive for them to do business. >> So what's the strategy there? Because it's an arms race. Obviously wanted one one. You know, Whitehead over a black hat, kind of continue to do that. Is it decentralized to create more segments? What is the current strategies that you see to make it more complex or less economically viable to just throw resource at a port or whatever? >> There's sort of two dimensions that are driving change one. You know they're trying to make a buck. Okay? And and, you know, we saw the ransomware stuff we saw, you know, things that they did to extract money from a victim. Their latest thing now is they've They've realized that Ransomware wasn't a recurring revenue stream for them. Right? And so what's called crypto jacking is so they essentially have taking the cost structure out of doing crypto mining. You know, when you do crypto mining, you'll make a nickel, maybe ten cents, maybe even twenty cents a day. Just doing this. Mathematical mining, solving these puzzles. And if you had to do that on your own computer, you'd suck up all this electricity and thing. You'd have some cost structure, right and less of a margin. But if you go on, you know, breach a thousand computers, maybe ten thousand, maybe one hundred thousand. Guess what, right you? Not one you're hiding. So guess what? Today you make a nickel tomorrow, you make another nickel. So, you know, if you if you go to the threat wall here, you'd be surprised this crypto mining activity taking place here and nobody knows about it. We have it up on the threat wall because we can detect its behavior. We can't see the actual payload because all encrypted. But we have techniques now. Advanced Analytics by which we can now call out its unique behaviour very distinctly. >> Okay, so you're attacking this problem with with data and analytics. Is that right? What? One of the ingredients of your defense? >> Yeah. I mean, they're sort of Ah, three layer cake There. You first. You have? You know, I always say all telemetry is data, but not all data. Is telemetry. All right? So when you when you go about looking at an observation or domain, you know, Inhumans, we have sight. We have hearing these air just like the network or the endpoint. And there's there's telemetry coming out of that, hopefully from the network itself. Okay, because it's the most pervasive. And so you have this dilemma tree telling you something about the good guys and the bad guys and you, you perform synthesis and analytics, and then you have an analytical outcome. So that's sort of the three layer cake is telemetry, analytics, analytical outcome. And what matters to you and me is really the outcome, right? In this case, detecting malicious activity without doing decryption. >> You mentioned observation. Love this. We've been talking to Cuba in the past about observation space. Having an observation base is critical because you know, people don't write bomb on a manifest and ship it. They they hide it's it's hidden in the network, even their high, but also the meta data. You have to kind extract that out. That's kind of where you get into the analytics. How does that observation space gets set up? Happened? Someone creating observation special? They sharing the space with a public private? This becomes kind of almost Internet infrastructure. Sound familiar? Network opportunity? >> Yeah. You know, there's just three other. The other driver of change is just infrastructure is changing. Okay. You mean the past? Go back. Go back twenty years, you had to rent some real estate. You gotto put up some rocks, some air conditioning, and you were running on raw iron. Then the hyper visors came. Okay, well, I need another observation. A ll. You know, I meet eyes and ears on this hyper visor you got urbanity is now you've got hybrid Cloud. You have even serve Ellis computing, right? These are all things I need eyes and ears. Now, there that traditional methods don't don't get me there so again, being able to respect the fact that there are multiple environments that my digital business thrives on. And it's not just the traditional stuff, you know, there's there's the new stuff that we need to invent ways by which to get the dilemma tree and get the analytical >> talkabout this dynamic because we're seeing this. I think we're just both talking before we came on camera way all got our kind of CS degrees in the eighties. But if you look at the decomposition of building blocks with a P, I's and clouds, it's now a lot of moving to spare it parts for good reasons, but also now, to your point, about having eyes and ears on these components. They're all from different vendors, different clouds. Multi cloud creates Mohr opportunities. But yet more complexity. Software abstractions will help manage that. Now you have almost like an operating system concept around it. How are you guys looking at this? I'll see the intent based networking and hyper flex anywhere. You seeing that vision of data being critical, observation space, etcetera. But if you think about holistically, the network is the computer. Scott McNealy once said. Yeah, I mean, last week, when we are this is actually happening. So it's not just cloud a or cloud be anon premise and EJ, it's the totality of the system. This is what's happening >> ways. It's it's absolutely a reality. And and and the sooner you embrace that, the better. Because when the bad guys embrace it verse, You have problems, right? And and you look at even how they you know how they scale techniques. They use their cloud first, okay, that, you know their innovative buns. And when you look at a cloud, you know, we mentioned the eyes and ears right in the past. You had eyes and ears on a body you own. You're trying to put eyes in here on a body you don't own anymore. This's public cloud, right? So again, the reality is somebody you know. These businesses are somewhere on the journey, right? And the journey goes traditional hyper visor. You have then ultimately hybrid multi clouds. >> So the cost issue comes back. The play of everything sass and cloud. It's just You start a company in the cloud versus standing up here on the check, we see the start of wave from a state sponsored terrorist organization. It's easy for me to start a threat. So this lowers the cost actually threat. So that lowers the IQ you needed to be a hacker. So making it harder also helps that this is kind of where you're going. Explain this dynamic because it's easy to start threats, throw, throw some code at something. I could be in a bedroom anywhere in the world. Or I could be a group that gets free, open source tools sent to me by a state and act on behalf of China. Russia, >> Of course, of course, you know, software, software, infrastructures, infrastructure, right? It's It's the same for the bad guys, the good guys. That's sort of the good news and the bad news. And you look at the way they scale, you know, techniques. They used to stay private saying, You know, all of these things are are valid, no matter what side of the line you sit on, right? Math is still math. And again, you know, I just have Ah, maybe a fascination for how quickly they innovate, How quickly they ship code, how quickly they scale. You know, these botnets are massive, right? If you could get about that, you're looking at a very cloud infrastructure system that expands and contracts. >> So let's let's talk a little more about scale. You got way more good guys on the network than bad guys get you. First of all, most trying to do good and you need more good guys to fight the bad guys up, do things. Those things like infrastructure is code dev ops. Does that help the good guys scale? And and how so? >> You know it does. There's a air. You familiar with the concept called The Loop Joe? It was It was invented by a gentleman, Colonel John Boyd, and he was a jet fighter pilot. Need taught other jet fighter pilots tactics, and he invented this thing called Guadalupe and it's it's o d a observe orient decide. And at all right. And the quicker you can spin your doodle ooh, the more disoriented your adversary ISS. And so speed speed matters. Okay. And so if you can observe Orient, decide, act faster, then your adversary, you created almost a knowledge margin by which they're disoriented. And and the speed of Dev ops has really brought this two defenders. They can essentially push code and reorient themselves in a cycle that's frankly too small of a window for the adversary to even get their bearings right. And so speed doesn't matter. And this >> changing the conditions of the test, if you will. How far the environment, of course, on a rabbit is a strategy whether it's segmenting networks, making things harder to get at. So in a way, complexity is better for security because it's more complex. It costs more to penetrate complex to whom to the adversary of the machine, trying very central data base. Second, just hack in, get all the jewels >> leave. That's right, >> that's right. And and again. You know, I think that all of this new technology and and as you mentioned new processes around these technologies, I think it's it's really changing the game. The things that are very deterministic, very static, very slow moving those things. They're just become easy targets. Low cost targets. If you will >> talk about the innovation that you guys are doing around the encryption detecting malware over encrypted traffic. Yeah, the average person Oh, encrypted traffic is totally secure. But you guys have a method to figure out Mel, where behavior over encrypted, which means the payload can't be penetrated or it's not penetrated. So you write full. We don't know what's in there but through and network trav explain what you're working on. >> Yeah. The paradox begins with the fact that everybody's using networks now. Everything, even your thermostat. You're probably your tea kettle is crossing a network somewhere. And and in that reality, that transmission should be secure. So the good news