(gentle synth music) (music ends) >> Welcome back to Supercloud 2, an open industry collaboration between technologists, consultants, analysts, and of course practitioners to help shape the future of cloud. At this event, one of the key areas we're exploring is the intersection of cloud and data. And how building value on top of hyperscale clouds and across clouds is evolving, a concept of course we call "Supercloud". And we're pleased to welcome our friends from Enterprise Technology research, Erik Bradley and Darren Brabham. Guys, thanks for joining us, great to see you. we love to bring the data into these conversations. >> Thank you for having us, Dave, I appreciate it. >> Yeah, thanks. >> You bet. And so, let me do the setup on what is Supercloud. It's a concept that we've floated, Before re:Invent 2021, based on the idea that cloud infrastructure is becoming ubiquitous, incredibly powerful, but there's a lack of standards across the big three clouds. That creates friction. So we defined over the period of time, you know, better part of a year, a set of essential elements, deployment models for so-called supercloud, which create this common experience for specific cloud services that, of course, again, span multiple clouds and even on-premise data. So Erik, with that as background, I wonder if you could add your general thoughts on the term supercloud, maybe play proxy for the CIO community, 'cause you do these round tables, you talk to these guys all the time, you gather a lot of amazing information from senior IT DMs that compliment your survey. So what are your thoughts on the term and the concept? >> Yeah, sure. I'll even go back to last year when you and I did our predictions panel, right? And we threw it out there. And to your point, you know, there's some haters. Anytime you throw out a new term, "Is it marketing buzz? Is it worth it? Why are you even doing it?" But you know, from my own perspective, and then also speaking to the IT DMs that we interview on a regular basis, this is just a natural evolution. It's something that's inevitable in enterprise tech, right? The internet was not built for what it has become. It was never intended to be the underlying infrastructure of our daily lives and work. The cloud also was not built to be what it's become. But where we're at now is, we have to figure out what the cloud is and what it needs to be to be scalable, resilient, secure, and have the governance wrapped around it. And to me that's what supercloud is. It's a way to define operantly, what the next generation, the continued iteration and evolution of the cloud and what its needs to be. And that's what the supercloud means to me. And what depends, if you want to call it metacloud, supercloud, it doesn't matter. The point is that we're trying to define the next layer, the next future of work, which is inevitable in enterprise tech. Now, from the IT DM perspective, I have two interesting call outs. One is from basically a senior developer IT architecture and DevSecOps who says he uses the term all the time. And the reason he uses the term, is that because multi-cloud has a stigma attached to it, when he is talking to his business executives. (David chuckles) the stigma is because it's complex and it's expensive. So he switched to supercloud to better explain to his business executives and his CFO and his CIO what he's trying to do. And we can get into more later about what it means to him. But the inverse of that, of course, is a good CSO friend of mine for a very large enterprise says the concern with Supercloud is the reduction of complexity. And I'll explain, he believes anything that takes the requirement of specific expertise out of the equation, even a little bit, as a CSO worries him. So as you said, David, always two sides to the coin, but I do believe supercloud is a relevant term, and it is necessary because the cloud is continuing to be defined. >> You know, that's really interesting too, 'cause you know, Darren, we use Snowflake a lot as an example, sort of early supercloud, and you think from a security standpoint, we've always pushed Amazon and, "Are you ever going to kind of abstract the complexity away from all these primitives?" and their position has always been, "Look, if we produce these primitives, and offer these primitives, we we can move as the market moves. When you abstract, then it becomes harder to peel the layers." But Darren, from a data standpoint, like I say, we use Snowflake a lot. I think of like Tim Burners-Lee when Web 2.0 came out, he said, "Well this is what the internet was always supposed to be." So in a way, you know, supercloud is maybe what multi-cloud was supposed to be. But I mean, you think about data sharing, Darren, across clouds, it's always been a challenge. Snowflake always, you know, obviously trying to solve that problem, as are others. But what are your thoughts on the concept? >> Yeah, I think the concept fits, right? It is reflective of, it's a paradigm shift, right? Things, as a pendulum have swung back and forth between needing to piece together a bunch of different tools that have specific unique use cases and they're best in breed in what they do. And then focusing on the duct tape that holds 'em all together and all the engineering complexity and skill, it shifted from that end of the pendulum all the way back to, "Let's streamline this, let's simplify it. Maybe we have budget crunches and we need to consolidate tools or eliminate tools." And so then you kind of see this back and forth over time. And with data and analytics for instance, a lot of organizations were trying to bring the data closer to the business. That's where we saw self-service analytics coming in. And tools like Snowflake, what they did was they helped point to different databases, they helped unify data, and organize it in a single place that was, you know, in a sense neutral, away from a single cloud vendor or a single database, and allowed the business to kind of be more flexible in how it brought stuff together and provided it out to the business units. So Snowflake was an example of one of those times where we pulled back from the granular, multiple points of the spear, back to a simple way to do things. And I think Snowflake has continued to kind of keep that mantle to a degree, and we see other tools trying to do that, but that's all it is. It's a paradigm shift back to this kind of meta abstraction layer that kind of simplifies what is the reality, that you need a complex multi-use case, multi-region way of doing business. And it sort of reflects the reality of that. >> And you know, to me it's a spectrum. As part of Supercloud 2, we're talking to a number of of practitioners, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, US West, we got Walmart. And it's a spectrum, right? In some cases the practitioner's saying, "You know, the way I solve multi-cloud complexity is mono-cloud, I just do one cloud." (laughs) Others like Walmart are saying, "Hey, you know, we actually are building an abstraction layer ourselves, take advantage of it." So my general question to both of you is, is this a concept, is the lack of standards across clouds, you know, really a problem, you know, or is supercloud a solution looking for a problem? Or do you hear from practitioners that "No, this is really an issue, we have to bring together a set of standards to sort of unify our cloud estates." >> Allow me to answer that at a higher level, and then we're going to hand it over to Dr. Brabham because he is a little bit more detailed on the realtime streaming analytics use cases, which I think is where we're going to get to. But to answer that question, it really depends on the size and the complexity of your business. At the very large enterprise, Dave, Yes, a hundred percent. This needs to happen. There is complexity, there is not only complexity in the compute and actually deploying the applications, but the governance and the security around them. But for lower end or, you know, business use cases, and for smaller businesses, it's a little less necessary. You certainly don't need to have all of these. Some of the things that come into mind from the interviews that Darren and I have done are, you know, financial services, if you're doing real-time trading, anything that has real-time data metrics involved in your transactions, is going to be necessary. And another use case that we hear about is in online travel agencies. So I think it is very relevant, the complexity does need to be solved, and I'll allow Darren to explain a little bit more about how that's used from an analytics perspective. >> Yeah, go for it. >> Yeah, exactly. I mean, I think any modern, you know, multinational company that's going to have a footprint in the US and Europe, in China, or works in different areas like manufacturing, where you're probably going to have on-prem instances that will stay on-prem forever, for various performance reasons. You have these complicated governance and security and regulatory issues. So inherently, I think, large multinational companies and or companies that are in certain areas like finance or in, you know, online e-commerce, or things that need real-time data, they inherently are going to have a very complex environment that's going to need to be managed in some kind of cleaner way. You know, they're looking for one door to open, one pane of glass to look at, one thing to do to manage these multi points. And, streaming's a good example of that. I mean, not every organization has a real-time streaming use case, and may not ever, but a lot of organizations do, a lot of industries do. And so there's this need to use, you know, they want to use open-source tools, they want to use Apache Kafka for instance. They want to use different megacloud vendors offerings, like Google Pub/Sub or you know, Amazon Kinesis Firehose. They have all these different pieces they want to use for different use cases at different stages of maturity or proof of concept, you name it. They're going to have to have this complexity. And I think that's why we're seeing this need, to have sort of this supercloud concept, to juggle all this, to wrangle all of it. 'Cause the reality is, it's complex and you have to simplify it somehow. >> Great, thanks you guys. All right, let's bring up the graphic, and take a look. Anybody who follows the breaking analysis, which is co-branded with ETR Cube Insights powered by ETR, knows we like to bring data to the table. ETR does amazing survey work every quarter, 1200 plus 1500 practitioners that that answer a number of questions. The vertical axis here is net score, which is ETR's proprietary methodology, which is a measure of spending momentum, spending velocity. And the horizontal axis here is overlap, but it's the presence pervasiveness, and the dataset, the ends, that table insert on the bottom right shows you how the dots are plotted, the net score and then the ends in the survey. And what we've done is we've plotted a bunch of the so-called supercloud suspects, let's start in the upper right, the cloud platforms. Without these hyperscale clouds, you can't have a supercloud. And as always, Azure and AWS, up and to the right, it's amazing we're talking about, you know, 80 plus billion dollar company in AWS. Azure's business is, if you just look at the IaaS is in the 50 billion range, I mean it's just amazing to me the net scores here. Anything above 40% we consider highly elevated. And you got Azure and you got Snowflake, Databricks, HashiCorp, we'll get to them. And you got AWS, you know, right up there at that size, it's quite amazing. With really big ends as well, you know, 700 plus ends in the survey. So, you know, kind of half the survey actually has these platforms. So my question to you guys is, what are you seeing in terms of cloud adoption within the big three cloud players? I wonder if you could could comment, maybe Erik, you could start. >> Yeah, sure. Now we're talking data, now I'm happy. So yeah, we'll get into some of it. Right now, the January, 2023 TSIS is approaching 1500 survey respondents. One caveat, it's not closed yet, it will close on Friday, but with an end that big we are over statistically significant. We also recently did a cloud survey, and there's a couple of key points on that I want to get into before we get into individual vendors. What we're seeing here, is that annual spend on cloud infrastructure is expected to grow at almost a 70% CAGR over the next three years. The percentage of those workloads for cloud infrastructure are expected to grow over 70% as three years as well. And as you mentioned, Azure and AWS are still dominant. However, we're seeing some share shift spreading around a little bit. Now to get into the individual vendors you mentioned about, yes, Azure is still number one, AWS is number two. What we're seeing, which is incredibly interesting, CloudFlare is number three. It's actually beating GCP. That's the first time we've seen it. What I do want to state, is this is on net score only, which is our measure of spending intentions. When you talk about actual pervasion in the enterprise, it's not even close. But from a spending velocity intention point of view, CloudFlare is now number three above GCP, and even Salesforce is creeping up to be at GCPs level. So what we're seeing here, is a continued domination by Azure and AWS, but some of these other players that maybe might fit into your moniker. And I definitely want to talk about CloudFlare more in a bit, but I'm going to stop there. But what we're seeing is some of these other players that fit into your Supercloud moniker, are starting to creep up, Dave. >> Yeah, I just want to clarify. So as you also know, we track IaaS and PaaS revenue and we try to extract, so AWS reports in its quarterly earnings, you know, they're just IaaS and PaaS, they don't have