(gentle music) >> From the Cube Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world. This is theCube Conversation. >> Hi everybody, this is Dave Vellante, we're back at Cube on Cloud, and with me is Muddu Sudhakar. He's a long time alum of theCube, a technologist and executive, a serial entrepreneur and an investor. Welcome my friend, good to see you. >> Good to see you, Dave. Pleasure to be with you. Happy elections, I guess. >> Yeah, yeah. So I wanted to start, this work from home, pivot's been amazing, and you've seen the enterprise collaboration explode. I wrote a piece a couple months ago, looking at valuations of various companies, right around the snowflake IPO, I want to ask you about that, but I was looking at the valuations of various companies, at Spotify, and Shopify, and of course Zoom was there. And I was looking at just simple revenue multiples, and I said, geez, Zoom actually looks, might look undervalued, which is crazy, right? And of course the stock went up after that, and you see teams, Microsoft Teams, and Microsoft doing a great job across the board, we've written about that, you're seeing Webex is exploding, I mean, what do you make of this whole enterprise collaboration play? >> No, I think the look there is a trend here, right? So I think this probably trend started before COVID, but COVID is going to probably accelerate this whole digital transformation, right? People are going to work remotely a lot more, not everybody's going to come back to the offices even after COVID, so I think this whole collaboration through Slack, and Zoom, and Microsoft Teams and Webex, it's going to be the new game now, right? Both the video, audio and chat solutions, that's really going to help people like eyeballs. You're not going to spend time on all four of them, right? It's like everyday from a consumer side, you're going to spend time on your Gmail, Facebook, maybe Twitter, maybe Instagram, so like in the consumer side, on your personal life, you have something on the enterprise. The eyeballs are going to be in these platforms. >> Yeah. Well. >> But we're not going to take everything. >> Well, So you are right, there's a permanence to this, and I got a lot of ground to cover with you. And I always like our conversations mood because you tell it like it is, I'm going to stay on that work from home pivot. You know a lot about security, but you've seen three big trends, like mega trends in security, Endpoint, Identity Access Management, and Cloud Security, you're seeing this in the stock prices of companies like CrowdStrike, Zscaler, Okta- >> Right >> Sailpoint- >> Right, I mean, they exploded, as a result of the pandemic, and I think I'm inferring from your comment that you see that as permanent, but that's a real challenge from a security standpoint. What's the impact of Cloud there? >> No, it isn't impact but look, first is all the services required to be Cloud, right? See, the whole ideas for it to collaborate and do these things. So you cannot be running an application, like you can't be running conference and SharePoint oN-Prem, and try to on a Zoom and MS teams. So that's why, if you look at Microsoft is very clever, they went with Office 365, SharePoint 365, now they have MS Teams, so I think that Cloud is going to drive all these workloads that you have been talking about a lot, right? You and John have been saying this for years now. The eruption of Cloud and SAS services are the vehicle to drive this next-generation collaboration. >> You know what's so cool? So Cloud obviously is the topic, I wonder how you look at the last 10 years of Cloud, and maybe we could project forward, I mean the big three Cloud vendors, they're running it like $20 billion a quarter, and they're growing collectively, 35, 40% clips, so we're really approaching a hundred billion dollars for these three. And you hear stats like only 20% of the workloads are in the public Cloud, so it feels like we're just getting started. How do you look at the impact of Cloud on the market, as you say, the last 10 years, and what do you expect going forward? >> No, I think it's very fascinating, right? So I remember when theCube, you guys are talking about 10 years back, now it's been what? More than 10 years, 15 years, since AWS came out with their first S3 service back in 2006. >> Right. >> Right? so I think look, Cloud is going to accelerate even more further. The areas is going to accelerate is for different reasons. I think now you're seeing the initial days, it's all about startups, initial workloads, Dev test and QA test, now you're talking about real production workloads are moving towards Cloud, right? Initially it was backup, we really didn't care for backup they really put there. Now you're going to have Cloud health primary services, your primary storage will be there, it's not going to be an EMC, It's not going to be a NetApp storage, right? So workloads are going to shift from the business applications, and these business applications, will be running on the Cloud, and I'll make another prediction, make customer service and support. Customer service and support, again, we should be running on the Cloud. You're not want to run the thing on a Dell server, or an IBM server, or an HP server, with your own hosted environment. That model is not because there's no economies of scale. So to your point, what will drive Cloud for the next 10 years, will be economies of scale. Where can you take the cost? How can I save money? If you don't move to the Cloud, you won't save money. So all those workloads are going to go to the Cloud are people who really want to save, like global gradual custom, right? If you stay on the ASP model, a hosted, you're not going to save your costs, your costs will constantly go up from a SaaS perspective. >> So that doesn't bode well for all the On-prem guys, and you hear a lot of the vendors that don't own a Cloud that talk about repatriation, but the numbers don't support that. So what do those guys do? I mean, they're talking multi-Cloud, of course they're talking hybrid, that's IBM's big play, how do you see it? >> I think, look, see there, to me, multi-Cloud makes sense, right? You don't want one vendor that you never want to get, so having Amazon, Microsoft, Google, it gives them a multi-Cloud. Even hybrid Cloud does make sense, right? There'll be some workloads. It's like, we are still running On-prem environment, we still have mainframe, so it's never going to be a hundred percent, but I would say the majority, your question is, can we get to 60, 70, 80% workers in the next 10 years? I think you will. I think by 2025, more than 78% of the Cloud Migration by the next five years, 70% of workload for enterprise will be on the Cloud. The remaining 25, maybe Hybrid, maybe On-prem, but I get panics, really doesn't matter. You have saved and part of your business is running on the Cloud. That's your cost saving, that's where you'll see the economies of scale, and that's where all the growth will happen. >> So square the circle for me, because again, you hear the stat on the IDC stat, IBM Ginni Rometty puts it out there a lot that only 20% of the workloads are in the public Cloud, everything else is On-prem, but it's not a zero sum game, right? I mean the Cloud native stuff is growing like crazy, the On-prem stuff is flat to down, so what's going to happen? When you talk about 70% of the workloads will be in the Cloud, do you see those mission critical apps and moving into the car, I mean the insurance companies going to put their claims apps in the Cloud, or the financial services companies going to put their mission critical workloads in the Cloud, or they just going to develop new stuff that's Cloud native that is sort of interacts with the On-prem. How do you see that playing out? >> Yeah, no, I think absolutely, I think a very good question. So two things will happen. I think if you take an enterprise, right? Most businesses what they'll do is the