is, I no longer have to complain as much about looking at somebody's business and saying, Why would you operate in the clear? Okay, now I say, Oh, my God, you're business is about ninety percent dot Okay, when I talked about technology working well for everyone, it works just as well for the bad guys. So I'm not going to tell this this business start operating in the clear anymore, so I can expect for malicious activity. No, we have to now in for malicious activity from behavior. Because the inspection, the direct inspection is no longer available. So that we came up with a technique called encrypted Traffic analytics. And again, we could have done it just in a product. But what we did that was clever was we went to the Enterprise networking group and said, if I could get of new telemetry, I can give you this analytical outcome. Okay? That'll allow us to detect malicious activity without doing decryption. And so the network as a sensor, the routers and switches, all of those things are sending me this. Richard, it's Tellem aji, by which I can infer this malicious activity without doing any secret. >> So payload and network are too separate things contractually because you don't need look at the payload network. >> Yeah. I mean, if you want to think about it this way, all encrypted traffic starts out unencrypted. Okay, It's a very small percentage, but everything in that start up is visible. So we have the routers and switches are sending us that metadata. Then we do something clever. I call it Instead of having direct observation, I need an observational derivative. Okay, I need to see its shape and size over time. So at minute five minute, fifteen minute thirty, I can see it's timing, and I can model on that timing. And this is where machine learning comes in because it's It's a science. That's just it's day has come for behavioral science, so I could train on all this data and say, If this malware looks like this at minute, five minute, ten minute fifteen, then if I see that exact behavior mathematically precise behaviour on your network, I can infer that's the same Mallory >> Okay, And your ability you mentioned just you don't have to decrypt that's that gives you more protection. Obviously, you're not exposed, but also presumably better performance. Is that right, or is that not affected? >> A lot? A lot better performance. The cryptographic protocols themselves are becoming more and more opaque. T L s, which is one of the protocols used to encrypt all of the Web traffic. For instance, they just went through a massive revision from one dot two two version one not three. It is faster, It is stronger. It's just better. But there's less visible fields now in the hitter. So you know things that there's a term being thrown around called Dark Data, and it's getting darker for everyone. >> So, looking at the envelope, looking at the network of fact, this is the key thing. Value. The network is now more important than ever explain why? Well, >> it connects everything right, and there's more things getting connected. And so, as you build, you know you can reach more customers. You can You can operate more efficiently, efficiently. You can. You can bring down your operational costs. There's so many so many benefit. >> FBI's also add more connection points as well. Integration. It's Metcalfe's law within a third dimension That dimension data value >> conductivity. I mean, the message itself is growing exponentially. Right? So that's just incredibly exciting. >> Super awesome topic. Looking forward to continuing this conversation. Great. Great. Come. Super important, cool and relevant and more impactful. A lot more action happening. Okay, Thanks for sharing that. Great. It's so great to have you on a keeper. Right, everybody, we'll be back to wrap Day three. Francisco live Barcelona. You're watching the Cube. Stay right there.

>> Announcer: Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE, covering ServiceNow Knowledge 2018. Brought to you by ServiceNow. >> Welcome back, everyone, to theCUBE's live coverage of ServiceNow Knowledge 18, here in Las Vegas. I'm your hose, Rebecca Knight, along with my cohost, Dave Vellante. We're joined by Josh Kahn. He is the General Manager of Platforms, ServiceNow. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE again. >> Yeah, really excited to be here. Thanks for being here and thanks for being part of our event. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> It's been a lot of fun. >> Newly minted. >> Yeah that's right. (laughing) >> Yes, congrats on the recent promotion. So tell us about your new role. >> Yeah, so I run the Platform Business Unit. We use the word platform a lot of different ways at ServiceNow and I think we're trying to get a little bit more clear about that. On the one hand, our platform is the core foundation that all of our applications and all of our customers' applications are built on. It's also a way that independent software vendors and our customers can build their own applications. So what my group is trying to do is really be more thoughtful and structured about how we go about gathering those requirements from our customers and our independent software vendor partners and make sure we're bringing the products to market that meet their needs, and that we're doing all of the things across the board as a company we need to do to make them successful because there's a lot that goes into long-term customer success from the sales teams to the solutions consultants to professional services and the Customer Success Management Team. We're bringing all those things to make sure that, as our customers are building applications, we're helping them be successful. >> I remember we had Erik Brynjolfsson and Andy McAfee on and they were making a point. This was years ago when they wrote their, I think, most recent book. They were saying platforms beat products, I'm like, okay, what do you mean? Look, you can make a great living doing products, but we are entering a platform era. It reminds me of the old Scott McNealy, car dealers versus car makers. If you want to be a car maker in this day and age, unfortunately Sun Microsystems never became that car maker, but you've got to have a platform. What's your perspective on all that? >> I totally agree. I think that every customer I talk to is looking for fewer, more strategic vendors and partners, and they're really saying, hey, be a strategic partner to me. Digital transformation is everywhere. Disruption is everywhere, and they're saying, hey, we need a few people we can really count on to help us build a strategy and execute on that strategy to get to the next place. Isolated, independent pieces of software tend to have a hard time becoming one of those strategic vendors, and I think the more you can be thought of as a platform, the more different kinds of workloads run on the same common shared infrastructure that provide shared data services, that can provide simple ways to get work across each other, the more value that you can bring and the more you can be thought of in that strategic partner realm. >> So you guys are a platform of platforms, we use that terminology a lot, and I think there's no question that for a lot of the C-level executives, particularly the CIOs that I talk to, you are becoming, ServiceNow is becoming a strategic platform provider. Who else is in there? Let's throw some... IBM, because of its huge services in certain industries, for sure, SAP because of its massive ERP estate. I mean, I don't know, Oracle, maybe, but it feels different, but maybe in some cases. Who do you see as your peers? >> The category of players that are in this space are really people that are investing big in the Cloud and investing big in intelligence and automation. And, I think, a lot of times automation can have kind of a negative connotation to it, but we really believe that automation can be used to serve people in the workplace and to make the world work better for people, not just make the world of work work without people. So when you look around at the people that are moving into that strategic realm, it's Cloud players, people who are providing either Cloud infrastructure or Cloud functions, a wide set of microservices capabilities, and people providing applications software as a service that start to cover a broader and broader portfolio. Clearly, Workday is thought of oftentimes as a strategic partner to their customers, because they provide a human capital management capability that's broader than just being a data repository. Salesforce is clearly a strategic partner to the sales and marketing organizations. The reality, though, is a lot of work that happens in the Enterprise cuts across these things, and so there's an opportunity for us to work with the Saleforces and the Workdays and the Googles and the Amazon Web Services of the world to help bring all of those things together. I think that what customers want is not only strategic technology providers, but strategic technology providers that will work with each other to solve customers' problems. >> John Donahoe on, I guess it was Tuesday, was saying we're very comfortable being that horizontal layer. We don't have to be the top layer, although I would observe that the more applications you develop, the more interesting the whole landscape becomes. >> Yeah, well, I think that's absolutely true. We're in the early stages of this, right? If you look at the amount of money that's spent in IT in the enterprise sector and then you start adding up all of these areas that I just mentioned, Cloud and SAS, it's still a very small amount of that overall spent. So clearly, big legacy technology vendors are incredibly relevant still today, but the challenge they'll have is making sure they stay relevant as this tide shifts to more Cloud, more intelligence, more automation in the workplace. >> I wonder if you could walk us through the process that you go through when you are working