a SaaS play, a little bit maybe, whereas Microsoft and Google include their applications and so we extract those out and if you do that, AWS is bigger, but in the surveys, you know, customers, they see cloud, SaaS to them as cloud. So that's one of the reasons why you see, you know, Microsoft as larger in pervasion. If you bring up that survey again, Alex, the survey results, you see them further to the right and they have higher spending momentum, which is consistent with what you see in the earnings calls. Now, interesting about CloudFlare because the CEO of CloudFlare actually, and CloudFlare itself uses the term supercloud basically saying, "Hey, we're building a new type of internet." So what are your thoughts? Do you have additional information on CloudFlare, Erik that you want to share? I mean, you've seen them pop up. I mean this is a really interesting company that is pretty forward thinking and vocal about how it's disrupting the industry. >> Sure, we've been tracking 'em for a long time, and even from the disruption of just a traditional CDN where they took down Akamai and what they're doing. But for me, the definition of a true supercloud provider can't just be one instance. You have to have multiple. So it's not just the cloud, it's networking aspect on top of it, it's also security. And to me, CloudFlare is the only one that has all of it. That they actually have the ability to offer all of those things. Whereas you look at some of the other names, they're still piggybacking on the infrastructure or platform as a service of the hyperscalers. CloudFlare does not need to, they actually have the cloud, the networking, and the security all themselves. So to me that lends credibility to their own internal usage of that moniker Supercloud. And also, again, just what we're seeing right here that their net score is now creeping above AGCP really does state it. And then just one real last thing, one of the other things we do in our surveys is we track adoption and replacement reasoning. And when you look at Cloudflare's adoption rate, which is extremely high, it's based on technical capabilities, the breadth of their feature set, it's also based on what we call the ability to avoid stack alignment. So those are again, really supporting reasons that makes CloudFlare a top candidate for your moniker of supercloud. >> And they've also announced an object store (chuckles) and a database. So, you know, that's going to be, it takes a while as you well know, to get database adoption going, but you know, they're ambitious and going for it. All right, let's bring the chart back up, and I want to focus Darren in on the ecosystem now, and really, we've identified Snowflake and Databricks, it's always fun to talk about those guys, and there are a number of other, you know, data platforms out there, but we use those too as really proxies for leaders. We got a bunch of the backup guys, the data protection folks, Rubric, Cohesity, and Veeam. They're sort of in a cluster, although Rubric, you know, ahead of those guys in terms of spending momentum. And then VMware, Tanzu and Red Hat as sort of the cross cloud platform. But I want to focus, Darren, on the data piece of it. We're seeing a lot of activity around data sharing, governed data sharing. Databricks is using Delta Sharing as their sort of place, Snowflakes is sort of this walled garden like the app store. What are your thoughts on, you know, in the context of Supercloud, cross cloud capabilities for the data platforms? >> Yeah, good question. You know, I think Databricks is an interesting player because they sort of have made some interesting moves, with their Data Lakehouse technology. So they're trying to kind of complicate, or not complicate, they're trying to take away the complications of, you know, the downsides of data warehousing and data lakes, and trying to find that middle ground, where you have the benefits of a managed, governed, you know, data warehouse environment, but you have sort of the lower cost, you know, capability of a data lake. And so, you know, Databricks has become really attractive, especially by data scientists, right? We've been tracking them in the AI machine learning sector for quite some time here at ETR, attractive for a data scientist because it looks and acts like a lake, but can have some managed capabilities like a warehouse. So it's kind of the best of both worlds. So in some ways I think you've seen sort of a data science driver for the adoption of Databricks that has now become a little bit more mainstream across the business. Snowflake, maybe the other direction, you know, it's a cloud data warehouse that you know, is starting to expand its capabilities and add on new things like Streamlit is a good example in the analytics space, with apps. So you see these tools starting to branch and creep out a bit, but they offer that sort of neutrality, right? We heard one IT decision maker we recently interviewed that referred to Snowflake and Databricks as the quote unquote Switzerland of what they do. And so there's this desirability from an organization to find these tools that can solve the complex multi-headed use-case of data and analytics, which every business unit needs in different ways. And figure out a way to do that, an elegant way that's governed and centrally managed, that federated kind of best of both worlds that you get by bringing the data close to the business while having a central governed instance. So these tools are incredibly powerful and I think there's only going to be room for growth, for those two especially. I think they're going to expand and do different things and maybe, you know, join forces with others and a lot of the power of what they do well is trying to define these connections and find these partnerships with other vendors, and try to be seen as the nice add-on to your existing environment that plays nicely with everyone. So I think that's where those two tools are going, but they certainly fit this sort of label of, you know, trying to be that supercloud neutral, you know, layer that unites everything. >> Yeah, and if you bring the graphic back up, please, there's obviously big data plays in each of the cloud platforms, you know, Microsoft, big database player, AWS is, you know, 11, 12, 15, data stores. And of course, you know, BigQuery and other, you know, data platforms within Google. But you know, I'm not sure the big cloud guys are going to go hard after so-called supercloud, cross-cloud services. Although, we see Oracle getting in bed with Microsoft and Azure, with a database service that is cross-cloud, certainly Google with Anthos and you know, you never say never with with AWS. I guess what I would say guys, and I'll I'll leave you with this is that, you know, just like all players today are cloud players, I feel like anybody in the business or most companies are going to be so-called supercloud players. In other words, they're going to have a cross-cloud strategy, they're going to try to build connections if they're coming from on-prem like a Dell or an HPE, you know, or Pure or you know, many of these other companies, Cohesity is another one. They're going to try to connect to their on-premise states, of course, and create a consistent experience. It's natural that they're going to have sort of some consistency across clouds. You know, the big question is, what's that spectrum look like? I think on the one hand you're going to have some, you know, maybe some rudimentary, you know, instances of supercloud or maybe they just run on the individual clouds versus where Snowflake and others and even beyond that are trying to go with a single global instance, basically building out what I would think of as their own cloud, and importantly their own ecosystem. I'll give you guys the last thought. Maybe you could each give us, you know, closing thoughts. Maybe Darren, you could start and Erik, you could bring us home on just this entire topic, the future of cloud and data. >> Yeah, I mean I think, you know, two points to make on that is, this question of these, I guess what we'll call legacy on-prem players. These, mega vendors that have been around a long time, have big on-prem footprints and a lot of people have them for that reason. I think it's foolish to assume that a company, especially a large, mature, multinational company that's been around a long time, it's foolish to think that they can just uproot and leave on-premises entirely full scale. There will almost always be an on-prem footprint from any company that was not, you know, natively born in the cloud after 2010, right? I just don't think that's reasonable anytime soon. I think there's some industries that need on-prem, things like, you know, industrial manufacturing and so on. So I don't think on-prem is going away, and I think vendors that are going to, you know, go very cloud forward, very big on the cloud, if they neglect having at least decent connectors to on-prem legacy vendors, they're going to miss out. So I think that's something that these players need to keep in mind is that they continue to reach back to some of these players that have big footprints on-prem, and make sure that those integrations are seamless and work well, or else their customers will always have a multi-cloud or hybrid experience. And then I think a second point here about the future is, you know, we talk about the three big, you know, cloud providers, the Google, Microsoft, AWS as sort of the opposite of, or different from this new supercloud paradigm that's emerging. But I want to kind of point out that, they will always try to make a play to become that and I think, you know, we'll certainly see someone like Microsoft trying to expand their licensing and expand how they play in order to become that super cloud provider for folks. So also don't want to downplay them. I think you're going to see those three big players continue to move, and take over what players like CloudFlare are doing and try to, you know, cut them off before they get too big. So, keep an eye on them as well. >> Great points, I mean, I think you're right, the first point, if you're Dell, HPE, Cisco, IBM, your strategy should be to make your on-premise state as cloud-like as possible and you know, make those differences as minimal as possible. And you know, if you're a customer, then the business case is going to be low for you to move off of that. And I think you're right. I think the cloud guys, if this is a real problem, the cloud guys are going to play in there, and they're going to make some money at it. Erik, bring us home please. >> Yeah, I'm going to revert back to our data and this on the macro side. So to kind of support this concept of a supercloud right now, you know Dave, you and I know, we check overall spending and what we're seeing right now is total year spent is expected to only be 4.6%. We ended 2022 at 5% even though it began at almost eight and a half. So this is clearly declining and in that environment, we're seeing the top two strategies to reduce spend are actually vendor consolidation with 36% of our respondents saying they're actively seeking a way to reduce their number of vendors, and consolidate into one. That's obviously supporting a supercloud type of play. Number two is reducing excess cloud resources. So when I look at both of those combined, with a drop in the overall spending reduction, I think you're on the right thread here, Dave. You know, the overall macro view that we're seeing in the data supports this happening. And if I can real quick, couple of names we did not touch on that I do think deserve to be in this conversation, one is HashiCorp. HashiCorp is the number one player in our infrastructure sector, with a 56% net score. It does multiple things within infrastructure and it is completely agnostic to your environment. And if we're also speaking about something that's just a singular feature, we would look at Rubric for data, backup, storage, recovery. They're not going to offer you your full cloud or your networking of course, but if you are looking for your backup, recovery, and storage Rubric, also number one in that sector with a 53% net score. Two other names that deserve to be in this conversation as we watch it move and evolve. >> Great, thank you for bringing that up. Yeah, we had both of those guys in the chart and I failed to focus in on HashiCorp. And clearly a Supercloud enabler. All right guys, we got to go. Thank you so much for joining us, appreciate it. Let's keep this conversation going. >> Always enjoy talking to you Dave, thanks. >> Yeah, thanks for having us. >> All right, keep it right there for more content from Supercloud 2. This is Dave Valente for John Ferg and the entire Cube team. We'll be right back. (gentle synth music) (music fades)