workloads that they should not be running On-prem, they'll move it up. So obviously things like take, as I said, I use the word SharePoint, right? SharePoint and conference, all the knowledge stuff is still running on people's data centers. There's no reason. I understand, I've seen statistics that 70, 80% of the On-prem for SharePoint will move to SharePoint on the Cloud. So Microsoft is going to make tons of money on that, right? Same thing, databases, right? Whether it's CQL server, whether there is Oracle database, things that you are running as a database, as a Cloud, we move to the Cloud. Whether that is posted in Oracle Cloud, or you're running Oracle or Mongo DB, or Dynamo DB on AWS or SQL server Microsoft, that's going to happen. Then what you're talking about is really the App concept, the applications themselves, the App server. Is the App server is going to run On-prem, how much it's going to laureate outside? There may be a hybrid Cloud, like for example, Kafka. I may use a Purse running on a Kafka as a service, or I may be using Elasticsearch for my indexing on AWS or Google Cloud, but I may be running my App locally. So there'll be some hybrid place, but what I would say is for every application, 75% of your Comprende will be on the Cloud. So think of it like the Dev. So even for the On-prem app, you're not going to be a 100 percent On-prem. The competent, the billing materials will move to the Cloud, your Purse, your storage, because if you put it On-prem, you need to add all this, you need to have all the whole things to buy it and hire the people, so that's what is going to happen. So from a competent perspective, 70% of your bill of materials will move to the Cloud, even for an On-prem application. >> So, Of course, the susification of the industry in the last decade and in my three favorite companies last decade, you've worked for two of them, Tableau, ServiceNow, and Splunk. I want to ask you about those, but I'm interested in the potential disruption there. I mean, you've got these SAS companies, Salesforce of course is another one, but they can't get started in 1999. What do you see happening with those? I mean, we're basically building these sort of large SAS, platforms, now. Do you think that the Cloud native world that developers can come at this from an angle where they can disrupt those companies, or are they too entrenched? I mean, look at service now, I mean, I don't know, $80 billion market capital where they are, they bigger than Workday, I mean, just amazing how much they've grown and you feel like, okay, nothing can stop them, but there's always disruption in this industry, what are your thoughts on that. >> Not very good with, I think there'll be disrupted. So to me actually to your point, ServiceNow is now close to a 100 billion now, 95 billion market coverage, crazy. So from evaluation perspective, so I think the reason they'll be disrupted is that the SAS vendors that you talked about, ServiceNow, and all this plan, most of these services, they're truly not a multi-tenant or what do you call the Cloud Native. And that is the Accenture. So because of that, they will not be able to pass the savings back to the enterprises. So the cost economics, the economics that the Cloud provides because of the multi tenancy ability will not. The second reason there'll be disrupted is AI. So far, we talked about Cloud, but AI is the core. So it's not really Cloud Native, Dave, I look at the AI in a two-piece. AI is going to change, see all the SAS vendors were created 20 years back, if you remember, was an operator typing it, I don't respond administered we'll type a Splunk query. I don't need a human to type a query anymore, system will actually find it, that's what the whole security game has changed, right? So what's going to happen is if you believe in that, that AI, your score will disrupt all the SAS vendors, so one angle SAS is going to have is a Cloud. That's where you make the Cloud will take up because a SAS application will be Cloudified. Being SAS is not Cloud, right? Second thing is SAS will be also, I call it, will be AI-fied. So AI and machine learning will be trying to drive at the core so that I don't need that many licenses. I don't need that many humans. I don't need that many administrators to manage, I call them the tuners. Once you get a driverless car, you don't need a thousand tuners to tune your Tesla, or Google Waymo car. So the same philosophy will happen is your Dev Apps, your administrators, your service management, people that you need for service now, and these products, Zendesk with AI, will tremendously will disrupt. >> So you're saying, okay, so yeah, I was going to ask you, won't the SAS vendors, won't they be able to just put, inject AI into their platforms, and I guess I'm inferring saying, yeah, but a lot of the problems that they're solving, are going to go away because of AI, is that right? And automation and RPA and things of that nature, is that right? >> Yes and no. So I'll tell you what, sorry, you have asked a very good question, let's answer, let me rephrase that question. What you're saying is, "Why can't the existing SAS vendors do the AI?" >> Yes, right. >> Right, >> And there's a reason they can't do it is their pricing model is by number of seats. So I'm not going to come to Dave, and say, come on, come pay me less money. It's the same reason why a board and general lover build an electric car. They're selling 10 million gasoline cars. There's no incentive for me, I'm not going to do any AI, I'm going to put, I'm not going to come to you and say, hey, buy me a hundred less license next year from it. So that is one reason why AI, even though these guys do any AI, it's going to be just so I call it, they're going to, what do you call it, a whitewash, kind of like you put some paint brush on it, trying to show you some AI you did from a marketing dynamics. But at the core, if you really implement the AI with you take the driver out, how are you going to change the pricing model? And being a public company, you got to take a hit on the pricing model and the price, and it's going to have a stocking part. So that, to your earlier question, will somebody disrupt them? The person who is going to disrupt them, will disrupt them on the pricing model. >> Right. So I want to ask you about that, because we saw a Snowflake, and it's IPO, we were able to pour through its S-1, and they have a different pricing model. It's a true Cloud consumption model, Whereas of course, most SAS companies, they're going to lock you in for at least one year term, maybe more, and then, you buy the license, you got to pay X. If you, don't use it, you still got to pay for it. Snowflake's different, actually they have a different problem, that people are using it too much and the sea is driving the CFO crazy because the bill is going up and up and up, but to me, that's the right model, It's just like the Amazon model, if you can justify it, so how do you see the pricing, that consumption model is actually, you're seeing some of the On-prem guys at HPE, Dell, they're doing as a service. They're kind of taking a page out of the last decade SAS model, so I think pricing is a real tricky one, isn't it? >> No, you nailed it, you nailed it. So I think the way in which the Snowflake there, how the disruptors are data warehouse, that disrupted the open source vendors too. Snowflake distributed, imagine the playbook, you disrupted something as the $ 0, right? It's an open source with Cloudera, Hortonworks, Mapper, that whole big data that you want me to, or that market is this, that disrupting data warehouses like Netezza, Teradata, and the charging more money, they're making more money and disrupting at $0, because the pricing models by consumption that you talked about. CMT is going to happen in the service now, Zen Desk, well, 'cause their pricing one is by number of seats. People are going to say, "How are my users are going to ask?" right? If