closely with customers, collaborating, trying to figure out what their problems are and solve them and then also solve the problems they don't even know they have, that you can provide solutions for. >> Actually, it's amazing, because in a lot of cases, the innovation, and this has been a phenomenal week, because I've gotten to meet with so many customers and see what they're doing. And what tends to happen with ServiceNow is the IT organization, oftentimes, it starts there. The IT organization brings it in for IT service management, and people start using that to request things that they need from IT, and they very quickly say, man, I have a process that would really benefit from exactly what you just did. Can you build my application on that? And so there starts to become this tidal wave of people asking the IT organization if they can start hosting applications on the platform. I'll give you one example from a company called Cox Automotive. Donna Woodruff, who's an innovation leader there and leads the ServiceNow platform team, found a process where they had a set of safety checks they do at all these remote sites as part of a car auctions, and it was a very spreadsheet-driven process that involved a lot of people doing manual checks, but it also had regulatory implications, insurance implications, and workplace happiness implications. And they were able to take this, put it on ServiceNow, and automate a lot of that process, make it faster, I should say digitize it, 'cause you still need the people going through and doing the checks, but were able to digitize it and make that person's job that much better. These applications are all over the place. They're in shared email inboxes, they're in Excel spreadsheets, they're in legacy applications. We don't actually have to go drive the innovation and the ideas. They end up coming to the ServiceNow platform owners and our customers. >> I'd like you to comment on some of the advantages of the platform and maybe some of the challenges that you face. When I think about enterprise software, I would generally characterize enterprise software as not a great user experience, oftentimes enterprise software products don't play well with other software products. They're highly complex. Oftentimes there's lots of customerization required, which means it's really hard to go from one state to another. Those are things that you generally don't suffer from. Are there others that give you advantages? And what are maybe some of the challenges that you face? >> I think it's true. Enterprise software, you used to have to train yourself to it. It's like, hey, we're going to roll out the new system. How are we going to train all the users? But you don't do that with the software we use in the consumer world. You download it from the app store and you start using it. If you can't figure it out, it's not going to go. >> You aint going to use it. >> Josh: Exactly right. So we put a lot of that thought process from the consumer world into our technology, but not just the technology we provide. We're trying to make it easier for our customers to then provide that onto their internal and external customers as well. Things like the Mobile Application Builder that we showed earlier today, that's coming in Madrid, it's an incredibly simple way to build a beautiful mobile application for almost anything in the workplace. And, again, as I was saying before, a lot of the ideas for applications come from people in the workplace. We've got to make it easy enough for them to not only to identify what the application potential is, but then build something that's amazing. What we're trying to do is put a lot of those design concepts, not just into the end products we sell, but into tools and technology that are part of the platform and the Platform Business Unit so that our customers can build something just like it in terms of experience, usability, simplicity, and power without having to have as many developers as we do. >> You and I have known each other for a number of years now, and just as we observed the other day, off camera, that you've been forced into a lot of challenges. I say forced, but welcomed a lot of challenges. >> I love it, I love it. >> All right, I mean, it's like, hey, I'll take that. No problem. You've had a variety of experiences at large companies. Things you've learned, opportunities ahead, maybe advice you'd give for others, like the hard stuff. >> I think one of the biggest things I've learned here, particularly at ServiceNow, is just the importance of staying focused on customers rather than competitors. I think a lot of times when you're in the business roles or strategy roles, you can really think a lot about who am I competing against, and you can forget that you really just need to solve the customer's problem as well as you possibly can. Be there for them when they need it. Have something that's compelling that addresses their needs, and stay laser-focused on what works for them, and at the end of the day you're got be successful. So that's a strategy we've really tried to take to heart at ServiceNow, is put the customers at the center of everything we do. We don't worry that much about competitors. They're out there and we know they're there and we study them, but it's really the customer that gets us up every morning. >> You know, it's interesting, I've had this, as well as John Furrier has, had this conversation with Andy Jassy a lot, and they're insanely focused on the customer where he says, even though he'll say, we get into a competitive situation, we'll take on anybody, but his point was both methods can work. Your former company, I would put into the very competitive, Oracle, I think, is the same way. Microsoft maybe used to me, maybe that's changing, but to a great extent would rip your face off if you were a competitor. My question is this: Is the efficacy of the head-to-head, competitive drive as effective as it used to be, and are we seeing a change toward a customer-centric success model? >> I think there's two things going on. I think one is once a market really kind of reaches maturity, the competitive dynamic really heats up. >> Dave: 'Cause you got to gain share. >> Yeah, you got to gain share. And today, in the Cloud world, in the intelligence world, there's just so much opportunity that you could just keep going for a long time before you even bump into people. I think in mature markets it's different, so I think a lot of times, partly at EMC, that was one of the dynamics we had is a very, very mature market on on-premise storage, and so you had to go head-to-head every time. But I think there's also the changing tenor of the world. People have a lot less, they don't care for that kind of dialogue as much anymore. They don't like it when you come in and talk bad about anybody else. So I think there's both dynamics at one, and the markets we're in, they're so new, they're growing so fast that it's not as important, but also, people don't care for it. I don't think it helps, if anything, sometimes it makes people wonder if they ought to be, oh, I didn't think about talking to them, maybe we should go call the competitor you just mentioned. (laughing) so, all that said, when you get into a fight, you got to fight hard and you got to come with the best stuff, so I think that's the reality. >> Dave: Great answer. >> That's a good note to end on. Thanks so much, Josh, for coming on theCUBE again. It's been a real pleasure having you here. >> All right. Thank you, I really appreciate it. >> I'm Rebecca Knight for Dave Vellante. We will have more from ServiceNow Knowledge 18 just after this. (techy music)

(techno music) >> Hello everyone, welcome to the Cube studio in Palo Alto. I'm John Furrier at the Cube for a special presentation with Riverbed and the Cube called getting started with SD-WAN, with two CTOs, Hansang Bae CTO, and Frank Layonnet, Deputy CTO with Riverbed, thanks for joining me today. >> Thanks for having us. >> Thank you. >> So, obviously you guys are the CTOs, chief technology officers, deputy and the chief here. What's going on under the hood? Because when you talk about the SD-WAN in action, really the number one thing comes in, it's networking, and everyone wants networking to go faster, and they want it automated. Now you're hearing about all this great programmatic stuff, what's happening? >> Yeah, I think, the difference between previous generation, which SDN, right? SDN was very hot for a while, didn't really go too far. The difference here is that we're solving tactical problems for the business, so that's very different than solving the problem for the IT folks, right? So, I'll give you an example. IP sec, turns out, kind of a pain to do. Very laborious, prone to errors, et cetera. Well, SD-WAN, as a first step takes care of that. It eliminates it completely. Out of the box, you have a secure transport. No thought involved. So that solves the IT problem, sure, but, step ahead of that, get ahead of that, you can now seamlessly service your business because the thorny problem of difficult IT goes away, right? So this is about frictionless IT, that allows your business to have a competitive edge. >> Frank, talk about the use cases involved in SD-WAN, because there's everything from I need bandwidth, better bandwidth, cost perspective. To full transformation of the organization. So networking is, you got to move the packets around, but at the same time it's strategic in that it's now an asset to the organization. >> Yes, definitely there multiple definitions out there for SD-WAN, and we must not be mistaken, it cannot be only about savings on bandwidth costs. This is something we have been doing for 10 years or more. So now SD-WAN is really connected to a business driver. This is digital transformation by the way, that is the first thing that is the source of everything we have been seeing, in terms of SD, including SD-WAN. So we have been seeing customers starting with saving on bandwidth costs, but then we discovered that there's more. There's definitely something that pertains to optimizing the way they are doing operations, agility, so the pressure from the business is coming there. But it's also about, according the fact that as a bunch of their applications are in the cloud, they cannot do networking just like they were doing before. So with this addition of the cloud, that is the first real movement toward SD-WAN. How do you connect your SAS applications back to your user, and things? so this is a real question and there's multiple options out there. There's also a bunch of challenges that need to be solved. So this is the first of those instances. >> Yeah and I think one of the good ways to kind of sum that up, is to say, you know, what if you could live in a world, as an IT guy, where when the business says, hey I need to roll out, and oh, by the way, give me 10 times the capacity, done, right? Push of a button, that's what automation brings to you. What if business says, by the way, Frank, I'm rolling it out in Australia, can we make sure we have enough bandwidth there, oh and by the way, I need it next week. Now for the first time with SD-WAN, infrastructure people can say, next week? Don't you want it tomorrow? 