(upbeat electronic music) >> Okay, welcome back to Supercloud 2, live here in Palo Alto. I'm John Furrier, with Dave Vellante. Again, all day wall-to-wall coverage, just had a great interview with Walmart, we've got a Next interview coming up, you're going to hear from Bob Muglia and Tristan Handy, two experts, both experienced entrepreneurs, executives in technology. We're here to break down what just happened with Walmart, and what's coming up with George Gilbert, former colleague, Wikibon analyst, Gartner Analyst, and now independent investor and expert. George, great to see you, I know you're following this space. Like you read about it, remember the first days when Dataverse came out, we were talking about them coming out of Berkeley? >> Dave: Snowflake. >> John: Snowflake. >> Dave: Snowflake In the early days. >> We, collectively, have been chronicling the data movement since 2010, you were part of our team, now you've got your nose to the grindstone, you're seeing the next wave. What's this all about? Walmart building their own super cloud, we got Bob Muglia talking about how these next wave of apps are coming. What are the super apps? What's the super cloud to you? >> Well, this key's off Dave's really interesting questions to Walmart, which was like, how are they building their supercloud? 'Cause it makes a concrete example. But what was most interesting about his description of the Walmart WCMP, I forgot what it stood for. >> Dave: Walmart Cloud Native Platform. >> Walmart, okay. He was describing where the logic could run in these stateless containers, and maybe eventually serverless functions. But that's just it, and that's the paradigm of microservices, where the logic is in this stateless thing, where you can shoot it, or it fails, and you can spin up another one, and you've lost nothing. >> That was their triplet model. >> Yeah, in fact, and that was what they were trying to move to, where these things move fluidly between data centers. >> But there's a but, right? Which is they're all stateless apps in the cloud. >> George: Yeah. >> And all their stateful apps are on-prem and VMs. >> Or the stateful part of the apps are in VMs. >> Okay. >> And so if they really want to lift their super cloud layer off of this different provider's infrastructure, they're going to need a much more advanced software platform that manages data. And that goes to the -- >> Muglia and Handy, that you and I did, that's coming up next. So the big takeaway there, George, was, I'll set it up and you can chime in, a new breed of data apps is emerging, and this highly decentralized infrastructure. And Tristan Handy of DBT Labs has a sort of a solution to begin the journey today, Muglia is working on something that's way out there, describe what you learned from it. >> Okay. So to talk about what the new data apps are, and then the platform to run them, I go back to the using what will probably be seen as one of the first data app examples, was Uber, where you're describing entities in the real world, riders, drivers, routes, city, like a city plan, these are all defined by data. And the data is described in a structure called a knowledge graph, for lack of a, no one's come up with a better term. But that means the tough, the stuff that Jack built, which was all stateless and sits above cloud vendors' infrastructure, it needs an entirely different type of software that's much, much harder to build. And the way Bob described it is, you're going to need an entirely new data management infrastructure to handle this. But where, you know, we had this really colorful interview where it was like Rock 'Em Sock 'Em, but they weren't really that much in opposition to each other, because Tristan is going to define this layer, starting with like business intelligence metrics, where you're defining things like bookings, billings, and revenue, in business terms, not in SQL terms -- >> Well, business terms, if I can interrupt, he said the one thing we haven't figured out how to APIify is KPIs that sit inside of a data warehouse, and that's essentially what he's doing. >> George: That's what he's doing, yes. >> Right. And so then you can now expose those APIs, those KPIs, that sit inside of a data warehouse, or a data lake, a data store, whatever, through APIs. >> George: And the difference -- >> So what does that do for you? >> Okay, so all of a sudden, instead of working at technical data terms, where you're dealing with tables and columns and rows, you're dealing instead with business entities, using the Uber example of drivers, riders, routes, you know, ETA prices. But you can define, DBT will be able to define those progressively in richer terms, today they're just doing things like bookings, billings, and revenue. But Bob's point was, today, the data warehouse that actually runs that stuff, whereas DBT defines it, the data warehouse that runs it, you can't do it with relational technology >> Dave: Relational totality, cashing architecture. >> SQL, you can't -- >> SQL caching architectures in memory, you can't do it, you've got to rethink down to the way the data lake is laid out on the disk or cache. Which by the way, Thomas Hazel, who's speaking later, he's the chief scientist and founder at Chaos Search, he says, "I've actually done this," basically leave it in an S3 bucket, and I'm going to query it, you know, with no caching. >> All right, so what I hear you saying then, tell me if I got this right, there are some some things that are inadequate in today's world, that's not compatible with the Supercloud wave. >> Yeah. >> Specifically how you're using storage, and data, and stateful. >> Yes. >> And then the software that makes it run, is that what you're saying? >> George: Yeah. >> There's one other thing you mentioned to me, it's like, when you're using a CRM system, a human is inputting data. >> George: Nothing happens till the human does something. >> Right, nothing happens until that data entry occurs. What you're talking about is a world that self forms, polling data from the transaction system, or the ERP system, and then builds a plan without human intervention. >> Yeah. Something in the real world happens, where the user says, "I want a ride." And then the software goes out and says, "Okay, we got to match a driver to the rider, we got to calculate how long it takes to get there, how long to deliver 'em." That's not driven by a form, other than the first person hitting a button and saying, "I want a ride." All the other stuff happens autonomously, driven by data and analytics. >> But my question was different, Dave, so I want to get specific, because this is where the startups are going to come in, this is the disruption. Snowflake is a data warehouse that's in the cloud, they call it a data cloud, they refactored it, they did it differently, the success, we all know it looks like. These areas where it's inadequate for the future are areas that'll probably be either disrupted, or refactored. What is that? >> That's what Muglia's contention is, that the DBT can start adding that layer where you define these business entities, they're like mini digital twins, you can define them, but the data warehouse isn't strong enough to actually manage and run them. And Muglia is behind a company that is rethinking the database, really in a fundamental way that hasn't been done in 40 or 50 years. It's the first, in his contention, the first real rethink of database technology in a fundamental way since the rise of the relational database 50 years ago. >> And I think you admit it's a real Hail Mary, I mean it's quite a long shot right? >> George: Yes. >> Huge potential. >> But they're pretty far along. >> Well, we've been talking on theCUBE for 12 years, and what, 10 years going to AWS Reinvent, Dave, that no one database will rule the world, Amazon kind of showed that with them. What's different, is it databases are changing, or you can have multiple databases, or? >> It's a good question. And the reason we've had multiple different types of databases, each one specialized for a different type of workload, but actually what Muglia is behind is a new engine that would essentially, you'll never get rid of the data warehouse, or the equivalent engine in like a Databricks datalake house, but it's a new engine that manages the thing that describes all the data and holds it together, and that's the new application platform. >> George, we have one minute left, I want to get real quick thought, you're an investor, and we know your history, and the folks watching, George's got a deep pedigree in investment data, and we can testify against that. If you're going to invest in a company right now, if you're a customer, I got to make a bet, what does success look like for me, what do I want walking through my door, and what do I want to send out? What companies do I want to look at? What's the kind of of vendor do I want to evaluate? Which ones do I want to send home? >> Well, the first thing a customer really has to do when they're thinking about next gen applications, all the people have told you guys, "we got to get our data in order," getting that data in order means building an integrated view of all your data landscape, which is data coming out of all your applications. It starts with the data model, so, today, you basically extract data from all your operational systems, put it in this one giant, central place, like a warehouse or lake house, but eventually you want this, whether you call it a fabric or a mesh, it's all the data that describes how everything hangs together as in one big knowledge graph. There's different ways to implement that. And that's the most critical thing, 'cause that describes your Uber landscape, your Uber platform. >> That's going to power the digital transformation, which will power the business transformation, which powers the business model, which allows the builders to build -- >> Yes. >> Coders to code. That's Supercloud application. >> Yeah. >> George, great stuff. Next interview you're going to see right here is Bob Muglia and Tristan Handy, they're going to unpack this new wave. Great segment, really worth unpacking and reading between the lines with George, and Dave Vellante, and those two great guests. And then we'll come back here for the studio for more of the live coverage of Supercloud 2. Thanks for watching. (upbeat electronic music)

Hello and welcome back to Supercloud 2 where we examine the intersection of cloud and data in the 2020s. My name is Dave Vellante. Our Supercloud panel, our power panel is back. Maribel Lopez is the founder and principal analyst at Lopez Research. Sanjeev Mohan is former Gartner analyst and principal at Sanjeev Mohan. And Keith Townsend is the CTO advisor. Folks, welcome back and thanks for your participation today. Good to see you. >> Okay, great. >> Great to see you. >> Thanks. Let me start, Maribel, with you. Bob Muglia, we had a conversation as part of Supercloud the other day. And he said, "Dave, I like the work, you got to simplify this a little bit." So he said, quote, "A Supercloud is a platform." He said, "Think of it as a platform that provides programmatically consistent services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers." And then Nelu Mihai said, "Well, wait a minute. This is just going to create more stove pipes. We need more standards in an architecture," which is kind of what Berkeley Sky Computing initiative is all about. So there's a sort of a debate going on. Is supercloud an architecture, a platform? Or maybe it's just another buzzword. Maribel, do you have a thought on this? >> Well, the easy answer would be to say it's just a buzzword. And then we could just kill the conversation and be done with it. But I think the term, it's more than that, right? The term actually isn't new. You can go back to at least 2016 and find references to supercloud in Cornell University or assist in other documents. So, having said this, I think we've been talking about Supercloud for a while, so I assume it's more than just a fancy buzzword. But I think it really speaks to that undeniable trend of moving towards an abstraction layer to deal with the chaos of what we consider managing multiple public and private clouds today, right? So one definition of the technology platform speaks to a set of services that allows companies to build and run that technology smoothly without worrying about the underlying infrastructure, which really gets back to something that Bob said. And some of the question is where that lives. And you could call that an abstraction layer. You could call it cross-cloud services, hybrid cloud management. So I see momentum there, like legitimate momentum with enterprise IT buyers that are trying to deal with the fact that they have multiple clouds now. So where I think we're moving is trying to define what are the specific attributes and frameworks of that that would make it so that it could be consistent across clouds. What is that layer? And maybe that's what the supercloud is. But one of the things I struggle with with supercloud is. What are we really trying to do here? Are we trying to create differentiated services in the supercloud layer? Is a supercloud just another variant of what AWS, GCP, or others do? You spoken to Walmart about its cloud native platform, and that's an example of somebody deciding to do it themselves because they need to deal with this today and not wait for some big standards thing to happen. So whatever it is, I do think it's something. I think we're trying to maybe create an architecture out of it would be a better way of saying it so that it does get to those set of principles, but it also needs to be edge aware. I think whenever we talk about supercloud, we're always talking about like the big centralized cloud. And I think we need to think about all the distributed clouds that we're looking at in edge as well. So that might be one of the ways that supercloud evolves. >> So thank you, Maribel. Keith, Brian Gracely, Gracely's law, things kind of repeat themselves. We've seen it all before. And so what Muglia brought to the forefront is this idea of a platform where the platform provider is really responsible for the architecture. Of course, the drawback is then you get a a bunch of stove pipes architectures. But practically speaking, that's kind of the way the industry has always evolved, right? >> So if we look at this from the practitioner's perspective and we talk about platforms, traditionally vendors have provided the platforms for us, whether it's distribution of lineage managed by or provided by Red Hat, Windows, servers, .NET, databases, Oracle. We think of those as platforms, things that are fundamental we can build on top. Supercloud isn't today that. It is a framework or idea, kind of a visionary goal to get to a point that we can have a platform or a framework. But what we're seeing repeated throughout the industry in customers, whether it's