you're an employee help desk, you're back to your original health collaborative. I may be on Slack, I could be on zoom, I'll maybe on MS Teams, I'm going to ask by using usage model on Slack, tools by employees to service now is the pricing model that people want to pay for. The more my employees use it, the more value I get. But I don't want to pay by number of seats, so the vendor, who's going to figure that out, and that's where I look, if you know me, I'm right over as I started, that's what I've tried to push that model look, I love that because that's the core of how you want to change the new game. >> I agree. I say, kill me with that problem, I mean, some people are trying to make it a criticism, but you hit on the point. If you pay more, it's only because you're getting more value out of it. So I wanted to flip the switch here a little bit and take a customer angle. Something that you've been on all sides. And I want to talk a little bit about strategies, you've been a strategist, I guess, once a strategist, always a strategist. How should organizations be thinking about their approach to Cloud, it's cost different for different industries, but, back when the cube started, financial services Cloud was a four-letter word. But of course the age of company is going to matter, but what's the framework for figuring out your Cloud strategy to get to your 70% and really take advantage of the economics? Should I be Mono Cloud, Multi-Cloud, Multi-vendor, what would you advise? >> Yeah, no, I mean, I mean, I actually call it the tech stack. Actually you and John taught me that what was the tech stack, like the lamp stack, I think there is a new Cloud stack needs to come, and that I think the bottomline there should be... First of all, anything with storage should be in the Cloud. I mean, if you want to start, whether you are, financial, doesn't matter, there's no way. I come from cybersecurity side, I've seen it. Your attackers will be more with insiders than being on the Cloud, so storage has to be in the Cloud then come compute, Kubernetes. If you really want to use containers and Kubernetes, it has to be in the public Cloud, leverage that have the computer on their databases. That's where it can be like if your data is so strong, maybe run it On-prem, maybe have it on a hosted model for when it comes to database, but there you have a choice between hybrid Cloud and public Cloud choice. Then on top when it comes to App, the app itself, you can run locally or anywhere, the App and database. Now the areas that you really want to go after to migrate is look at anything that's an enterprise workload that you don't need people to manage it. You want your own team to move up in the career. You don't want thousand people looking at... you don't want to have a, for example, IT administrators to call central people to the people to manage your compute storage. That workload should be more, right? You already saw Sierra moved out to Salesforce. We saw collaboration already moved out. Zoom is not running locally. You already saw SharePoint with knowledge management mode up, right? With a box, drawbacks, you name anything. The next global mode is a SAS workloads, right? I think Workday service running there, but work data will go into the Cloud. I bet at some point Zendesk, ServiceNow, then either they put it on the public Cloud, or they have to create a product and public Cloud. To your point, these public Cloud vendors are at $2 trillion market cap. They're they're bigger than the... I call them nation States. >> Yeah, >> So I'm servicing though. I mean, there's a 2 trillion market gap between Amazon and Azure, I'm not going to compete with them. So I want to take this workload to run it there. So all these vendors, if you see that's where Shandra from Adobe is pushing this right, Adobe, Workday, Anaplan, all the SAS vendors we'll move them into the public Cloud within these vendors. So those workloads need to move out, right? So that all those things will start, then you'll start migrating, but I call your procurement. That's where the RPA comes in. The other thing that we didn't talk about, back to your first question, what is the next 10 years of Cloud will be RPA? That third piece to Cloud is RPA because if you have your systems On-prem, I can't automate them. I have to do a VPN into your house there and then try to automate your systems, or your procurement, et cetera. So all these RPA vendors are still running On-prem, most of them, whether it's UI path automation anywhere. So the Cloud should be where the brain should be. That's what I call them like the octopus analogy, the brain is in the Cloud, the tentacles are everywhere, they should manage it. But if my tentacles have to do a VPN with your house to manage it, I'm always will have failures. So if you look at the why RPA did not have the growth, like the Snowflake, like the Cloud, because they are running it On-prem, most of them still. 80% of the RP revenue is On-prem, running On-prem, that needs to be called clarified. So AI, RPA and the SAS, are the three reasons Cloud will take off. >> Awesome. Thank you for that. Now I want to flip the switch again. You're an investor or a multi-tool player here, but so if you're, let's say you're an ecosystem player, and you're kind of looking at the landscape as you're in an investor, of course you've invested in the Cloud, because the Cloud is where it's at, but you got to be careful as an ecosystem player to pick a spot that both provides growth, but allows you to have a moat as, I mean, that's why I'm really curious to see how Snowflake's going to compete because they're competing with AWS, Microsoft, and Google, unlike, Frank, when he was at service now, he was competing with BMC and with on-prem and he crushed it, but the competitors are much more capable here, but it seems like they've got, maybe they've got a moat with MultiCloud, and that whole data sharing thing, we'll see. But, what about that? Where are the opportunities? Where's that white space? And I know there's a lot of white space, but what's the framework to look at, from an investor standpoint, or even a CEO standpoint, where you want to put place your bets. >> No, very good question, so look, I did something. We talk as an investor in the board with many companies, right? So one thing that says as an investor, if you come back and say, I want to create a next generation Docker or a computer, there's no way nobody's going to invest. So that we can motor off, even if you want to do object storage or a block storage, I mean, I've been an investor board member of so many storage companies, there's no way as an industry, I'll write a check for a compute or storage, right? If you want to create a next generation network, like either NetSuite, or restart Juniper, Cisco, there is no way. But if you come back and say, I want to create a next generation Viper for remote working environments, where AI is at the core, I'm interested in that, right? So if you look at how the packets are dropped, there's no intelligence in either not switching today. The packets come, I do it. The intelligence is not built into the network with AI level. So if somebody comes with an AI, what good is all this NVD, our GPS, et cetera, if you cannot do wire speed, packet inspection, looking at the content and then route the traffic. If I see if it's a video package, but in UN Boston, there's high interview day of they should be loading our package faster, because you are a premium ISP. That intelligence has not gone there. So you will see, and that will be a bad people will happen in the network, switching, et cetera, right? So that is still an angle. But if you work and it comes to platform services, remember when I was at Pivotal and VMware, all models was my boss, that would, yes, as a platform, service is a game already won by the Cloud guys. >> Right. (indistinct) >> Silicon Valley Investors, I don't think you want to invest