'Cause I'm ready to hit the button, right? So SD-WAN, is that revolutionary. It's not an incremental a better routing, easier this, it's a revolutionary way of thinking about how IT can make businesses be more competitive. >> The software piece is interesting, because you look at networking. There's an operational aspect of it, you mentioned the bandwidth. That's basic, you got to have basic needs. (laughing) >> [Frank] Of course. >> Got to move the packets around the network, you know, do all that stuff, check. You're getting at something different here, which is, I want to tune into the business speed. So the speed of the business really becomes the next table stakes, which is what the cloud's doing. >> [Hansang] That's right. >> So now, how does that change networking? Because we've seen with cloud, no perimeter, different kind of provisioning capabilities, automatic provisioning, now you have multi cloud. You guys can do that kind of multi cloud stuff right now. This is not obvious to many people. >> That's right. >> What's the magic behind it? >> See I guess, if we take SD-WAN as something that is an evolution that we are forced to go into, this can be the same part of some of the customers. Yes, okay, we need to move to SD-WAN, because we need automation. But if you flip that around, what you want to achieve is unleash the capacity of the business to innovate. So we have organization, interestingly enough, that completely took that into account, and are already finding the way they are organized. It's not something very common, but we have the first occurrence of customers that are interested to still connect, well their title is not networking head, but more like Dev Ops head. So this is the starting point of a lot of organization that want to fully embrace the full power of the cloud. >> That's a full wholesale change, you're talking about a new scenario, the third one, which is, I want to completely transform my business. But in the spirit of getting started with SD-WAN, I want to ask you guys a question. >> [Frank] Absolutely. >> See how you guys can come with this one. IT people come in two flavors, I'm freaking out, or I'm jumping for joy. Because that's really kind of what's happening here, you have Ops guys, hey lock down the network, you know, we're going to check all the boxes. Then you have other people who say, oh, we're liberated with Dev Ops, it's going to be freedom. Automatic provisioning. So, where's the balance, and describe your reaction to that, that phrase, freaking out, versus jumping for joy. >> I think I can answer this this way. So, I'm sure everybody can relate to this, is that every outage I've ever been involved in, and some, spectacularly big, has always been, the root cause has always been, we had a template, we had a standard, we just didn't have time to roll it out. Or, I had a template, but I made a mistake. Human latency, right? People are very very bad at doing mundane tasks at 2:00 a.m. When network changes happen, no surprise. So SD-WAN takes care of that drudgery, of the very important work, which is IT. So SD-WAN says, you know what, make your decisions, and go from whiteboard concept with your business, to implementation in less than a week. It can be shorter than that. But let's not bring too much shock to the system. So the whole idea of SD-WAN is, don't freak out about your job, because we're enabling the IT people to meet he business demand at their speed. >> So speed's a double edged sword, on one side, the fear of going too fast, and breaking stuff, or making something go down, also there's the other side of the coin, which is you can bring it back as fast. >> That's correct. >> Talk about that dynamic because I think that's interesting conversation. >> So I think the biggest difference is yes, so let's put it out there, right? Failure at the speed of automation, is fantastic, fantastically terrible. But at the same time, the big difference is that the recovery from that is automatic as well. Because in the world of SD-WAN, it's enable, disable, it's not about touching every single end device, to fix the problem that you might have caused. Because let's face it, today, if you roll out, and I know some of you are thinking, I have an automated way of pushing out a template. And that's great, that's a start. But to recover from that, means you have to touch every device, yet again. Where as with automation, from an SD-WAN perspective, it's all centralized. You push it from a central location, you withdraw it from a central location. So it's a different recovery-- >> On those outages you mentioned earlier, you've been involved in the past, where they've had a bit of human error, or a template issue, what was the recovery like? Probably just as bad, right? So the slowness is on both sides, right? >> Absolutely, and I think, you know, the biggest problem too is, and this is something that not too many SD-WAN vendors talk about, is visibility. If I had a dollar for every time there was an outage, and someone said "Who's impacted?" And it would be at least 45 minutes to an hour before anybody can say definitively, these groups of business, or this location is impacted. So we have the luxury of having a BU, who's sole purpose in life is to bring visibility from application user, and network level. So we're bringing that to bear, and marrying that with Software Defined win. So like Frank said, we don't stop at just making it easy for the IT folks, right? IP sec example that I gave you. What we're talking about is allowing the business to be just as agile, just as flexible, and including multicloud, what if you could, as an IT person, forget about, is it Azure? Amazon? Google? Soflare? Whatever cloud vendor you're talking about, what if that didn't matter, right? Because with the right SD-WAN philosophy, there is no difference between a branch, a laptop at a hotel, a datacenter, Azure, or Google, or Amazon. It's just a connectivity point from beginning to end, all you have are publishers of application, and subscribers of that application. Everything else goes behind it, don't get me wrong, it takes design, and like you said, packets have to go somewhere, but the complex design goes away with SD-WAN. >> So I, go ahead Frank. >> Yeah, so, I want to relate that to one of the use case that we have been seeing, which is isolation of some of the traffic, let's take the example of IOT, that we understand, I mean it's a recommendation that is everywhere, we want to isolate IOT, derive it from the rest of the traffic. How do you do that without SD-WAN? Okay, I put some DNS there, I put some VRF there. What do I do in the cloud? So there's really that notion of slows on which you provide some manual type of processes to implement that segmentation. Source VFR, and you defeat the purpose of segmentation. >> It's a bandaid, you're throwing pre existing stuff at a problem. >> And it's a complex thing to do, and we know that there will be errors, therefore holes, right? Suddenly defeat the purpose of your protection. So SD-WAN, especially in the context of steel connect, is allowing to have one single policy that is, you know, define wherever the workloads are, wherever the users or things are. So this is the kind of top level benefit that we can bring, and only SD-WAN can bring. >> I like that example, SD-WAN is growing up, and your use case of internet of things, IOT, is really spot on because that highlights the growing up, and that's happening very very fast. IOT is really becoming a tactical, strategic, board agenda item, and going down to the technical folks. Because IOT is now blending the physical world, and a lot of digital. >> Yeah. >> And so people are connecting, that's a network issue, put on the network, it's now an IOT device. You mentioned that's anything. But cloud also highlights this, 'cause now with compute, and analytics, the cloud really makes that connect well. So you guys have this multi cloud thing. Take me through that, because I'm a customer of yours, if I'm a CIO, or I'm running an IT department, you got my attention, 'cause I've heard everyone talk multi cloud all day long, I don't believe it. I don't think it could work, I've looked at latency between clouds, I got my office 365 and Azure, I run some stuff on Red Shift, I do some stuff with Google. Those apps are down beside me on those clouds. >> And to prove that point, just for kicks, 'cause it's easy, I connected every instance of Amazon in the world as part of my routing infrastructure. I had access, I could ping, bring up servers to every instance of Amazon, and by the way, I can do that with Azure as well. To me, there is no difference between a server running in a