the Walmarts that's kind of supersized the idea of supercloud, or if it's regular end user organizations that are coming out with platform groups, groups who normalize cloud native infrastructure, AWS multi-cloud, VMware resources to look like one thing internally to their developers. We're seeing this trend that there's a desire for a platform that provides the capabilities of a supercloud. >> Thank you for that. Sanjeev, we often use Snowflake as a supercloud example, and now would presumably would be a platform with an architecture that's determined by the vendor. Maybe Databricks is pushing for a more open architecture, maybe more of that nirvana that we were talking about before to solve for supercloud. But regardless, the practitioner discussions show. At least currently, there's not a lot of cross-cloud data sharing. I think it could be a killer use case, egress charges or a barrier. But how do you see it? Will that change? Will we hide that underlying complexity and start sharing data across cloud? Is that something that you think Snowflake or others will be able to achieve? >> So I think we are already starting to see some of that happen. Snowflake is definitely one example that gets cited a lot. But even we don't talk about MongoDB in this like, but you could have a MongoDB cluster, for instance, with nodes sitting in different cloud providers. So there are companies that are starting to do it. The advantage that these companies have, let's take Snowflake as an example, it's a centralized proprietary platform. And they are building the capabilities that are needed for supercloud. So they're building things like you can push down your data transformations. They have the entire security and privacy suite. Data ops, they're adding those capabilities. And if I'm not mistaken, it'll be very soon, we will see them offer data observability. So it's all works great as long as you are in one platform. And if you want resilience, then Snowflake, Supercloud, great example. But if your primary goal is to choose the most cost-effective service irrespective of which cloud it sits in, then things start falling sideways. For example, I may be a very big Snowflake user. And I like Snowflake's resilience. I can move from one cloud to another cloud. Snowflake does it for me. But what if I want to train a very large model? Maybe Databricks is a better platform for that. So how do I do move my workload from one platform to another platform? That tooling does not exist. So we need server hybrid, cross-cloud, data ops platform. Walmart has done a great job, but they built it by themselves. Not every company is Walmart. Like Maribel and Keith said, we need standards, we need reference architectures, we need some sort of a cost control. I was just reading recently, Accenture has been public about their AWS bill. Every time they get the bill is tens of millions of lines, tens of millions 'cause there are over thousand teams using AWS. If we have not been able to corral a usage of a single cloud, now we're talking about supercloud, we've got multiple clouds, and hybrid, on-prem, and edge. So till we've got some cross-platform tooling in place, I think this will still take quite some time for it to take shape. >> It's interesting. Maribel, Walmart would tell you that their on-prem infrastructure is cheaper to run than the stuff in the cloud. but at the same time, they want the flexibility and the resiliency of their three-legged stool model. So the point as Sanjeev was making about hybrid. It's an interesting balance, isn't it, between getting your lowest cost and at the same time having best of breed and scale? >> It's basically what you're trying to optimize for, as you said, right? And by the way, to the earlier point, not everybody is at Walmart's scale, so it's not actually cheaper for everybody to have the purchasing power to make the cloud cheaper to have it on-prem. But I think what you see almost every company, large or small, moving towards is this concept of like, where do I find the agility? And is the agility in building the infrastructure for me? And typically, the thing that gives you outside advantage as an organization is not how you constructed your cloud computing infrastructure. It might be how you structured your data analytics as an example, which cloud is related to that. But how do you marry those two things? And getting back to sort of Sanjeev's point. We're in a real struggle now where one hand we want to have best of breed services and on the other hand we want it to be really easy to manage, secure, do data governance. And those two things are really at odds with each other right now. So if you want all the knobs and switches of a service like geospatial analytics and big query, you're going to have to use Google tools, right? Whereas if you want visibility across all the clouds for your application of state and understand the security and governance of that, you're kind of looking for something that's more cross-cloud tooling at that point. But whenever you talk to somebody about cross-cloud tooling, they look at you like that's not really possible. So it's a very interesting time in the market. Now, we're kind of layering this concept of supercloud on it. And some people think supercloud's about basically multi-cloud tooling, and some people think it's about a whole new architectural stack. So we're just not there yet. But it's not all about cost. I mean, cloud has not been about cost for a very, very long time. Cloud has been about how do you really make the most of your data. And this gets back to cross-cloud services like Snowflake. Why did they even exist? They existed because we had data everywhere, but we need to treat data as a unified object so that we can analyze it and get insight from it. And so that's where some of the benefit of these cross-cloud services are moving today. Still a long way to go, though, Dave. >> Keith, I reached out to my friends at ETR given the macro headwinds, And you're right, Maribel, cloud hasn't really been about just about cost savings. But I reached out to the ETR, guys, what's your data show in terms of how customers are dealing with the economic headwinds? And they said, by far, their number one strategy to cut cost is consolidating redundant vendors. And a distant second, but still notable was optimizing cloud costs. Maybe using reserve instances, or using more volume buying. Nowhere in there. And I asked them to, "Could you go look and see if you can find it?" Do we see repatriation? And you hear this a lot. You hear people whispering as analysts, "You better look into that repatriation trend." It's pretty big. You can't find it. But some of the Walmarts in the world, maybe even not repatriating, but they maybe have better cost structure on-prem. Keith, what are you seeing from the practitioners that you talk to in terms of how they're dealing with these headwinds? >> Yeah, I just got into a conversation about this just this morning with (indistinct) who is an analyst over at GigaHome. He's reading the same headlines. Repatriation is happening at large scale. I think this is kind of, we have these quiet terms now. We have quiet quitting, we have quiet hiring. I think we have quiet repatriation. Most people haven't done away with their data centers. They're still there. Whether they're completely on-premises data centers, and they own assets, or they're partnerships with QTX, Equinix, et cetera, they have these private cloud resources. What I'm seeing practically is a rebalancing of workloads. Do I really need to pay AWS for this instance of SAP that's on 24 hours a day versus just having it on-prem, moving it back to my data center? I've talked to quite a few customers who were early on to moving their static SAP workloads onto the public cloud, and they simply moved them back. Surprising, I was at VMware Explore. And we can talk about this a little bit later on. But our customers, net new, not a lot that were born in the cloud. And they get to this point where their workloads are static. And they look at something like a Kubernetes, or a OpenShift, or VMware Tanzu. And they ask the question, "Do I need the scalability of cloud?" I might consider being a net new VMware customer to deliver this base capability. So are we seeing repatriation as the number one reason? No, I think internal IT operations are just naturally come to this realization. Hey, I have these resources on premises. The private cloud technologies have moved far along enough that I can just simply move this workload back. I'm not calling it repatriation, I'm calling it rightsizing for the operating model that I have. >> Makes sense. Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> If I missed something, Dave, why we are on this topic of repatriation. I'm actually surprised that we are talking about repatriation as a very big thing. I think repatriation is happening, no doubt, but it's such a small percentage of cloud migration that to me it's a rounding error in my opinion. I think there's a bigger problem. The problem is that people don't know where the cost is. If they knew where the cost was being wasted in the cloud, they could do something about it. But if you don't know, then the easy answer is cloud costs a lot and moving it back to on-premises. I mean, take like Capital One as an example. They got rid of all the data centers. Where are they going to repatriate to? They're all in the cloud at this point. So I think my point is that data observability is one of the places that has seen a lot of traction is because of cost. Data observability, when it first came into existence, it was all about data quality. Then it was all about data pipeline reliability. And now, the number one killer use case is FinOps. >> Maribel, you had a comment? >> Yeah, I'm kind of in violent agreement with both Sanjeev and Keith. So what are we seeing here? So the first thing that we see is that many people wildly overspent in the big public cloud. They had stranded cloud credits, so to speak. The second thing is, some of them still had infrastructure that was useful. So why not use it if you find the right workloads to what Keith was talking about, if they were more static workloads, if it was already there? So there is a balancing that's going on. And then I think fundamentally, from a trend standpoint, these things aren't binary. Everybody, for a while, everything was going to go to the public cloud and then people are like, "Oh, it's kind of expensive." Then they're like, "Oh no, they're going to bring it all on-prem 'cause it's really expensive." And it's like, "Well, that doesn't necessarily get me some of the new features and functionalities I might want for some of my new workloads." So I'm going to put the workloads that have a certain set of characteristics that require cloud in the cloud. And if I have enough capability on-prem and enough IT resources to manage certain things on site, then I'm going to do that there 'cause that's a more cost-effective thing for me to do. It's not binary. That's why we went to hybrid. And then we went to multi just to describe the fact that people added multiple public clouds. And now we're talking about super, right? So I don't look at it as a one-size-fits-all for any of this. >> A a number of practitioners leading up to Supercloud2 have told us that they're solving their cloud complexity by going in monocloud. So they're putting on the blinders. Even though across the organization, there's other groups using other clouds. You're like, "In my group, we use AWS, or my group, we use Azure. And those guys over there, they use Google. We just kind of keep it separate." Are you guys hearing this in your view? Is that risky? Are they missing out on some potential to tap best of breed? What do you guys think about that? >> Everybody thinks they're monocloud. Is anybody really monocloud? It's like a group is monocloud, right? >> Right. >> This genie is out of the bottle. We're not putting the genie back in the bottle. You might think your monocloud and you go like three doors down and figure out the guy or gal is on a fundamentally different cloud, running some analytics workload that you didn't know about. So, to Sanjeev's earlier point, they don't even know where their cloud spend is. So I think the concept of monocloud, how that's actually really realized by practitioners is primary and then secondary sources. So they have a primary cloud that they run most of their stuff on, and that they try to optimize. And we still have forked workloads. Somebody decides, "Okay, this SAP runs really well on this, or these analytics workloads run really well on that cloud." And maybe that's how they parse it. But if you really looked at it, there's very few companies, if you really peaked under the hood and did an analysis that you could find an actual monocloud structure. They just want to pull it back in and make it more manageable. And I respect that. You want to do what you can to try to streamline the complexity of that. >> Yeah, we're- >> Sorry, go ahead, Keith. >> Yeah, we're doing this thing where we review AWS service every day. Just in your inbox, learn about a new AWS service cursory. There's 238 AWS products just on the AWS cloud itself. Some of them are redundant, but you get the idea. So the concept of monocloud, I'm in filing agreement with Maribel on this that, yes, a group might say I want a primary cloud. And that primary cloud may be the AWS. But have you tried the licensed Oracle database on AWS? It is really tempting to license Oracle on Oracle Cloud, Microsoft on Microsoft. And I can't get RDS anywhere but Amazon. So while I'm driven to desire the simplicity, the reality is whether be it M&A, licensing, data sovereignty. I am forced into a multi-cloud management style. But I do agree most people kind of do this one, this primary cloud, secondary