in past services, right? I mean, you might come with some lecture edition database to do some updates, there could be some game, let's say we want to do a time series database, or some metrics database, there's always some small angle, but the opportunity to go create a national database there it's very few. So I'm kind of eliminating all the black spaces, right? >> Yeah. >> We have the white spaces that comes in is the SAS level. Now to your point, if I'm Amazon, I'm going to compete with Snowflake, I have Redshift. So this is where at some point, these Cloud platforms, I call them aircraft carriers. They're not going to stay on the aircraft carriers, they're going to own the land as well. So they're going to move up to the SAS space. The question is you want to create a SAS service like CRM. They are not going to create a CRM like service, they may not create a sales force and service now, but if you're going to add a data warehouse, I can very well see Azure, Google, and AWS, going to create something to compute a Snowflake. Why would I not? It's so close to my database and data warehouse, I already have Redshift. So that's going to be nightlights, same reason, If you look at Netflix, you have a Netflix and you have Amazon prime. Netflix runs on Amazon, but you have Amazon prime. So you have the same model, you have Snowflake, and you'll have Redshift. The both will help each other, there'll be a... What do you call it? Coexistence will happen. But if you really want to invest, you want to invest in SAS companies. You do not want to be investing in a compliment players. You don't want to a feature. >> Yeah, that's great, I appreciate that perspective. And I wonder, so obviously Microsoft play in SAS, Google's got G suite. And I wonder if people often ask the Andy Jassy, you're going to move up the stack, you got to be an application, a SAS vendor, and you never say never with Atavist, But I wonder, and we were talking to Jerry Chen about this, years ago on theCube, and his angle was that Amazon will play, but they'll play through developers. They'll enable developers, and they'll participate, they'll take their, lick off the cone. So it's going to be interesting to see how directly Amazon plays, but at some point you got Tam expansion, you got to play in that space. >> Yeah, I'll give you an example of knowing, I got acquired by a couple of times by EMC. So I learned a lot from Joe Tucci and Paul Merage over the years. see Paul and Joe, what they did is to look at how 20 years, and they are very close to Boston in your area, Joe, what games did is they used to sell storage, but you know what he did, he went and bought the Apps to drive them. He bought like Legato, he bought Documentum, he bought Captiva, if you remember how he acquired all these companies as a services, he bought VMware to drive that. So I think the good angle that Microsoft has is, I'm a SAS player, I have dynamics, I have CRM, I have SharePoint, I have Collaboration, I have Office 365, MS Teams for users, and then I have the platform as Azure. So I think if I'm Amazon, (indistinct). I got to own the apps so that I can drive this workforce on my platform. >> Interesting. >> Just going to developers, like I know Jerry Chan, he was my peer a BMF. I don't think just literally to developers and that model works in open source, but the open source game is pretty much gone, and not too many companies made money. >> Well, >> Most companies pretty much gone. >> Yeah, he's right. Red hats not bad idea. But it's very interesting what you're saying there. And so, hey, its why Oracle wants to have Tiktok, running on their platform, right? I mean, it's going to. (laughing) It's going to drive that further integration. I wanted to ask you something, you were talking about, you wouldn't invest in storage or compute, but I wonder, and you mentioned some commentary about GPU's. Of course the videos has been going crazy, but they're now saying, okay, how do we expand our Team, they make the acquisition of arm, et cetera. What about this DPU thing, if you follow that, that data processing unit where they're like hyper dis-aggregation and then they reaggregate, and as an offload and really to drive data centric workloads. Have you looked at that at all? >> I did, I think, and that's a good angle. So I think, look, it's like, it goes through it. I don't know if you remember in your career, we have seen it. I used to get Silicon graphics. I saw the first graphic GPU, right? That time GPU was more graphic processor unit, >> Right, yeah, work stations. >> So then become NPUs at work processing units, right? There was a TCP/IP office offloading, if you remember right, there was like vector processing unit. So I think every once in a while the industry, recreated this separate unit, as a co-processor to the main CPU, because main CPU's inefficient, and it makes sense. And then Google created TPU's and then we have the new world of the media GPU's, now we have DPS all these are good, but what's happening is, all these are driving for machine learning, AI for the training period there. Training period Sometimes it's so long with the workloads, if you can cut down, it makes sense. >> Yeah. >> Because, but the question is, these aren't so specialized in nature. I can't use it for everything. >> Yup. >> I want Ideally, algorithms to be paralyzed, I want the training to be paralyzed, I want so having deep use and GPS are important, I think where I want to see them as more, the algorithm, there should be more investment from the NVIDIA's and these guys, taking the algorithm to be highly paralyzed them. (indistinct) And I think that still has not happened in industry yet. >> All right, so we're pretty much out of time, but what are you doing these days? Where are you spending your time, are you still in Stealth, give us a little glimpse. >> Yeah, no, I'm out of the Stealth, I'm actually the CEO of Aisera now, Aisera, obviously I invested with them, but I'm the CEO of Aisero. It's funded by Menlo ventures, Norwest, True, along with Khosla ventures and Ram Shriram is a big investor. Robin's on the board of Google, so these guys, look, we are going out to the collaboration game. How do you automate customer service and support for employees and then users, right? In this whole game, we talked about the Zoom, Slack and MS Teams, that's what I'm spending time, I want to create next generation service now. >> Fantastic. Muddu, I always love having you on you, pull punches, you tell it like it is, that you're a great visionary technologist. Thanks so much for coming on theCube, and participating in our program. >> Dave, it's always a pleasure speaking to you sir. Thank you. >> Okay. Keep it right there, there's more coming from Cuba and Cloud right after this break. (slow music)