datacenter, running in Amazon, running in Azure, right? What that means, again from a tactical, so what what does it mean to me as a business person? Well, what if you can enforce your active directory log in services to Amazon? Because it's not Amazon Azure anymore, it's your VPC. The fact that it runs on a different cloud system, doesn't matter, because we automatically connect those two together. So as a business person, and as an infrastructure person, don't worry about what cloud it's in. Because we'll seamlessly connect it together, and the perfect example is Azure active directory service, being presented to Amazon. You can do that, because it's your VPC. Do with it as you will, and by the way, when you're done, turn it off. >> So this is interesting, so the sequence of operations here are relative to getting started with SD-WAN, is take care of the bandwidth costs, no problem, check. But it's the hybrid, it's the SAS applications, now when you get into multi cloud, you now take that through. So take me through the impact, what does it mean to the customer to have that multi cloud capability? What's the benefit? What's in if for them? >> So I think I'll start first, and then we'll go into some of the more used cases, is that the bigger challenge, which, by the way, it sounds awesome, is that infrastructure people tend to think of and solve problems from the tools that they know how to use today. SD-WAN is very different. So the first advice that I have, is stop thinking though the lens of the tools that you have today, right? And this is that whole Dev Ops, versus infrastructure argument that's raging these days, and the bottom line is it's either IT keep pace, or perish, right? And that sounds ominous, but guess what, the other side of that coin is, you get to join the party, you're no longer a call center, you're no longer, at worst case, a necessary evil, right? >> [John] So be open to new tooling? >> That's right, be open to new tooling. The power that the new tooling brings, right? This is something that DevOps folks have had and enjoyed, so why is it that infrastructure people are laggards in this? And I'll tell you why, and I had this conversation, because one of the application guys said, "You IT guys, man, I got 8,000 servers, what's the big deal?" And my point was, you have 8,000 servers for you app? I have two backbones for my company. That's it, so slow and steady wins the race, it's in our DNA. And SD-WAN says now you can have both. You can have that agility, but that stability, right? So when you have agility and stability, the cost savings automatically happen. >> I think that's the big deal, because again, a lot of my friends are networking guys, and a lot of dogma in networking, but it's for the right reasons. Networks can't go down. (laughing) When networks go down, you know what hits the fan. So take us through that scaling, 'cause agility and stability is really a good message. What does that mean, how does a customer do that? How do they get there? >> Yes, you have to put some trust onto vendors like us to take care of stability and just get the benefit of agility, which is that extra thing that you really can leverage to support a business. So I think that it's important to send a message there, that SD-WAN will not take over the job of anybody. It's just changing the way people will operate, the way people will think, and it's amazing to see some customers that I know for 10 years, 15 years. And yes, walls where CCIEs, you know, network specialists, and when I'm coming back to them with steel connect, I mean they are really evolved, just like we have evolved. (laughing) We know all together, that's it's about changing the overall, be if you're moving to Dev Ops, and discerning what's going on with the cloud. We are techies, so it's good stuff in fact, for everybody to understand that. And those customers that went through different steps of evolving, maturing that idea, they are really taking us into, use cases again, where it's really about, okay, now I've got a request for my business, which is to deploy that new work load, and by the way, on both sides that exist over there, but I need to add that to some of our sides. We tell, pop up stores, right? I want to do some digital marketing on pop up stores. Okay, what do I do? And I had a customer doing me a demo, we have a script provisioning back end, you know the blue in front in, and in a few clicks, provisioning connectivity. >> [John] Yeah. >> To that workload on the pop up store, right? With just an internet connection, this is amazing. >> IOT and all that stuff is great. IOT all these new paired ups is essentially networking. (laughing) I mean edge of the network, you just talked about provisioning. Think about how hard that was. That was a campus a couple years ago. >> That's right. >> That's an office. Remote office, the notion of a retail space that pops up, is just another remote edge point. So this is not new concepts, but the software makes it a difference. So, I think that's where I see the connection. So I'd ask you this question, when you walk around with steel connect, which we saw the demos on the last episode, really impressive. What are customers saying? I mean for folks that have never seen it before, what's their reaction, and for folks that work with you guys, what is their reaction for steel connect? >> I think I can give you some customer quotes, without mentioning their names. I had one customer who, after sitting through their presentation, said, "If this stuff works, we need to rethink our strategy." This is coming from a head of architecture, that reported to the CIO, right? Think about that statement and break it down. Yes there has to be trust, about it's a nascent field, new field, I get that. But when you truly embrace SD-WAN, not just from a cost perspective. That's a great catalyst, everybody wants that, because it's an feather in their cap. Once you go beyond that, and you start to think about the possibilities that SD-WAN, in our version of SD-WAN, which we call steel connect, can bring to you, it's a different conversation with a business, you're not talking about give me time. Imagine that pop up store, or you say, you know what, give me two weeks and I might have something for you. In this world of SnapChat, kids are changing their minds on a day by day basis, nevermind two weeks. >> It could delay the opening of the retail outlet, and all kinds of interesting business side effects. >> Absolutely, that's correct. And again, I keep going back to the business agility. It's high time that IT people keep up with the business, and in fact, surpass it using cloud of cloud for example. >> Hansang and Frank, we were talking before we came on the segment here, about video conferencing, and having kind of town hall meetings, and you know we were kind of joking, when something goes down in a business, you can see how fast something can move the mob, now that we're all connected on SnapChat, things go viral instantly. Like the United Airlines comment, we were talking about United Airlines, okay they have this big viral thing. Took them like three days to respond, next thing you know their brand suffered. I mean, imagine the impact of their business. They could have had a town hall meeting, let's take through that use case. Hey let's set up a network. We're going to have all these people dial in, and perusing it up, well that's going to take two weeks. Every day the stock is getting the hammer. I think they lost $1,000,000,000 in market cap in the first day. So there they need the provision of video network. Okay, take us through that, what would you guys do with SD-WAN? >> So, for me it's easy. With the right SD-WAN, I'll compare and contrast, okay? Today, you have to go and touch every edge device, and you have to change your quality of service. Because video, AF class, AF 41 for example, has a certain amount of quality of service that it can use. So you have to go and touch every device, every infrastructure device, at every location, to give it that bandwidth that's required, okay? So now, that takes maybe a week, maybe two weeks, depending on the size of your network. But that time, how much did they lose? $1,000,000,000 overnight? You can do the math, versus the new world of SD-WAN, where I say, you know what, between 2:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. eastern, video is going to have top quality of service marking. And then when I'm done, I'm going to turn it off. That's the actual difference between today's workflow, and the brave new world of SD-WAN. >> And by the way, video, just to point out, not in that one use case. Video is becoming the number one app for users, whether you want to accentuate it, in this case highlight it, or in some cases, not let everyone watch Game of Thrones Monday morning from their desk. Or those kinds of things are going on. You guys have that policy based capability. >> That's right. >> Yeah, so I'd like to pick up on the change management. Let's be honest in fact, us people in the networking space, we're a bit of laggards, when it comes to providing that capability. Because on the other aspects of IT, it's no brainer of course, we can do that. We can do that adaptation in a breeze. But what about the later, we're stuck into a solution, where yes, change management was something that was nightmare, and everybody talks about QS being a nightmare for so long, right? Now obviously we have steel connect with SD-WAN, we can fix that. >> My final question for you guys we we wrap up this segment is competition. For folks out there looking to get started and evaluate SD-WAN, because right now software define everything is happening. We're seeing it across the board, it's software and data. You guys from a networking angle, SD-WAN. How should your customers, and potential customers evaluate you, vis-a-vis the competition. Riverbed versus the competition. What should they look for, and how should