cloud. And I guarantee you're going to have a third cloud or a fourth cloud whether you want to or not via shadow IT, latency, technical reasons, et cetera. >> Thank you. Sanjeev, you had a comment? >> Yeah, so I just wanted to mention, as an organization, I'm complete agreement, no organization is monocloud, at least if it's a large organization. Large organizations use all kinds of combinations of cloud providers. But when you talk about a single workload, that's where the program arises. As Keith said, the 238 services in AWS. How in the world am I going to be an expert in AWS, but then say let me bring GCP or Azure into a single workload? And that's where I think we probably will still see monocloud as being predominant because the team has developed its expertise on a particular cloud provider, and they just don't have the time of the day to go learn yet another stack. However, there are some interesting things that are happening. For example, if you look at a multi-cloud example where Oracle and Microsoft Azure have that interconnect, so that's a beautiful thing that they've done because now in the newest iteration, it's literally a few clicks. And then behind the scene, your .NET application and your Oracle database in OCI will be configured, the identities in active directory are federated. And you can just start using a database in one cloud, which is OCI, and an application, your .NET in Azure. So till we see this kind of a solution coming out of the providers, I think it's is unrealistic to expect the end users to be able to figure out multiple clouds. >> Well, I have to share with you. I can't remember if he said this on camera or if it was off camera so I'll hold off. I won't tell you who it is, but this individual was sort of complaining a little bit saying, "With AWS, I can take their best AI tools like SageMaker and I can run them on my Snowflake." He said, "I can't do that in Google. Google forces me to go to BigQuery if I want their excellent AI tools." So he was sort of pushing, kind of tweaking a little bit. Some of the vendor talked that, "Oh yeah, we're so customer-focused." Not to pick on Google, but I mean everybody will say that. And then you say, "If you're so customer-focused, why wouldn't you do a ABC?" So it's going to be interesting to see who leads that integration and how broadly it's applied. But I digress. Keith, at our first supercloud event, that was on August 9th. And it was only a few months after Broadcom announced the VMware acquisition. A lot of people, myself included said, "All right, cuts are coming." Generally, Tanzu is probably going to be under the radar, but it's Supercloud 22 and presumably VMware Explore, the company really... Well, certainly the US touted its Tanzu capabilities. I wasn't at VMware Explore Europe, but I bet you heard similar things. Hawk Tan has been blogging and very vocal about cross-cloud services and multi-cloud, which doesn't happen without Tanzu. So what did you hear, Keith, in Europe? What's your latest thinking on VMware's prospects in cross-cloud services/supercloud? >> So I think our friend and Cube, along host still be even more offended at this statement than he was when I sat in the Cube. This was maybe five years ago. There's no company better suited to help industries or companies, cross-cloud chasm than VMware. That's not a compliment. That's a reality of the industry. This is a very difficult, almost intractable problem. What I heard that VMware Europe were customers serious about this problem, even more so than the US data sovereignty is a real problem in the EU. Try being a company in Switzerland and having the Swiss data solvency issues. And there's no local cloud presence there large enough to accommodate your data needs. They had very serious questions about this. I talked to open source project leaders. Open source project leaders were asking me, why should I use the public cloud to host Kubernetes-based workloads, my projects that are building around Kubernetes, and the CNCF infrastructure? Why should I use AWS, Google, or even Azure to host these projects when that's undifferentiated? I know how to run Kubernetes, so why not run it on-premises? I don't want to deal with the hardware problems. So again, really great questions. And then there was always the specter of the problem, I think, we all had with the acquisition of VMware by Broadcom potentially. 4.5 billion in increased profitability in three years is a unbelievable amount of money when you look at the size of the problem. So a lot of the conversation in Europe was about industry at large. How do we do what regulators are asking us to do in a practical way from a true technology sense? Is VMware cross-cloud great? >> Yeah. So, VMware, obviously, to your point. OpenStack is another way of it. Actually, OpenStack, uptake is still alive and well, especially in those regions where there may not be a public cloud, or there's public policy dictating that. Walmart's using OpenStack. As you know in IT, some things never die. Question for Sanjeev. And it relates to this new breed of data apps. And Bob Muglia and Tristan Handy from DBT Labs who are participating in this program really got us thinking about this. You got data that resides in different clouds, it maybe even on-prem. And the machine polls data from different systems. No humans involved, e-commerce, ERP, et cetera. It creates a plan, outcomes. No human involvement. Today, you're on a CRM system, you're inputting, you're doing forms, you're, you're automating processes. We're talking about a new breed of apps. What are your thoughts on this? Is it real? Is it just way off in the distance? How does machine intelligence fit in? And how does supercloud fit? >> So great point. In fact, the data apps that you're talking about, I call them data products. Data products first came into limelight in the last couple of years when Jamal Duggan started talking about data mesh. I am taking data products out of the data mesh concept because data mesh, whether data mesh happens or not is analogous to data products. Data products, basically, are taking a product management view of bringing data from different sources based on what the consumer needs. We were talking earlier today about maybe it's my vacation rentals, or it may be a retail data product, it may be an investment data product. So it's a pre-packaged extraction of data from different sources. But now I have a product that has a whole lifecycle. I can version it. I have new features that get added. And it's a very business data consumer centric. It uses machine learning. For instance, I may be able to tell whether this data product has stale data. Who is using that data? Based on the usage of the data, I may have a new data products that get allocated. I may even have the ability to take existing data products, mash them up into something that I need. So if I'm going to have that kind of power to create a data product, then having a common substrate underneath, it can be very useful. And that could be supercloud where I am making API calls. I don't care where the ERP, the CRM, the survey data, the pricing engine where they sit. For me, there's a logical abstraction. And then I'm building my data product on top of that. So I see a new breed of data products coming out. To answer your question, how early we are or is this even possible? My prediction is that in 2023, we will start seeing more of data products. And then it'll take maybe two to three years for data products to become mainstream. But it's starting this year. >> A subprime mortgages were a data product, definitely were humans involved. All right, let's talk about some of the supercloud, multi-cloud players and what their future looks like. You can kind of pick your favorites. VMware, Snowflake, Databricks, Red Hat, Cisco, Dell, HP, Hashi, IBM, CloudFlare. There's many others. cohesive rubric. Keith, I wanted to start with CloudFlare because they actually use the term supercloud. and just simplifying what they said. They look at it as taking serverless to the max. You write your code and then you can deploy it in seconds worldwide, of course, across the CloudFlare infrastructure. You don't have to spin up containers, you don't go to provision instances. CloudFlare worries about all that infrastructure. What are your thoughts on CloudFlare this approach and their chances to disrupt the current cloud landscape? >> As Larry Ellison said famously once before, the network is the computer, right? I thought that was Scott McNeley. >> It wasn't Scott McNeley. I knew it was on Oracle Align. >> Oracle owns that now, owns that line. >> By purpose or acquisition. >> They should have just called it cloud. >> Yeah, they should have just called it cloud. >> Easier. >> Get ahead. >> But if you think about the CloudFlare capability, CloudFlare in its own right is becoming a decent sized cloud provider. If you have compute out at the edge, when we talk about edge in the sense of CloudFlare and points of presence, literally across the globe, you have all of this excess computer, what do you do with it? First offering, let's disrupt data in the cloud. We can't start the conversation talking about data. When they say we're going to give you object-oriented or object storage in the cloud without egress charges, that's disruptive. That we can start to think about supercloud capability of having compute EC2 run in AWS, pushing and pulling data from CloudFlare. And now, I've disrupted this roach motel data structure, and that I'm freely giving away bandwidth, basically. Well, the next layer is not that much more difficult. And I think part of CloudFlare's serverless approach or supercloud approaches so that they don't have to commit to a certain type of compute. It is advantageous. It is a feature for me to be able to go to EC2 and pick a memory heavy model, or a compute heavy model, or a network heavy model, CloudFlare is taken away those knobs. and I'm just giving code and allowing that to run. CloudFlare has a massive network. If I can put the code closest using the CloudFlare workers, if I can put that code closest to where the data is at or residing, super compelling observation. The question is, does it scale? I don't get the 238 services. While Server List is great, I have to know what I'm going to build. I don't have a Cognito, or RDS, or all these other services that make AWS, GCP, and Azure appealing from a builder's perspective. So it is a very interesting nascent start. It's great because now they can hide compute. If they don't have the capacity, they can outsource that maybe at a cost to one of the other cloud providers, but kind of hiding the compute behind the surplus architecture is a really unique approach. >> Yeah. And they're dipping their toe in the water. And they've announced an object store and a database platform and more to come. We got to wrap. So I wonder, Sanjeev and Maribel, if you could maybe pick some of your favorites from a competitive standpoint. Sanjeev, I felt like just watching Snowflake, I said, okay, in my opinion, they had the right strategy, which was to run on all the clouds, and then try to create that abstraction layer and data sharing across clouds. Even though, let's face it, most of it might be happening across regions if it's happening, but certainly outside of an individual account. But I felt like just observing them that anybody who's traditional on-prem player moving into the clouds or anybody who's a cloud native, it just makes total sense to write to the various clouds. And to the extent that you can simplify that for users, it seems to be a logical strategy. Maybe as I said before, what multi-cloud should have been. But are there companies that you're watching that you think are ahead in the game , or ones that you think are a good model for the future? >> Yes, Snowflake, definitely. In fact, one of the things we have not touched upon very much, and Keith mentioned a little bit, was data sovereignty. Data residency rules can require that certain data should be written into certain region of a certain cloud. And if my cloud provider can abstract that or my database provider, then that's perfect for me. So right now, I see Snowflake is way ahead of this pack. I would not put MongoDB too far behind. They don't really talk about this thing. They are in a different space, but now they have a lakehouse, and they've got all of these other SQL access and new capabilities that they're announcing. So I think they would be quite good with that. Oracle is always a dark forest. Oracle seems to have revived its Cloud Mojo to some extent. And it's doing some interesting stuff. Databricks is the other one. I have not seen Databricks. They've been very focused on lakehouse, unity, data catalog, and some of those pieces. But they would be the obvious challenger. And if they come into this space of supercloud, then they may bring some open source technologies that others can rely on like Delta Lake as a table format. >> Yeah. One of these infrastructure players, Dell, HPE, Cisco, even IBM. I mean, I would be making my infrastructure as programmable and cloud friendly as possible. That seems like table stakes. But Maribel, any companies that stand out to you that we should be paying attention to? >> Well, we already mentioned a bunch of them, so maybe I'll go a slightly different route. I'm watching two companies pretty closely to see what kind of traction they get in their established companies. One we already talked about, which is VMware. And the thing that's interesting about VMware is they're everywhere. And they also have the benefit of having a foot in both camps. If you want to do it the old way, the way you've always done it with VMware, they got all that going on. If you want to try to do a more cross-cloud, multi-cloud native style thing, they're really trying to build tools for that. So I think they have really good access to buyers. And that's one of the reasons why I'm interested in them to see how they progress. The other thing, I think, could be a sleeping horse oddly enough is Google Cloud. They've spent a lot of work and time on Anthos. They really need to create a certain set of differentiators. Well, it's not necessarily in their best interest to be the best multi-cloud player. If they decide that they want to differentiate on a different layer of the stack, let's say they want to be like the person that is really transformative, they talk about transformation cloud with analytics workloads, then maybe they do spend a good deal of time trying to help people abstract all of the other underlying infrastructure and make sure that they get the sexiest, most meaningful workloads into their cloud. So those are two people that you might not have expected me to go with, but I think it's interesting to see not just on the things that might be considered, either startups or more established independent companies, but how some of the traditional providers are trying to reinvent themselves as well. >> I'm glad you brought that up because if you think about what Google's done with Kubernetes. I mean, would Google even be relevant in the cloud without Kubernetes? I could argue both sides of that. But it was quite a gift to the industry. And there's a motivation there to do something unique and different from maybe the other cloud providers. And I'd throw in Red Hat as well. They're obviously a key player and Kubernetes. And Hashi Corp seems to be becoming the standard for application deployment, and terraform, or cross-clouds, and there are many, many others. I know we're leaving lots out, but we're out of time. Folks, I got to thank you so much for your insights and your participation in Supercloud2. Really appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> This is Dave Vellante for John Furrier and the entire Cube community. Keep it right there for more content from Supercloud2.