(upbeat techno music) >> From Sand Hill Road, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE. Presenting the People First Network, insights from entrepreneurs and tech leaders. >> Hello, everyone, I'm John Furrier the co-host on theCUBE, founder of SiliconANGLE Media. We are here at Sand Hill Road, at Mayfield for the 50th anniversary celebration and content series called The People First Network. This is a co-developed program. We're going to bring thought leaders, inspirational entrepreneurs and tech executives to talk about their experience and their journey around a people first society. This is the focus of entrepreneurship these days. I'm here with Navin Chaddha who's the managing director of Mayfield. Navin, you're kicking off the program. Tell us, why the program? Why People First Network? Is this a cultural thing? Is this part of a program? What's the rationale? What's the message? >> Yeah, first of all I want to thank, John, you and your team and theCUBE for co-hosting the People First Network with us. It's been a real delight working with you. Shifting to people first, Mayfield has had a long standing philosophy that people build companies and it's not the other way around. We believe in betting on great people because even if their initial idea doesn't pan out, they'll quickly pivot to find the right market opportunity. Similarly we believe when the times get tough it's our responsibility to stand behind people and the purpose of this People First Network is people like me were extremely lucky to have mentors along the way, when I was an entrepreneur and now as a venture capitalist, who are helping me achieve my dreams. Mayfield and me want to give back to other entrepreneurs, by bringing in people who are luminaries in their own fields to share their learnings with other entrepreneurs. >> This is a really great opportunity and I want to thank you guys for helping us put this together with you guys. It's a great co-creation. The observation that we're seeing in Silicon Valley and certainly in talking to some of the guests we've already interviewed and that will be coming up on the program, is the spirit of community and the culture of innovation is around the ecosystem of Silicon Valley. This has been the bedrock. >> Mm-hmm. >> Of Silicon Valley, Mayfield, one of the earliest if not the first handful of venture firms. >> Mm-hmm. >> Hanging around Stanford, doing entrepreneurship, this is a people culture in Silicon Valley and this is now going global. >> Mm-hmm. >> So great opportunity. What can we expect to see from some of the interviews? What are you looking for and what's the hope? >> Yeah, so I think what you're going to see from the interviews is, we are trying to bring around 20 plus people, and they'll be many John on the interview besides you. So there will be John Chambers, ex-chairman and CEO of Cisco. There'll be John Zimmer, president and co founder of Lyft. And there also will be John Hennessy who will be our first interview, with him, from Stanford University. And jokes apart, there'll be like 20 plus other people who will be part of this network. So I think what you're going to see is, goings always don't go great. There's a lot of learnings that happen when things don't work out. And our hope is, when these luminaries from their professions, share their learnings the entrepreneurs will benefit from it. As we all know, being an entrepreneur is hard. But sometimes, and many times, actually it's also a lonely road and our belief is, and I strongly personally also believe in it, that great entrepreneurs believe in continuous learning and are continuously adapting themselves to succeed. So our hope is, this People First Network serves as a learning opportunity from entrepreneurs to learn from great leaders. >> You said a few things I really admire about Mayfield and I want to get your reaction because I think is a fundamental for society. Building durable companies is about the long game because people fail and people succeed but they always move on. >> Mm-hmm. >> They move on to another opportunity. They move on to another pursuit. >> Mm-hmm. >> And this pay it forward culture has been a key thing for Silicon Valley. >> It absolutely has been. >> What's the inspiration behind it, from your perspective? You mentioned your experiences. Tell us a story and experience you've had? >> Yeah, so I would say, first of all, right, since we strongly believe people make products and products don't make people, we believe venture capital and entrepreneurship is about like running a marathon, it's not a sprint. So if you take a longterm view, have a strong vision and mission which is supported with great beliefs and values? You can do wonders. And our whole aim, not only as Mayfield but other venture capitalists, is to build iconic companies which are built to last which beyond creating jobs and economic wealth, can give back to the society and make the world a better place to work, live and play. >> You know one of the things that we are passionate about at theCUBE, and on SiliconANGLE Media is standing by our community. >> Mm-hmm. >> Because people do move around and I think one of the things that is key in venture capital now, than ever before is not looking for the quick hit. >> Mm-hmm. >> It's standing by your companies in good times and in bad. >> Mm-hmm. >> Because this is about people and you don't know how things might turn out, how a company might end up in a different place. We've heard some of your entrepreneurs talk about that, that the outcome was not how they envisioned it when they started. >> Mm-hmm. >> This is a key mindset for a business. >> It absolutely is, right? Let's look at a few examples. One of our most successful companies is Lyft. When we backed it at Series A, it was called Zimride. They weren't doing what they were doing, but the company had a strong vision and mission of changing the way people transport and given that, they were A plus people, as I mentioned earlier. The initial idea wasn't going to be a massive opportunity. They quickly pivoted to go after the right market opportunity. And hence, again and again, right? Like to me, it's all about the people. >> Navigating those boards is sometimes challenging and we hope that this content will help people, inspire people, help them discover their passion, discover people that they might want to work with. We really appreciate your support and thank you for contributing your network and your brand and your team in supporting our mission. >> Yeah, it's been an absolute pleasure and we hope the viewers and especially entrepreneurs can learn from the journeys of many iconic people who have built great things in their careers. >> Were here at Sand Hill Road, at Mayfield's venture capital headquarters in sunny Silicon Valley, California, Stanford, California, Palo Alto California, all one big melting pot of innovation. I'm here with John Hennessy, who's the Stanford President Emeritus, also the director of the Knight Hennessy Scholarship. Thanks for joining me today for this conversation. >> Delighted to be here, John. >> So I wanted to get your thoughts on the history of the valley. Obviously, Mayfield, celebrating their 50th anniversary and Mayfield was one of those early venture capital firms that kind of hung around the barbershop, looking for a haircut. Stanford University was that place. Early on this was the innovation spark that created the valley. A lot of other early VCs as well, but not that many in the early days and now 50 years later, so much has changed. What's your thoughts on the arc of entrepreneurship around Stanford, around Silicon Valley? >> Well, you're right, it's been an explosive force. I mean, I think there were a few companies out here on Sand Hill Road at that time. Now nearly the number of venture firms there are today. But I think the biggest change has been the kinds of technologies we build. You know, in those days, we built technologies that were primarily for other engineers or perhaps they were tandem computers being built for business interest. Now we build technologies that change people's lives, every single day and the impact on the world is so much larger than it was and these companies have grown incredibly fast. I mean, you look at the growth rate? We had the stars of the earlier compared to the Googles and Facebooks of today, it's small growth rates, so those are big changes. >> I'm excited to talk with you, because you're one of the only people that I can think of that has seen so many different waves of innovation. You've been involved in many of them yourself, one of the co-founders of MIPS, chairman of the board of Alphabet, which is Google, Google's holding company, the large holdings they have and just Stanford in general has been, you know, now with CAL, kind of the catalyst for a lot of the change. What's interesting is, you know, the Hewlett-Packards, the birthplace of Silicon Valley, that durable company view. >> Mm-hmm. >> Of how to build a company and the people that are involved is really a, still, essential part of it. Certainly happening faster, differently. When you