they evaluate it for them? >> I'll give a couple of different quick books to successful proof of concept, if you will. It does start with that IP sect, that secure tunnel that can separate and differentiate traffic and quality of service. It does involve making sure that the right important applications get preferential treatment, and oh, by the way, move over to a different lane. Creating HOV lanes on demand is what SD-WAN is about, right? It can be time based, it can be user based. So it's not just a static configuration, it's very very fluid. As an HOV lane, think of it this way. It's an HOV lane, from your house, to your work, because you have an important job that day, right? SD-WAN says you can do that, I can get quality of service down to a user level, with a few click of a button. So, from a competitive landscape, IP sec is important. But differentiating application and user by name, not IP addresses, in the world of SAS, IP addresses doesn't mean anything, is also important. And then the other one is, the cloud, right? Think of the cloud as your datacenter. So whatever you do, in the world of SD-WAN, should be just as easy at branch, datacenter, cloud, and cloud of clouds, right? And if it encompasses all of that, then you've found the right SD-WAN vendor. >> I think that's exactly right. We need to help customers to understand that it's not about replicating what we have been doing with the new cool technology, that is slightly more automated. This is about rethinking the way you are connecting that work. And this is something we've been hearing from analysts that I've been personally seeing over the past couple years. It's now down to not only networking people, but also the cloud people, but also the security people to sit together and look at all the use cases around the one, and obviously this has evolved to our SAS, to our yes, to a lot of things that pertains to automation. So this is really the advice that I would give to customers, don't fall into the trap of comparing SD-WAN with win, it has to be something more. It has to include the cloud. >> And I'll give you the secret sauce that I've been dying to get out there. It was the biggest differentiator for us. We removed the pain of latency for applications. We've been doing it for over 10 years. So, yes bandwidth is plentiful. I have a gigabyte service at home, it's wonderful. But it still doesn't take away the latency when I have to interact with folks in Sydney, or in Singapore, and we take that pain of latency away, have been doing that for over 10 years. It's a perfect marriage made in heaven. As the network grows to include cloud, where theoretically it shouldn't matter if your instance is in Ireland, if it's in Singapore, if it's in Korea, if it's in Germany, or San Jose, or in Virginia. But because of latency, it matters. What if you could have a vendor that makes that pain go away as well? And that's our secret sauce. >> What's interesting is that the world's changing, so the network used to dictate what applications could do, now applications are dictating what the networks are doing. >> Absolutely. >> Which means it has to be programmable. >> That's right. >> And that is interesting because that flips it upside down. >> That's correct, and that's that business agility that we've been harping on this whole time. >> Talking about marriage, let me add a third to the problem, we have also visibility, right in the portfolio, and it's amazingly important. Because you know, in one click, I can deploy policy. I mean, one click I can kill. (laughing) Through my wrongly configured policy, a bunch of our closed, so it's super important to be in a position to provide new tools, new ways of verifying what's going on. I have an intent, I want the network to be like this. I need to verify immediately whether or not I'm going the right direction, right? (laughing) To just like, you drive, you have your super powerful wheel that brings you everywhere. You need to know where all that will go there. >> And that's that trust but verify motto, right? I trust that it's doing the right thing, but I want to be able to verify it. And with SD-WAN, it's build in. >> Riverbend you guys have been doing some great work, I was joking with my friend over the weekend, we were just talking about SD-WAN in general, just as we do on the weekends. >> [Hansang] Who doesn't? >> I said, I mean it's interesting, the world is a win now, the network is global. That's essentially a wide area network, it's called the internet. >> That's right. >> And you treat it a win, and there it is, end points, you have remotes. >> That's right, and sun computer, unfortunately was right, they were just decades early, right? The computer, or the network is the computer. And with the SD-WAN and cloud movement, it really can be anywhere. >> I got a funny anecdote, at the table interview, and I interviewed Scott McNealy, and he was like, "I just should have called the cloud." >> [Hansang] There you go, that's all you needed. >> Guys thanks so much for spending the time here inside the Cube studios, I'm John Furrier with Riverbed, on getting started with SD-WAN. Thanks for watching. (techno music)

>> Narrator: Recovery. DataWorks Summit Europe 2017. Brought to you by Hortonworks. >> Hello everyone, welcome to The Cube's special presentation here in Munich, Germany for DataWorks Summit 2017. This is the Hadoop Summit powered by Hortonworks. This is their event and again, shows the transition from the Hadoop world to the big data world. I'm John Furrier. My co-host Dave Vellante, good to see you Dave. We're back in the seats together, usually on different events, but now here together in Munich. Great beer, great scene here. Small European event for Hortonworks and the ecosystem but it's called DataWorks 2017. Strata Hadoop is calling themselves Strata and Data. They're starting to see the word Hadoop being sunsetted from these events, which is a big theme of this year. The transition from Hadoop being the branded category to Data. >> Well, you're certainly seeing that in a number of ways. The titles of these events. Well, first of all, I love being in Europe. These venues are great, right? They're so Euro, very clean and magnificent. But back to your point. You're seeing the Hadoop Summit now called the DataWorks Summit. You're seeing the Strata Plus Hadoop is now Strata Plus, I don't even know what it is. Right, it's not Hadoop driven anymore. You see it also in Cloudera's IPO. They're going to talk about Hadoop and Hadoop Distro. They're a Hadoop Distro vendor but they talked about being a data management company and John, I think we are entering the era, or well deep into the era of what I have been calling for the last couple of years, profitless prosperity. Really where you see the Cloudera IPO, as you know, they raised money from Intel, over $600 million at a $4.1 billion dollar valuation. The Wall Street Journal says they'll have a tough time getting a billion dollar valuation. For every dollar each of these companies spends, Hortonworks and Cloudera, they lose between $1.70 and $2.50, so we've always said at SiliconANGLE, Wiki Bond and The Cube that people are going to make money in big data or the practitioners of big data, and it's hard to find those guys, it's hard to see them but that's really what's happening is the industries are transforming and those are the guys that are putting money into their bottom line. Not so much for technology vendors. >> Great to unpack that but first of all, I want to just say congratulations to Wiki Bond for getting it right again. As usual Wiki Bond, ahead of the curve and being out there and getting it right because I think you nailed it and I think Wiki Bond saw this first of all the research firms, kind of, you know, pat ourselves on the back here, but the truth is that practitioners are making the money and I think you're going to see more of that. In fact, last night as I'm having a nice beer here in Germany, I just like to listen to the conversations in the bar area and a lot of conversations around, real conversations around, you know, doing deals, and you know, deployments. You know, you're hearing about HBase, you're hearing about clusters, you're hearing about service revenue, and I think this is the focus. Cloudera, I think, in a classic Silicon Valley way, their hubris was tempered by their lack of scale. I mean, they didn't really blow it out. I mean, now they do 200 million in revenue. Nothing to shake a stick at, they did a great job, but they're buying revenue and Hortonworks is as well. But the ecosystem is the factor, and this is the wildcard. I'm making a prediction. Profitless prosperity that you point out is right, but I think that it has longevity with these companies like Hortonworks and Cloudera and others, like MapR because the ecosystem's robust. If you factor in the ecosystem revenue that is enough rising tide in my opinion. The question is how do they become sustainable as a standalone venture, that Red Hat for Hadoop never worked as Pat Gilson, you know, predicted. So, I think you're going to see a quick shift and pivot quickly by Hortonworks, certainly Cloudera's going to be under the microscope once they go public. I'm expecting that valuation to plummet like a rock. They're going to go public, Silicon Valley people are going to get their exits but. >> Excel will be happy. >> Everyone, yeah, they'll be happy. They already sold in 2013. They did a big sale, I mean, all of them cashed out two years ago when that liquidation event happened with Intel but that's fine. But now it's back to business building and Hortonworks has been doing it for years, so when you see your evaluation is less than a billion, so I'm expecting Cloudera to plummet like a rock. I would not buy the IPO at all because I think it's going to go well under a billion dollars. >> And I think it's the right call and as we know, last year, at the end of last year, Fidelity and other mutual