>>When Oracle acquired my SQL via the Sun acquisition, nobody really thought the company would put much effort into the platform preferring to focus all the wood behind its leading Oracle database, Arrow pun intended. But two years ago, Oracle surprised many folks by announcing my SQL Heatwave a new database as a service with a massively parallel hybrid Columbia in Mary Mary architecture that brings together transactional and analytic data in a single platform. Welcome to our latest database, power panel on the cube. My name is Dave Ante, and today we're gonna discuss Oracle's MySQL Heat Wave with a who's who of cloud database industry analysts. Holgar Mueller is with Constellation Research. Mark Stammer is the Dragon Slayer and Wikibon contributor. And Ron Westfall is with Fu Chim Research. Gentlemen, welcome back to the Cube. Always a pleasure to have you on. Thanks for having us. Great to be here. >>So we've had a number of of deep dive interviews on the Cube with Nip and Aggarwal. You guys know him? He's a senior vice president of MySQL, Heatwave Development at Oracle. I think you just saw him at Oracle Cloud World and he's come on to describe this is gonna, I'll call it a shock and awe feature additions to to heatwave. You know, the company's clearly putting r and d into the platform and I think at at cloud world we saw like the fifth major release since 2020 when they first announced MySQL heat wave. So just listing a few, they, they got, they taken, brought in analytics machine learning, they got autopilot for machine learning, which is automation onto the basic o l TP functionality of the database. And it's been interesting to watch Oracle's converge database strategy. We've contrasted that amongst ourselves. Love to get your thoughts on Amazon's get the right tool for the right job approach. >>Are they gonna have to change that? You know, Amazon's got the specialized databases, it's just, you know, the both companies are doing well. It just shows there are a lot of ways to, to skin a cat cuz you see some traction in the market in, in both approaches. So today we're gonna focus on the latest heat wave announcements and we're gonna talk about multi-cloud with a native MySQL heat wave implementation, which is available on aws MySQL heat wave for Azure via the Oracle Microsoft interconnect. This kind of cool hybrid action that they got going. Sometimes we call it super cloud. And then we're gonna dive into my SQL Heatwave Lake house, which allows users to process and query data across MyQ databases as heatwave databases, as well as object stores. So, and then we've got, heatwave has been announced on AWS and, and, and Azure, they're available now and Lake House I believe is in beta and I think it's coming out the second half of next year. So again, all of our guests are fresh off of Oracle Cloud world in Las Vegas. So they got the latest scoop. Guys, I'm done talking. Let's get into it. Mark, maybe you could start us off, what's your opinion of my SQL Heatwaves competitive position? When you think about what AWS is doing, you know, Google is, you know, we heard Google Cloud next recently, we heard about all their data innovations. You got, obviously Azure's got a big portfolio, snowflakes doing well in the market. What's your take? >>Well, first let's look at it from the point of view that AWS is the market leader in cloud and cloud services. They own somewhere between 30 to 50% depending on who you read of the market. And then you have Azure as number two and after that it falls off. There's gcp, Google Cloud platform, which is further way down the list and then Oracle and IBM and Alibaba. So when you look at AWS and you and Azure saying, hey, these are the market leaders in the cloud, then you start looking at it and saying, if I am going to provide a service that competes with the service they have, if I can make it available in their cloud, it means that I can be more competitive. And if I'm compelling and compelling means at least twice the performance or functionality or both at half the price, I should be able to gain market share. >>And that's what Oracle's done. They've taken a superior product in my SQL heat wave, which is faster, lower cost does more for a lot less at the end of the day and they make it available to the users of those clouds. You avoid this little thing called egress fees, you avoid the issue of having to migrate from one cloud to another and suddenly you have a very compelling offer. So I look at what Oracle's doing with MyQ and it feels like, I'm gonna use a word term, a flanking maneuver to their competition. They're offering a better service on their platforms. >>All right, so thank you for that. Holger, we've seen this sort of cadence, I sort of referenced it up front a little bit and they sat on MySQL for a decade, then all of a sudden we see this rush of announcements. Why did it take so long? And and more importantly is Oracle, are they developing the right features that cloud database customers are looking for in your view? >>Yeah, great question, but first of all, in your interview you said it's the edit analytics, right? Analytics is kind of like a marketing buzzword. Reports can be analytics, right? The interesting thing, which they did, the first thing they, they, they crossed the chasm between OTP and all up, right? In the same database, right? So major engineering feed very much what customers want and it's all about creating Bellevue for customers, which, which I think is the part why they go into the multi-cloud and why they add these capabilities. And they certainly with the AI capabilities, it's kind of like getting it into an autonomous field, self-driving field now with the lake cost capabilities and meeting customers where they are, like Mark has talked about the e risk costs in the cloud. So that that's a significant advantage, creating value for customers and that's what at the end of the day matters. >>And I believe strongly that long term it's gonna be ones who create better value for customers who will get more of their money From that perspective, why then take them so long? I think it's a great question. I think largely he mentioned the gentleman Nial, it's largely to who leads a product. I used to build products too, so maybe I'm a little fooling myself here, but that made the difference in my view, right? So since he's been charged, he's been building things faster than the rest of the competition, than my SQL space, which in hindsight we thought was a hot and smoking innovation phase. It kind of like was a little self complacent when it comes to the traditional borders of where, where people think, where things are separated between OTP and ola or as an example of adjacent support, right? Structured documents, whereas unstructured documents or databases and all of that has been collapsed and brought together for building a more powerful database for customers. >>So I mean it's certainly, you know, when, when Oracle talks about the competitors, you know, the competitors are in the, I always say they're, if the Oracle talks about you and knows you're doing well, so they talk a lot about aws, talk a little bit about Snowflake, you know, sort of Google, they have partnerships with Azure, but, but in, so I'm presuming that the response in MySQL heatwave was really in, in response to what they were seeing from those big competitors. But then you had Maria DB coming out, you know, the day that that Oracle acquired Sun and, and launching and going after the MySQL base. So it's, I'm, I'm interested and we'll talk about this later and what you guys think AWS and Google and Azure and Snowflake and how they're gonna respond. But, but before I do that, Ron, I want to ask you, you, you, you can get, you know, pretty technical and you've probably seen the benchmarks. >>I know you have Oracle makes a big deal out of it, publishes its benchmarks, makes some transparent on on GI GitHub. Larry Ellison talked about this in his keynote at Cloud World. What are the benchmarks show in general? I mean, when you, when you're new to the market, you gotta have a story like Mark was saying, you gotta be two x you know, the performance at half the cost or you better be or you're not gonna get any market share. So, and, and you know, oftentimes companies don't publish market benchmarks when they're leading. They do it when they, they need to gain share. So what do you make of the benchmarks? Have their, any results that were surprising to you? Have, you know, they been challenged by the competitors. Is it just a bunch of kind of desperate bench marketing to make some noise in the market or you know, are they real? What's your view? >>Well, from my perspective, I think they have the validity. And to your point, I believe that when it comes to competitor responses, that has not really happened. Nobody has like pulled down the information that's on GitHub and said, Oh, here are our price performance results. And they counter oracles. In fact, I think part of the reason why that hasn't happened is that there's the risk if Oracle's coming out and saying, Hey, we can deliver 17 times better query performance using our capabilities versus say, Snowflake when it comes to, you know, the Lakehouse platform and Snowflake turns around and says it's actually only 15 times better during performance, that's not exactly an effective maneuver. And so I think this is really to oracle's credit and I think it's refreshing because these differentiators are significant. We're not talking, you know, like 1.2% differences. We're talking 17 fold differences, we're talking six fold differences depending on, you know, where the spotlight is being shined and so forth. >>And so I think this is actually something that is actually too good to believe initially at first blush. If I'm a cloud database decision maker, I really have to prioritize this. I really would know, pay a lot more attention to this. And that's why I posed the question to Oracle and others like, okay, if these differentiators are so significant, why isn't the needle moving a bit more? And it's for, you know, some of the usual reasons. One is really deep discounting coming from, you know, the other players that's really kind of, you know, marketing 1 0 1, this is something you need to do when there's a real competitive threat to keep, you know, a customer in your own customer base. Plus there is the usual fear and uncertainty about moving from one platform to another. But I think, you know, the traction, the momentum is, is shifting an Oracle's favor. I think we saw that in the Q1 efforts, for example, where Oracle cloud grew 44% and that it generated, you know, 4.8 billion and revenue if I recall correctly. And so, so all these are demonstrating that's Oracle is making, I think many of the right moves, publishing these figures for anybody to look at from their own perspective is something that is, I think, good for the market and I think it's just gonna continue to pay dividends for Oracle down the horizon as you know, competition intens plots. So if I were in, >>Dave, can I, Dave, can I interject something and, and what Ron just said there? Yeah, please go ahead. A couple things here, one discounting, which is a common practice when you have a real threat, as Ron pointed out, isn't going to help much in this situation simply because you can't discount to the point where you improve your performance and the performance is a huge differentiator. You may be able to get your price down, but the problem that most of them have is they don't have an integrated product service. They don't have an integrated O L T P O L A P M L N data lake. Even if you cut out two of them, they don't have any of them integrated. They have multiple services that are required separate integration and that can't be overcome with discounting. And