look at the waves of innovation, is there anything that you could look at and say, hey, this is the consistent pattern that we see emerging of these waves? Is it a classic formula of engineers getting together trying to solve problems? Is it the Stanford drop out PH.d program? Is there a playbook? Is there a pattern that you see in the entrepreneurship over the years? >> You know, I think there are these waves that are often induced by big technology changes, right? The beginning of the personal computer. The beginning of the internet. The world wide web, social media. The other observation is that it's very hard to predict what the next one will be. (laughing) If it was easier to predict, there would be one big company, rather than lots of companies riding each one of these waves. The other thing I think that's fascinating about them is these waves don't create just one company. They create a whole new microcosm of companies around that technology which exploit it and bring it to the people and change people's lives with it. >> And another thing is interesting about that point is that even the failures have DNA. You see people, big venture backed company, I think Go is a great example, you think about those kinds of companies. The early work on mobile computing, the early work on processors that you were involved in MIPS. >> Mm-hmm. >> They become successful and/or may/may not have the outcomes but the people move on to other companies to either start companies. This is a nice flywheel, this is one of the things that Silicon Valley has enjoyed over the years. >> Yeah, and just look at the history of RISC technology that I was involved in. We initially thought it would take over the general purpose computing industry and I think Intel responded in an incredible way and eventually reduced the advantage. Now here we are 30 years later and 95%/98% of the processors in the world are RISC because of the rise of mobile, internet of things, dramatically changing where the processors were. >> Yeah. >> They're not on the desktop anymore, they're scattered around in very different ways. >> It's interesting, I was having a conversation with Andy Kessler, who used to be an analyst back at the time for Morgan Stanley. He then became an investor. And he was talking about, with me, the DRAM days when the Japanese were dumping DRAMs and then that was low margin business, and then Intel said, "Hey, no problem. "We'll let go of the DRAM business." but they created Pentium and then the micro processor. >> Right. >> That spawned a whole nother wave, so you see the global economy today, you see China, you see people manufacturing things at very low cost, Apple does work out there. What's your view and reaction to the global landscape? Because certainly things are changed a bit but it seems to be some of the same? What's your thoughts on the global landscape and the impact of entrepreneurs? >> It certainly is global. I mean, I think in two ways. First of all, supply chains have become completely global. Look at how many companies in the valley rely on TSMC as their primary source of silicon? It's a giant engine for the valley. But we also see, increasingly, even in young companies a kind of global, distributed engineering scheme where they'll have a group in Taiwan, or in China or in India that'll be doing part of the engineering work and they're basically outsourcing some of that and balancing their costs and bringing in other talent that might be very hard to hire right now in the valley or very expensive in the valley. And I think that's exciting to see. >> The future of Silicon Valley is interesting because you have a lot of the fast pace, it seems like ventures have shrink down in terms of the acceleration of the classic building blocks of how to get a company started. You get some funding, engineers build a product, they get a prototype, they get it out. Now it seems to be condensed. You'll see valuations of a billion dollars. Can Silicon Valley survive the current pace given the real estate prices and some of the transportation challenges? What's your view on the future of Silicon Valley? >> Well my view is there is no place like the valley. The interaction between great universities, Stanford and Cal, UCSF if you're interested in biomedical innovation and the companies makes it just a microcosm of innovation and excellence. It's challenges, if it doesn't solve it's problems on housing and transportation, it will eventually cause a second Silicon Valley to rise and challenge it and I think that's really up to us to solve and I think we're going to have to, the great leaders, the great companies in the valley are going to have to take a leadership role working with the local governments to solve that problem. >> On the Silicon Valley vision of replicating it, I've seen many people try, other regions try over the years and over the 20 years, my observation is, they kind of get it right on paper but kind of fail in the execution. It's complicated but it's nuanced in a lot of ways but now we're seeing with remote working and the future of work changing a little bit differently and all kinds of new tech from block chain to, you name it, remote working. >> Right. >> That it might be a perfect storm now to actually have a formula to replicate Silicon Valley. If you were advising folks to say, hey, if you want to replicate Silicon Valley, what would be your advice to people? >> Well you got to start with the weather. (laughing) Always a challenge to replicate that. But then the other pieces, right? Some great universities, an ecosystem that supports risk taking and smart failure. One of the great things about the valley is, you're a young engineer/computer scientist graduating, you come here. You go to a start up company, so what it fails? There's 10 other companies you can get a job with. So there's a sense of this is a really exciting place to be, that kind of innovation. Creating that, replicating that ecosystem, I think and getting all the pieces together is going to be the challenge and I think the area that does that will have a chance at building something that could eventually be a real contestant for the second Silicon Valley. >> And I think the ecosystem and community is the key word. >> And community, absolutely. >> So I'll get your thoughts on your journey. Take us through your journey. MIPS co-founder, life at Stanford, now with the Knights Scholarship Program that you're involved in, the Knight Hennessy Scholarship. What lessons have you learned from each kind of big sequence of your life? Obviously in the start up days. Take us through some of the learnings. >> Yeah. >> Whether it's the scar tissue or the success, you know? >> Well, no, the time I spent starting MIPS and I took a leave for about 18 months full-time from the university, but I stayed involved after that on a part time basis but that 18 months was an intensive learning experience because I was an engineer. I knew a lot about the technology we're building, I didn't know anything about starting a company. And I had to go through all kinds of things, you know? Determining who to hire for CEO. Whether or not the CEO would be able to scale with the company. We had to do a layoff when we almost ran out of cash and that was a grueling experience but I learned how to get through that and that was a lesson when I came back to return to the university, to really use those lessons from the valley, they were invaluable. I also became a much better teacher, because here I had actually built something in industry and after all, most of our students are going to build things, they're not going to become future academics. So I went back and reengaged with the university and started taking on a variety of leadership roles there. Which was a wonderful experience. I never thought I'd be university president, not in a million years would I have told you that was, and it wasn't my goal. It was sort of the proverbial frog in the pot