funds devalued their holdings in Cloudera and so, you know, you've got this situation where, as you say, a couple hundred, maybe you know, on the way to 300 million in revenue, Hortonworks on the way to 200 million in revenue. Add up the ecosystem, yeah, maybe you get to a billion, throw in all of what IBM and Oracle call big data, and it's kind of a more interesting business, but you've called it same wine, new bottle. Is it a new bottle? Now, what I mean by that is the shift from Hadoop and then again, you read Cloudera's S1, it's all about AI, machine learning, you know, the cloud. Interesting, we'll talk about the cloud a little later, but is it same wine, new bottle, or is this really a shift toward a new era of innovation? >> It's not a new shift. It's the same innovation that the Hortonworks was founded on. Big data is a categorical and Hadoop was the horse they rode in on, but I think what's changing is the fact that customers are now putting real projects on the table and the scrutiny around those projects have to produce value, and the value comes down to total cost of ownership and business value. And that's becoming a data specific thing, and you look at all the successes in the big data world, Spark and others, you're seeing a focus on cloud integration and real-time workloads. These are real projects. This isn't fantasy. This isn't hype. This isn't early adopter. These are real companies saying we are moving to a new paradigm of digital transforming our companies and we need cost efficiencies but revenue-producing applications and workloads that are going to be running in the cloud with data at the heart of it. So, this is a customer-forcing function where the customers are generally excited about machine learning, moving to real-time classification of workloads. This is the deal and no hubris, no technology posturing, no open standards, jockeying can right the situation. Customers have demands and they want them filled, and we're going to have a lot of guests on here and I'm going to ask them those direct questions. What are you looking for and? >> Well, I totally agree with what you're saying and when we first met, it was right around the, you know, the mid point of the web 2.0 era, and I remember Tim Berners-Lee commenting on all this excitement, everybody's doing, he said this is what the web was invented to do, and this is what big data was invented to do. It was to produce deep analytics, deep learning, machine learning, you know, cognitive, as IBM likes to brand that, and so, it really is the next era even though people don't like to use the term big data anymore. We were talking to, you know, some of the folks in our community earlier, John, you and I, about some of the challenges. Why is it profitless, you know? Why is there so much growth but it's no profit? And you know, we have to point out here that people like Hortonworks and Cloudera, they've made some big bets, take HDSF of example. And now you have the cloud guys, particularly Amazon, coming in, you know, with S3. Look at YARN, big open source project. But you got Docker and Kubernetes seem to be mopping that up. Tez was supposed to replace MapReduce and now you've got. >> I mean, I wouldn't say mopping up, I mean. >> You've got Spark. >> At the end of the day the ecosystem's going to revolve around what the customers want, and portability of workloads, Kubernetes and microservices, these are areas that just absolutely make a lot of sense and I think, you know, people will move to where the frictionless action is and that's going to happen with Kubernetes and containers and microservices, but that just speaks to the devops culture, and I think Hadoop ecosystem, again, was grounded in the devops culture. So, yeah, there's some progress that are going to maybe go out of flavor, but there's other stuff coming up trough the ranks in open source and I think it's compelling. >> But where I disagree with what you're saying is well, the point I'm trying to make, is you have to, if you're Cloudera and Hortonworks, you have to support those multiple projects and it's expensive as hell. Whereas the cloud guys put all their wood behind one arrow, to use an old Scott McNealy phrase, and you know, Amazon, I would argue is mopping up in big data. I think the cloud guys, you know, it's ironic to me that Cloudera in the cloud era picked that name, you know, but really never had. >> John: They missed the cloud. >> They've never really had a strong cloud play, and I would say the same thing with Hortonworks and MapR. They have to play in the cloud and they talk about cloud, but they've got to support hybrid, they've got to support on param, they got to pick the clouds that they're going to support, AWS, Azure, maybe IBM's cloud. >> Look, Cloudera completely missed the cloud era, pun intended. However, they didn't miss open source but they're great at and I'm an admirer of Cloudera and Hortonworks on is that their open source ethos is what drove them, and so they kind of got isolated in with some of their product decisions, but that's not a bad thing. I mean, ultimately, I'm really bullish on Cloudera and Hortonworks because the ecosystem points I mentioned earlier are not high on the I wouldn't buy the IPO, I think I'd buy them at a discount, but Cloudera's not going to go away, Dave. They're going to go public. I think the valuation's going to drop like a rock and then settle around a billion, but they have good management. The founders still there, Michael Olson, Amr Awadallah. So, you're going to see Cloudera transform as a company. They have to do business out in the open and they're not afraid to, obviously they're open source. So, we're going to start to see that transition from a private venture backed, scale up, buy revenue. In the playbook of Silicon Valley venture capital's Excel partners and Greylock. Now they go public and get liquid and then now next phase of their journey is going to be build a public company and I think that they will do a good job doing it and I'm not down on them at all for that and I think it's just going to be a transition. >> Well, they're going to raise what? A couple 100 million dollars? But this industry, yeah, this industry's cashflow negative, so I agree with you. Open source is great, let's ra-ra for open source and it drives innovation, but how does this industry pay for itself? That's what I want to know. How you respond to that? >> Well, I think they have sustainable issues around services and I think partnering with the big companies like Intel that have professional services might help them on that front, but Michael Olson said in his founder's letter in his S1, kind of AI washing, he said AI and cognitive. But that's okay because Cloudera could easily pivot with their brain power, and same with Hortonworks to AI. Machine learning is very open source driven. Open source culture is growing, it's not going away, so I think Cloudera's in a very good position. >> I think the cloud guys are going to kill them in that game, and cloud guys and IBM are going to cream these profitless startups in that AI and machine learning game. >> We'll see. >> You disagree? >> I disagree, I think. Well, I mean, it depends. I mean, you know, I'm not going to, you know, forecast what the managements might do, but I mean, if I'm cloud looking at what Cloudera's done. >> What would you do? >> I would do exactly what Mike Olson's doing is I'd basically pivot immediately to machine learning. Look at Google. TensorFlow it's go so much traction with their cloud because it's got machine learning built into it. Open source is where the action is, and that's where you could do a lot of good work and use it as an advantage in that they know that game. I would not count out the open source game. >> So, we know how IBM makes money at that, you know, in theory anyway it wants. We know how Amazon's going to make money at that with their priority approach, Microsoft will do the same thing. How to Cloudera and Hortonworks make money? >> I think it's a product transition around getting to the open source with cloud technologies. Amazon is not out to kill open source, so I think there's an opportunity to wedge in a position there, and so they just got to move quickly. If they don't make these decisions then that's a failed execution on the management team at Cloudera and Hortonworks and I think they're on it. So, we'll keep an eye on that. >> No, Amazon's not trying to kill open source, I would agree, but they are bogarting open source in a big way and profiting amazingly from it. >> Well, they just do what Amy Jessie would say, they're customer driven. So, if a customer doesn't want to do five things to do one thing this is back to my point. The customers want real-time workloads. They want it with open source and they don't want all these steps in the cost of ownership. That's why this is not a new shift, it's the same wine, new bottle because now you're just seeing real projects that are demanding successful and efficient code and support and whoever delivers it builds the better mousetrap. In this case, the better mousetrap will win. >> And I'm arguing that the better mousetrap and the better marginal economics, I know I'm like a broken record on this, but if I take Kinesis and DynamoDB and Red Ship and wrap it into my big data play, offer it as a service with a set of APIs on the cloud, like AWS is going to do, or is doing, and Azure is doing, that's a better business model than, as you say, five different pieces that I have to cobble together. It's just not economically viable for customers to do that. >> Well, we've got some big new coming up here. We're going to have two days of wall-to-wall coverage of DataWorks 2017. Hortonworks announcing 2.6 of their Hadoop Hortonworks data platform. We're going to talk to Scott now, the CTO, coming up shortly. Stay with us for exclusive coverage of DataWorks in Munich, Germany 2017. We'll be back with more after this short break.

>> Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're at Data Privacy Day at Twitter's World Headquarters in downtown San Francisco. Full-day event, a lot of seminars and sessions talking about the issue of privacy. Even though Scott McNealy in 1999 said, "Privacy's dead, get over it," everyone here would beg to differ; and it's a really important topic. We're excited to have Michelle Dennedy. She's the Chief Privacy Officer from Cisco. Welcome, Michelle. >> Indeed, thank you. And when Scott said that, I was his Chief Privacy Officer. >> Oh you were? >> I'm well acquainted with my young friend Scott's feelings on the subject. >> It's pretty interesting, 'cause that was eight years before the iPhone, so a completely different world than actually one of the prior guests we were talking about privacy is an issue in the Harvard Business Review from 125 years ago. So this is not new. >> Absolutely. >> So how have things changed? I mean that's a great perspective that you were there. What was he kind of thinking about and really what are the privacy challenges now compared to 1999? >> So different. Such a different world. I mean fascinating that when that statement was made the discussion was a press conference where we were introducing Connectivity. It was an offshoot of Java, and it basically allowed you to send from your personal computer a wireless message to your printer so that a document could come out (gasp). >> That's what it was? >> Yeah. >> Wireless printing? >> Wireless printing. And really it was gyro technology, so anything wirelessly could start talking to each other in an internet of things world. >> Right. >> So, good news bad news. The world has exploded from there, obviously; but the base premise of, can I be mobile, can I live in a world of connectivity, and still have control over my story, who I am, where I am, what I'm doing? And it was really a reframing moment of when you say privacy is dead, if what you mean by that is secrecy and hiding away and not being connected to the world around you, I may agree with you. However, privacy as a functional definition of how we define ourselves, how we live in a culture, what we can expect in terms of morality, ethics, respect, and security, alive and well, baby. Alive and well. >> (laughs) No shortage of opportunity to keep you busy. We talked to a lot of people who go to a lot of tech conferences. I have to say I don't know that we've ever talked to a Chief Privacy Officer. >> You're missing out. >> I know, so not you get to define the role, I love it. So what are your priorities as Chief Priority Officer? What are you keeping an eye on day to day as well as what are your more strategic objectives? >> It's a great question. So the rise of the Chief Privacy Officer, actually Scott was a big help in that and gave me exactly the right amount of rope to hang myself with. The way I look at it is, probably the simplest analogy is, should you have a Chief Financial Officer? >> Yeah. >> I would guess yeah, right? That didn't exist about 100 years ago. We just kind of loped along, and whoever had the biggest bag of money at the end was deemed to be successful. Where if somebody else who had no money left at the end but bought another store, you would have no way of measuring that. So the Chief Privacy Officer is that person for your digital currency. I look at the pros and the cons, the profit and the loss, of data and the data footprint for our company and for all the people to whom we sell. We think about, what are those control mechanisms for data? So think of me as your data financial officer. >> Right, right. But the data in and of itself is just stagnant, right? It's really just the data in the context of all these other applications. How it's used, where it's used, when it's used, what it's combined with, that really starts to trip into areas of value as well as potential problems. >> I feel like we scripted this before, but we didn't. >> Jeff: We did not script it, we don't script the-- >> So if I took out a rectangle out of my wallet, and it had a number on it, and it was green, what would you say that thing probably is? >> Probably Andrew Jackson on the front. >> Yeah, probably Andrew Jackson. What is that? >> A 20 dollar bill. >> Why is that a 20 dollar bill? >> Because we agree that you're going to give it to me and it has that much value, and thankfully the guy at Starbucks will give me 20 bucks worth of coffee for it. >> (laughs) Exactly. Well which could be a cup the way we're going. >> Which could be a cup. >> But that's exactly right. So is that 20 dollar bill stagnant? Yes. That 20 dollar bill just sitting on the table between us is nothing. I could burn it up, I could put it in my pocket and lose it and never see it again. I could flush it down the toilet. That's how we used to treat our data. If you recognize instead the story that we share about that piece of currency, we happen to be in a place where it's really easy to alienate that currency. I could go downstairs here and spend it. If I was in Beijing I probably would have to go and convert it into a different currency, and we'd tell a story about that conversion because our standards interface is different. Data is exactly the same way. The story that we share together today is a valuable story because we're communicating out, we're here for a purpose. >> Right. >> We're making friends. I'm liking you because you're asking me all these great questions that I would have fed you had I been able to feed you questions. >> Jeff: (laughs) But it's only that context, it's only that communicability that brings it value. We now assume as a populous that paper currency is valuable. It's just paper. It's only as good as the story that enlivens it. So now we're looking at smaller, smaller Microdata transactions of how am I tweeting out information to people who follow me? >> Jeff: Right, right. >> How do I share that with your following public, and does that give me a greater opportunity to educate people about security and privacy? Does that allow my company to sell more of my goods and services because we're building ethics and privacy into the fabric of our networks? I would say that's as valuable or more valuable than that Andrew Jackson. >> So it's interesting 'cause you talk about building privacy into the products. We often hear about building security into the products, right? Because the old way of security of building a bigger wall doesn't work any more and you really have to bake it in at all steps of the application: development, the data layer, the database, et cetera, et cetera. When you look at privacy versus security, and especially 'cause Cisco's sitting on, I mean you guys are sitting on the pipes, everything is running through your machines. >> That's right. >> How do you separate the two, how do you prioritize, and how do you make sure the privacy discussion is certainly part of that gets the right amount of relevance within the context of the security conversation? >> It's a glib answer that's much more complicated, but the security is really in many instances the what. I can really secure almost any batch of data. It can be complete gobbley gook zeroes and ones. It could be something really critical. It could be my medical records. The privacy and the data about what that context is, that's the why. I don't see them as one or the other at all. I see security and security not as not a technology but a series of verb things that you actually physically, people process technologies. That enactment should be addressed to a why. So it's kind of Peter Drucker's management of you manage what you measure. That was like incendiary advice when it first came out. Well I wanted to say that you secure what you treasure. So if you treasure a digital interaction with your employees, your customers, and your community, you should probably secure that. >> Right. But it seems like there's a little bit of a disconnect about maybe what should be treasured and what is the value with folks that have grown up. Let's pick on the young kids, not really thinking through or having the time or knowing an impact of a negative event in terms of just clicking and accepting the EULA and using that application on their phone. They just look at in a different way. Is that valid? How do they change that behavior? How do you look at this new generation, and there's this sea of data which is far larger than it used to be coming off all these devices, internet of things, obviously. People are things too. The mobile devices with all that geolocation data, and the sensor data, and then oh by the way it's all going to be in our cars and everything else shortly. How's that landscape changing and challenging you in new ways, and what are you doing about it? >> The speed and dynamics are astronomical. How do you count the stars, right? >> Jeff: (laughs) >> And should you? Isn't that kind of a waste of time? >> Jeff: Right, right. >> It used to be that knowledge, when I was a kid, was knowing what was in A to Z of the Encyclopedia Britannica. Now facts are cheap. Facts used to be expensive. You had to take time and commit to them, and physically find them, and be smart enough to read, and on, and on, and on. The dumbest kid is smarter than I was with my Encyclopedia Britannica because we have search engines. Now their commodity is how do I critically think? How do I make my brand and make my way? How do I ride and surf on a wave of untold quantities of information to create a quality brand for myself? So the young people are actually in a much better position than, I'll still count us as young. >> Jeff: Yeah, Uh huh. >> But maybe less young. >> Less young, less young than we were yesterday. >> We are digital natives, but I think I am hugely optimistic that the kids coming up are really starting to understand the power of brand: personal brand, family brand, cultural brand. And they're feeling very activist about the whole thing. >> Yeah, which is interesting 'cause that was never a factor when there was no personal brand, right? You were part of-- >> No way. >> whatever entity that you were in. >> Well, you were in a clique. >> Right. >> Right? You identified as when I was home I was the third out of four kids. I was a Roman Catholic girl in the Midwest. I was a total dork with a bowl haircut. Now kids can curate who and what and how they are over the network. Young professionals can connect with people with experience. Or they can decide, I get this all the time on Twitter actually. How did you become a Chief Privacy Officer? I'm really interested in taking a pivot in my career. And I love talking to those people 'cause they always educate me, and I hope that I give them a little bit of value too. >> Right, right. Michelle, we could go on for on and on and on. But, unfortunately, I think you got to go cover a session. So we're going to let you go. >> Thank you. >> Michelle Dennedy, thanks for taking a few minutes of your time. >> Thank you, and don't miss another Data Privacy Day. >> I will not. We'll be back next year as well. I'm Jeff Frick. You're watching theCUBE. See you next time.