the, they, you have to pay for each one of these. And oh, by the way, as you grow, the discounts go away. So that's a, it's a minor important detail. >>So, so that's a TCO question mark, right? And I know you look at this a lot, if I had that kind of price performance advantage, I would be pounding tco, especially if I need two separate databases to do the job. That one can do, that's gonna be, the TCO numbers are gonna be off the chart or maybe down the chart, which you want. Have you looked at this and how does it compare with, you know, the big cloud guys, for example, >>I've looked at it in depth, in fact, I'm working on another TCO on this arena, but you can find it on Wiki bod in which I compared TCO for MySEQ Heat wave versus Aurora plus Redshift plus ML plus Blue. I've compared it against gcps services, Azure services, Snowflake with other services. And there's just no comparison. The, the TCO differences are huge. More importantly, thefor, the, the TCO per performance is huge. We're talking in some cases multiple orders of magnitude, but at least an order of magnitude difference. So discounting isn't gonna help you much at the end of the day, it's only going to lower your cost a little, but it doesn't improve the automation, it doesn't improve the performance, it doesn't improve the time to insight, it doesn't improve all those things that you want out of a database or multiple databases because you >>Can't discount yourself to a higher value proposition. >>So what about, I wonder ho if you could chime in on the developer angle. You, you followed that, that market. How do these innovations from heatwave, I think you used the term developer velocity. I've heard you used that before. Yeah, I mean, look, Oracle owns Java, okay, so it, it's, you know, most popular, you know, programming language in the world, blah, blah blah. But it does it have the, the minds and hearts of, of developers and does, where does heatwave fit into that equation? >>I think heatwave is gaining quickly mindshare on the developer side, right? It's not the traditional no sequel database which grew up, there's a traditional mistrust of oracles to developers to what was happening to open source when gets acquired. Like in the case of Oracle versus Java and where my sql, right? And, but we know it's not a good competitive strategy to, to bank on Oracle screwing up because it hasn't worked not on Java known my sequel, right? And for developers, it's, once you get to know a technology product and you can do more, it becomes kind of like a Swiss army knife and you can build more use case, you can build more powerful applications. That's super, super important because you don't have to get certified in multiple databases. You, you are fast at getting things done, you achieve fire, develop velocity, and the managers are happy because they don't have to license more things, send you to more trainings, have more risk of something not being delivered, right? >>So it's really the, we see the suite where this best of breed play happening here, which in general was happening before already with Oracle's flagship database. Whereas those Amazon as an example, right? And now the interesting thing is every step away Oracle was always a one database company that can be only one and they're now generally talking about heat web and that two database company with different market spaces, but same value proposition of integrating more things very, very quickly to have a universal database that I call, they call the converge database for all the needs of an enterprise to run certain application use cases. And that's what's attractive to developers. >>It's, it's ironic isn't it? I mean I, you know, the rumor was the TK Thomas Curian left Oracle cuz he wanted to put Oracle database on other clouds and other places. And maybe that was the rift. Maybe there was, I'm sure there was other things, but, but Oracle clearly is now trying to expand its Tam Ron with, with heatwave into aws, into Azure. How do you think Oracle's gonna do, you were at a cloud world, what was the sentiment from customers and the independent analyst? Is this just Oracle trying to screw with the competition, create a little diversion? Or is this, you know, serious business for Oracle? What do you think? >>No, I think it has lakes. I think it's definitely, again, attriting to Oracle's overall ability to differentiate not only my SQL heat wave, but its overall portfolio. And I think the fact that they do have the alliance with the Azure in place, that this is definitely demonstrating their commitment to meeting the multi-cloud needs of its customers as well as what we pointed to in terms of the fact that they're now offering, you know, MySQL capabilities within AWS natively and that it can now perform AWS's own offering. And I think this is all demonstrating that Oracle is, you know, not letting up, they're not resting on its laurels. That's clearly we are living in a multi-cloud world, so why not just make it more easy for customers to be able to use cloud databases according to their own specific, specific needs. And I think, you know, to holder's point, I think that definitely lines with being able to bring on more application developers to leverage these capabilities. >>I think one important announcement that's related to all this was the JSON relational duality capabilities where now it's a lot easier for application developers to use a language that they're very familiar with a JS O and not have to worry about going into relational databases to store their J S O N application coding. So this is, I think an example of the innovation that's enhancing the overall Oracle portfolio and certainly all the work with machine learning is definitely paying dividends as well. And as a result, I see Oracle continue to make these inroads that we pointed to. But I agree with Mark, you know, the short term discounting is just a stall tag. This is not denying the fact that Oracle is being able to not only deliver price performance differentiators that are dramatic, but also meeting a wide range of needs for customers out there that aren't just limited device performance consideration. >>Being able to support multi-cloud according to customer needs. Being able to reach out to the application developer community and address a very specific challenge that has plagued them for many years now. So bring it all together. Yeah, I see this as just enabling Oracles who ring true with customers. That the customers that were there were basically all of them, even though not all of them are going to be saying the same things, they're all basically saying positive feedback. And likewise, I think the analyst community is seeing this. It's always refreshing to be able to talk to customers directly and at Oracle cloud there was a litany of them and so this is just a difference maker as well as being able to talk to strategic partners. The nvidia, I think partnerships also testament to Oracle's ongoing ability to, you know, make the ecosystem more user friendly for the customers out there. >>Yeah, it's interesting when you get these all in one tools, you know, the Swiss Army knife, you expect that it's not able to be best of breed. That's the kind of surprising thing that I'm hearing about, about heatwave. I want to, I want to talk about Lake House because when I think of Lake House, I think data bricks, and to my knowledge data bricks hasn't been in the sites of Oracle yet. Maybe they're next, but, but Oracle claims that MySQL, heatwave, Lakehouse is a breakthrough in terms of capacity and performance. Mark, what are your thoughts on that? Can you double click on, on Lakehouse Oracle's claims for things like query performance and data loading? What does it mean for the market? Is Oracle really leading in, in the lake house competitive landscape? What are your thoughts? >>Well, but name in the game is what are the problems you're solving for the customer? More importantly, are those problems urgent or important? If they're urgent, customers wanna solve 'em. Now if they're important, they might get around to them. So you look at what they're doing with Lake House or previous to that machine learning or previous to that automation or previous to that O L A with O ltp and they're merging all this capability together. If you look at Snowflake or data bricks, they're tacking one problem. You look at MyQ heat wave, they're tacking multiple problems. So when you say, yeah, their queries are much better against the lake house in combination with other analytics in combination with O ltp and the fact that there are no ETLs. So you're getting all this done in real time. So it's, it's doing the query cross, cross everything in real time. >>You're solving multiple user and developer problems, you're increasing their ability to get insight faster, you're having shorter response times. So yeah, they really are solving urgent problems for customers. And by putting it where the customer lives, this is the brilliance of actually being multicloud. And I know I'm backing up here a second, but by making it work in AWS and Azure where people already live, where they already have applications, what they're saying is, we're bringing it to you. You don't have to come to us to get these, these benefits, this value overall, I think it's a brilliant strategy. I give Nip and Argo wallet a huge, huge kudos for what he's doing there. So yes, what they're doing with the lake house is going to put notice on data bricks and Snowflake and everyone else for that matter. Well >>Those are guys that whole ago you, you and I have talked about this. Those are, those are the guys that are doing sort of the best of breed. You know, they're really focused and they, you know, tend to do well at least out of the gate. Now you got Oracle's converged philosophy, obviously with Oracle database. We've seen that now it's kicking in gear with, with heatwave, you know, this whole thing of sweets versus best of breed. I mean the long term, you know, customers tend to migrate towards suite, but the new shiny toy tends to get the growth. How do you think this is gonna play out in cloud database? >>Well, it's the forever never ending story, right? And in software right suite, whereas best of breed and so far in the long run suites have always won, right? So, and sometimes they struggle again because the inherent problem of sweets is you build something larger, it has more complexity and that means your cycles to get everything working together to integrate the test that roll it out, certify whatever it is, takes you longer, right? And that's not the case. It's a fascinating part of what the effort around my SQL heat wave is that the team is out executing the previous best of breed data, bringing us something together. Now if they can maintain that pace, that's something to to, to be seen. But it, the strategy, like what Mark was saying, bring the software to the data is of course interesting and unique and totally an Oracle issue in the past, right? >>Yeah. But it had to be in your database on oci. And but at, that's an interesting part. The interesting thing on the Lake health side is, right, there's three key benefits of a lakehouse. The first one is better reporting analytics, bring more rich information together, like make the, the, the case for silicon angle, right? We want to see engagements for this video, we want to know what's happening. That's a mixed transactional video media use case, right? Typical Lakehouse use case. The next one is to build more rich applications, transactional applications which have video and these elements in there, which are the engaging one. And the third one, and that's where I'm a little critical and concerned, is it's really the base platform for artificial intelligence, right? To run deep learning to run things automatically because they have all the data in one place can create in one way. >>And that's where Oracle, I know that Ron talked about Invidia for a moment, but that's where Oracle doesn't have the strongest best story. Nonetheless, the two other main use cases of the lake house are very strong, very well only concern is four 50 terabyte sounds long. It's an arbitrary limitation. Yeah, sounds as big. So for the start, and it's the first word, they can make that bigger. You don't want your lake house to be limited and the terabyte sizes or any even petabyte size because you want to have the certainty. I can put everything in there that I think it might be relevant without knowing what questions to ask and query those questions. >>Yeah. And you know, in the early days of no schema on right, it just became a mess. But now technology has evolved to allow us to actually get more value out of that data. Data lake. Data swamp is, you know, not much more, more, more, more logical. But, and I want to get in, in a moment, I want to come back to how you think the competitors are gonna respond. Are they gonna have to sort of do a more of a converged approach? AWS in particular? But before I do, Ron, I want to ask you a question about autopilot because I heard Larry Ellison's keynote and he was talking about how, you know, most security issues are human errors with autonomy and autonomous database and things like autopilot. We take care of that. It's like autonomous vehicles, they're gonna be safer. And I went, well maybe, maybe someday. So Oracle really tries to emphasize this, that every time you see an announcement from Oracle, they talk about new, you know, autonomous capabilities. It, how legit is it? Do people care? What about, you know, what's new for heatwave Lakehouse? How much of a differentiator, Ron, do you really think autopilot is in this cloud database space? >>Yeah, I think it will definitely enhance the overall proposition. I don't think people are gonna buy, you know, lake house exclusively cause of