of water and the temperature keeps going up and then you're cooking before you know it. >> Well one of the things you did I thought was interesting during your time in the 90's as the head of the computer science department is a lot of that Stanford innovation started to come out with the internet and you had Yahoo, you had Google, you had PH.ds and you guys were okay with people dropping out, coming back in. >> Yeah. >> So you had this culture of building? >> Yup. >> Tell us some of the stories there, I mean Yahoo was a server under the desk and the web exploded. >> Yeah, it was a server under the desk. In fact, Dave and Jerry's office was in a trailer and you go into their room and they'd have pizza boxes and Coke cans stacked around because Yahoo use was exploding and they were trying to build this portal out to serve this growing community of users. Their machine was called Akebono because they were both big sumo wrestling fans. Then eventually, the university had to say, "You guys need to move this off campus "because it's generating 3/4 of the internet traffic "at the university and we can't afford it." (laughing) So they moved off campus and of course figured out how to use advertising as a monetization model. And that changed a lot of things on the internet because that made it possible for Google to come along years later. Redo search in a way that lots of us thought, there's nothing left to do in search, there's just not a lot there. But Larry and Sergey came up with a much better search algorithm. >> Talk about the culture that you guys fostered there because this, I think, is notable, in my mind, as well as some of the things I want to get into about the interdisciplinary. But at that time, you guys fostered a culture of creating and taking things out and there was an investment group of folks around Stanford. Was it a policy? Was it more laid back? >> No, I think-- >> Take us through some of the cultural issues. >> It was a notion of what really matters in the world. How do you get impact? Because in the end that's what the university really wants to do. Some people will do impact by publishing a paper or a book but some technologies, the real impact will occur when you take it out into the real world. And that was a vision that a lot of us had, dating back to Hewlett-Packard, of course but Jim Clark at Silicon Graphics, the Cisco work, MIPS and then, of course, Yahoo and Google years later. That was something that was supported by both the leadership of the university and that made it much easier for people to go out and take their work and take it out to the world. >> Well thank you for doing that, because I think the impact has been amazing and had transcended a lot of society today. You're seeing some challenges now with society. Now we have our own problems. (laughing) The impact has been massive but now lives are being changed. You're seeing technology better lives so it's changing the educational system. It's also changing how people are doing work. Talk about your current role right now with the Knight Hennessy Scholarship. What is that structured like and how are you shaping that? What's the vision? >> Well our vision, I became concerned as I was getting ready to leave the president's office that we, as a human society, were failing to develop the kinds of leaders that we needed. It seemed to me it was true in government. It was true in the corporate world. It was even true in some parts of the nonprofit world. And we needed to step back and say, how do we generate a new community of young leaders who are going to go out, determined to do the right thing, who see their role as service to society? And their success aligned with the success of others? We put together a small program. We put together a vision of this. I got support from the trustees. I went to ask my good friend Phil Knight, talked to him about it, and I said, "Phil I have this great idea," and I explained it to him and he said, "That's terrific." So I said, "Phil I need 400 million dollars." (laughing) A month later he said, "Yes," and we were off and running. Now we've got 50 truly extraordinary scholars from around the world, 21 different birth countries. Really, some of them have already started nonprofits that are making a big difference in their home communities. Others will do it in the future. >> What are some of the things they're working on? And how did you guys roll this out? Because, obviously, getting the funding's key but now you got to execute. What are some of the things that you went through? How did you recruit? How did you deploy? How did you get it up and running? >> We recruited by going out to universities around the world, and meeting with them and, of course, using social media as well. If you want get 21 year and 22 year olds to apply? Go to social media. So that gave us a feed on some students and then we thought a lot, our goal is to educate people who will be leaders in all walks of life. So we have MBAs, we have MDs, we have PH.ds, we have JDs. >> Yeah. >> A broad cohort of people, build a community. Build a community that will last far beyond their time at Stanford so they have a connection to a community of like minded individuals long after they graduate and then try to build their leadership skills. Bringing in people who they can meet with and hear from. George Schultz is coming in on Thursday night to talk about his journey through government service in four different cabinet positions and how did he address some of the challenges that he encountered. Build up their speaking skills and their ability to collaborate with others. And hopefully, these are great people. >> Yeah. >> We just hope to push their trajectory a little higher. >> One of the things I want you is that when Steve Jobs gave his commencement speech at Stanford, which is up on YouTube, it's got zillions and zillions of views, before he passed away, that has become kind of a famous call to arms for a lot of young people. A lot of parents, I have four kids and the question always comes up, how do I get into Stanford? But the question I want to ask you is more of, as you have the program, and you look for these future leaders, what advice would you give? Because we're seeing a lot of people saying, hey you know people build their resume, they say what they think people want to hear to get into a school, you know Steve Job's point said, "Follow your passion, don't live other people's dogma" these are some of the themes that he shared during that famous commencement speech in Stanford. Your advice for the next generation of leaders? How should they develop their skills? What are some of the things that they can acquire? Steve Jobs was famous to say in interviews, "What have you built?" >> Yeah. >> "Tell me something that you've built." It's kind of a qualifying question. So this brings up the question of, how should young people develop? How should they think about, not just applying and getting in but being a candidate for some of these programs? >> Well I think the first thing is you really want to challenge yourself. You really want to engage your intellectual passions. Find something you really like to do. Find something that you're also good at because that's the thing that'll get you out of bed on weekends early, and you'll go do it. I mean, if you asked me about my career? And asked me about my number one hobby for most of my career? It was my career. I loved being a professor. I loved research, I love teaching. That made it very easy to do it with energy and excitement and passion. You know there's a great quote in Steve Job's commencement speech where he says, "I look in the mirror every morning "and if too many days in a row I find out "I don't like what I'm going to do that day, "it's time for a change." Well I think it's that commitment to something. It's that belief in something that's bigger than yourself, that's about a journey that you're going to go on with others in that leadership role. >> I want to get your thoughts on the future for young people and society and business. It's very people centric now. You're seeing a lot of the younger generation look for mission driven ventures, they want to make a difference. But there's a lot of skills out there that are not yet born, yet. There's jobs that haven't been invented yet. Who handles autonomous vehicles? What's the policy? These are societal and technology questions. What are some of things that you see that are important to focus on for some of these new skills? There's a zillion new cyber security jobs open, for instance. >> Right. I mean there's thousands and thousands of openings for people that don't have those skills. >> Well I think we're going to need two different types of people. The traditional techno experts that we've always had but we're also going to need people that have a deep understanding of technology but are deeply committed to understanding it's impact on people. One of the problems we're going to have with the rise of artificial intelligence is we're going to have job displacements. In the longterm, I'm a believer that the number of opportunities created will exceed those that get destroyed but there'll be a lot of jobs that are deskilled or actually eliminated. How are we going to help educate that cohort of people and minimize the disruption of this technology? Because that disruption is really people's live that you're playing with. >> It's interesting, the old expression of ATMs will kill the bank branch but yet, now there's more bank branches than ever before. >> Than ever before, right? >> So, I think you're right on that, I think there'll be new opportunities. Entrepreneurship certainly is changing and I want to get your thoughts. This is the number one question I get from young entrepreneurs is, how should I raise money? How should I leverage money investors and my board? As you build your early foundational successes whether you're an engineer or a team, putting that E team together, entrepreneurial team is critical and that's just not people around the table of the venture. >> Correct. >> It's the support service providers and advisors and board of directors. How should they leverage their investors and board? How should they leverage that resource and not make it contentious, make it positive? >> Make is positive, right? So the best boards are collaborative with the management team, they work together to try to move the company forward. With so many angels now investing in these young companies there's an opportunity to bring in experience from somebody who's already had a successful entrepreneurial venture and looking for really deciding who do you want your investor to be? And it's not just about who gives you the highest valuation. It's also about who'll be there when things get tough? When the cash squeeze occurs and you're about to run out of money and you're really in a difficult situation? Who will help you build out the rest of your management team? Lots of young entrepreneurs, they're excited about their technology. >> Yeah. >> They don't have any management experience. (laughing) They need help. >> Yeah. >> They need help building that team and finding the right people for the company to be successful. >> I want to get thoughts on Mayfield. The 50th anniversary, obviously, they've been around longer than me, I'm going to be 53 this year. I remember when I first pitched Yogan DeGaulle in 1990, my first venture, he passed, but, Mayfield's been around for a while. I mean, Mayfield was the name of the town around here? >> Right. >> And has a lot of history. How do you see the relationship with the ventures and Stanford evolving? Are they still solid? They're doing well? Is it evolved? There's a new program going on? I see much more integration. What's the future of venture? >> Well I think the university's still a source of many ideas, obviously the notion of entrepreneurship has spread much more broadly than the university. And lots of creative start ups are spun out of existing companies or a group of young entrepreneurs that were in Google or Facebook early and now decide they want to go do their own thing. That's certainly happens but I think that ongoing innovation cycle is still alive. It's still dependent on the venture community and their experience having built companies. Particularly when you're talking about first time entrepreneurs. >> Yeah. >> Who really don't have a lot of depth. >> My final question I want to ask you is obviously one relating, pure to my heart, is computer science. I got my degree in the 80's during the systems revolution. Fun time, a lots changed. Women in computer science, the surface area of what computer science is. >> Mm-hmm. >> It was interesting, there was a story in Bloomberg that was debunked but people were debating if the super micros was being hacked by a chip in the system. >> Right. >> And more people don't even know what computer architecture is, I was like, hey now, the drivers might able to inject malware. So you need computer architecture, a book you've written. >> Mm-hmm. >> Academically, to programming so the range of computer science has changed. The diversity has changed. What's your thoughts on the current computer science curriculums? The global programs? Where's it going and what's your perspective on that? >> So I think computer science has changed dramatically. When I was a graduate student, you could arguably take a full set of breadth courses across the discipline. Maybe only one course in AI or one course in data base if you were a hardware or systems person but you could do everything. I could go to basically any Ph.d defense and understand what was going on. No more, the field has just exploded. And the impact? I mean you have people who do bio computation, for example, and you have to understand a lot of biology in order to understand how computer science applies to that. So that's the excitement. The excitement of having computer science have this broad impact. The other thing that's exciting is to see more women, more people of color, coming into the field, really injecting new energy and new perspective into the field and I think that will stand the discipline well in the future. >> And open source has been growing. I mean if you think about what it's like now to write software, all this goodness coming in with open source, it just adds over the top. >> Yeah. >> More goodness. >> I think today a, even a young undergraduate, writing in Python, using all these open libraries, could write more code in two weeks than I could have written in a year when I was graduate student. >> If we were 21 together, sitting here you and I, today, we're 21 years old, what would we do? What would you do? >> Well I think the opportunity created by the rise of machine learning and artificial intelligence is just unrivaled. This is a technology which we have invested in for 50 or 60 years, that was disappointing us for 50 or 60 years, in terms of not meeting it's projections and then, all of a sudden, turning point. It was a radical breakthrough and we're still at the very beginning of that radical breakthrough so I think it's going to be a really exciting time. >> Diane Green had a great quote at her last Google Cloud conference. She said, "It's like butter, everything's great with it." (laughing) AI is the-- >> Yeah, it's great with it. And of course, it can be overstated but I think there really is a fundamental breakthrough in terms of how we use the technology. Driven, of course, by the amount of data available for training these neural networks and far more computational resources than we ever thought we'd have. >> John it's been a great pleasure. Thanks for spending the time with us here for our People First interview, appreciate it. >> My pleasure, John. >> I'm John Furrier with theCUBE, we are here in Sand Hill Road for the People First program, thanks for watching. (upbeat techno music)