autopilot capabilities, but when they look at the overall picture, I think it will be an added capability bonus to Oracle's benefit. And yeah, I think it's kind of one of these age old questions, how much do you automate and what is the bounce to strike? And I think we all understand with the automatic car, autonomous car analogy that there are limitations to being able to use that. However, I think it's a tool that basically every organization out there needs to at least have or at least evaluate because it goes to the point of it helps with ease of use, it helps make automation more balanced in terms of, you know, being able to test, all right, let's automate this process and see if it works well, then we can go on and switch on on autopilot for other processes. >>And then, you know, that allows, for example, the specialists to spend more time on business use cases versus, you know, manual maintenance of, of the cloud database and so forth. So I think that actually is a, a legitimate value proposition. I think it's just gonna be a case by case basis. Some organizations are gonna be more aggressive with putting automation throughout their processes throughout their organization. Others are gonna be more cautious. But it's gonna be, again, something that will help the overall Oracle proposition. And something that I think will be used with caution by many organizations, but other organizations are gonna like, hey, great, this is something that is really answering a real problem. And that is just easing the use of these databases, but also being able to better handle the automation capabilities and benefits that come with it without having, you know, a major screwup happened and the process of transitioning to more automated capabilities. >>Now, I didn't attend cloud world, it's just too many red eyes, you know, recently, so I passed. But one of the things I like to do at those events is talk to customers, you know, in the spirit of the truth, you know, they, you know, you'd have the hallway, you know, track and to talk to customers and they say, Hey, you know, here's the good, the bad and the ugly. So did you guys, did you talk to any customers my SQL Heatwave customers at, at cloud world? And and what did you learn? I don't know, Mark, did you, did you have any luck and, and having some, some private conversations? >>Yeah, I had quite a few private conversations. The one thing before I get to that, I want disagree with one point Ron made, I do believe there are customers out there buying the heat wave service, the MySEQ heat wave server service because of autopilot. Because autopilot is really revolutionary in many ways in the sense for the MySEQ developer in that it, it auto provisions, it auto parallel loads, IT auto data places it auto shape predictions. It can tell you what machine learning models are going to tell you, gonna give you your best results. And, and candidly, I've yet to meet a DBA who didn't wanna give up pedantic tasks that are pain in the kahoo, which they'd rather not do and if it's long as it was done right for them. So yes, I do think people are buying it because of autopilot and that's based on some of the conversations I had with customers at Oracle Cloud World. >>In fact, it was like, yeah, that's great, yeah, we get fantastic performance, but this really makes my life easier and I've yet to meet a DBA who didn't want to make their life easier. And it does. So yeah, I've talked to a few of them. They were excited. I asked them if they ran into any bugs, were there any difficulties in moving to it? And the answer was no. In both cases, it's interesting to note, my sequel is the most popular database on the planet. Well, some will argue that it's neck and neck with SQL Server, but if you add in Mariah DB and ProCon db, which are forks of MySQL, then yeah, by far and away it's the most popular. And as a result of that, everybody for the most part has typically a my sequel database somewhere in their organization. So this is a brilliant situation for anybody going after MyQ, but especially for heat wave. And the customers I talk to love it. I didn't find anybody complaining about it. And >>What about the migration? We talked about TCO earlier. Did your t does your TCO analysis include the migration cost or do you kind of conveniently leave that out or what? >>Well, when you look at migration costs, there are different kinds of migration costs. By the way, the worst job in the data center is the data migration manager. Forget it, no other job is as bad as that one. You get no attaboys for doing it. Right? And then when you screw up, oh boy. So in real terms, anything that can limit data migration is a good thing. And when you look at Data Lake, that limits data migration. So if you're already a MySEQ user, this is a pure MySQL as far as you're concerned. It's just a, a simple transition from one to the other. You may wanna make sure nothing broke and every you, all your tables are correct and your schema's, okay, but it's all the same. So it's a simple migration. So it's pretty much a non-event, right? When you migrate data from an O LTP to an O L A P, that's an ETL and that's gonna take time. >>But you don't have to do that with my SQL heat wave. So that's gone when you start talking about machine learning, again, you may have an etl, you may not, depending on the circumstances, but again, with my SQL heat wave, you don't, and you don't have duplicate storage, you don't have to copy it from one storage container to another to be able to be used in a different database, which by the way, ultimately adds much more cost than just the other service. So yeah, I looked at the migration and again, the users I talked to said it was a non-event. It was literally moving from one physical machine to another. If they had a new version of MySEQ running on something else and just wanted to migrate it over or just hook it up or just connect it to the data, it worked just fine. >>Okay, so every day it sounds like you guys feel, and we've certainly heard this, my colleague David Foyer, the semi-retired David Foyer was always very high on heatwave. So I think you knows got some real legitimacy here coming from a standing start, but I wanna talk about the competition, how they're likely to respond. I mean, if your AWS and you got heatwave is now in your cloud, so there's some good aspects of that. The database guys might not like that, but the infrastructure guys probably love it. Hey, more ways to sell, you know, EC two and graviton, but you're gonna, the database guys in AWS are gonna respond. They're gonna say, Hey, we got Redshift, we got aqua. What's your thoughts on, on not only how that's gonna resonate with customers, but I'm interested in what you guys think will a, I never say never about aws, you know, and are they gonna try to build, in your view a converged Oola and o LTP database? You know, Snowflake is taking an ecosystem approach. They've added in transactional capabilities to the portfolio so they're not standing still. What do you guys see in the competitive landscape in that regard going forward? Maybe Holger, you could start us off and anybody else who wants to can chime in, >>Happy to, you mentioned Snowflake last, we'll start there. I think Snowflake is imitating that strategy, right? That building out original data warehouse and the clouds tasking project to really proposition to have other data available there because AI is relevant for everybody. Ultimately people keep data in the cloud for ultimately running ai. So you see the same suite kind of like level strategy, it's gonna be a little harder because of the original positioning. How much would people know that you're doing other stuff? And I just, as a former developer manager of developers, I just don't see the speed at the moment happening at Snowflake to become really competitive to Oracle. On the flip side, putting my Oracle hat on for a moment back to you, Mark and Iran, right? What could Oracle still add? Because the, the big big things, right? The traditional chasms in the database world, they have built everything, right? >>So I, I really scratched my hat and gave Nipon a hard time at Cloud world say like, what could you be building? Destiny was very conservative. Let's get the Lakehouse thing done, it's gonna spring next year, right? And the AWS is really hard because AWS value proposition is these small innovation teams, right? That they build two pizza teams, which can be fit by two pizzas, not large teams, right? And you need suites to large teams to build these suites with lots of functionalities to make sure they work together. They're consistent, they have the same UX on the administration side, they can consume the same way, they have the same API registry, can't even stop going where the synergy comes to play over suite. So, so it's gonna be really, really hard for them to change that. But AWS super pragmatic. They're always by themselves that they'll listen to customers if they learn from customers suite as a proposition. I would not be surprised if AWS trying to bring things closer together, being morely together. >>Yeah. Well how about, can we talk about multicloud if, if, again, Oracle is very on on Oracle as you said before, but let's look forward, you know, half a year or a year. What do you think about Oracle's moves in, in multicloud in terms of what kind of penetration they're gonna have in the marketplace? You saw a lot of presentations at at cloud world, you know, we've looked pretty closely at the, the Microsoft Azure deal. I think that's really interesting. I've, I've called it a little bit of early days of a super cloud. What impact do you think this is gonna have on, on the marketplace? But, but both. And think about it within Oracle's customer base, I have no doubt they'll do great there. But what about beyond its existing install base? What do you guys think? >>Ryan, do you wanna jump on that? Go ahead. Go ahead Ryan. No, no, no, >>That's an excellent point. I think it aligns with what we've been talking about in terms of Lakehouse. I think Lake House will enable Oracle to pull more customers, more bicycle customers onto the Oracle platforms. And I think we're seeing all the signs pointing toward Oracle being able to make more inroads into the overall market. And that includes garnishing customers from the leaders in, in other words, because they are, you know, coming in as a innovator, a an alternative to, you know, the AWS proposition, the Google cloud proposition that they have less to lose and there's a result they can really drive the multi-cloud messaging to resonate with not only their existing customers, but also to be able to, to that question, Dave's posing actually garnish customers onto their platform. And, and that includes naturally my sequel but also OCI and so forth. So that's how I'm seeing this playing out. I think, you know, again, Oracle's reporting is indicating that, and I think what we saw, Oracle Cloud world is definitely validating the idea that Oracle can make more waves in the overall market in this regard. >>You know, I, I've floated this idea of Super cloud, it's kind of tongue in cheek, but, but there, I think there is some merit to it in terms of building on top of hyperscale infrastructure and abstracting some of the, that complexity. And one of the things that I'm most interested in is industry clouds and an Oracle acquisition of Cerner. I was struck by Larry Ellison's keynote, it was like, I don't know, an hour and a half and an hour and 15 minutes was focused on healthcare transformation. Well, >>So vertical, >>Right? And so, yeah, so you got Oracle's, you know, got some industry chops and you, and then you think about what they're building with, with not only oci, but then you got, you know, MyQ, you can now run in dedicated regions. You got ADB on on Exadata cloud to customer, you can put that OnPrem in in your data center and you look at what the other hyperscalers are, are doing. I I say other hyperscalers, I've always said Oracle's not really a hyperscaler, but they got a cloud so they're in the game. But you can't get, you know, big query OnPrem, you look at outposts, it's very limited in terms of, you know, the database support and again, that that will will evolve. But now you got Oracle's got, they announced Alloy, we can white label their cloud. So I'm interested in what you guys think about these moves, especially the industry cloud. We see, you know, Walmart is doing sort of their own cloud. You got Goldman Sachs doing a cloud. Do you, you guys, what do you think about that and what role does Oracle play? Any thoughts? >>Yeah, let me lemme jump on that for a moment. Now, especially with the MyQ, by making that available in multiple clouds, what they're doing is this follows the philosophy they've had the past with doing cloud, a customer taking the application and the data and putting it where the customer lives. If it's on premise, it's on premise. If it's in the cloud, it's in the cloud. By making the mice equal heat wave, essentially a plug compatible with any other mice equal as far as your, your database is concern and then giving you that integration with O L A P and ML and Data Lake and everything else, then what you've got is a compelling offering. You're making it easier for the customer to use. So I look the difference between MyQ and the Oracle database, MyQ is going to capture market more market share for them. >>You're not gonna find a lot of new users for the Oracle debate database. Yeah, there are always gonna be new users, don't get me wrong, but it's not gonna be a huge growth. Whereas my SQL heatwave is probably gonna be a major growth engine for Oracle going forward. Not just in their own cloud, but in AWS and in Azure and on premise over time that eventually it'll get there. It's not there now, but it will, they're doing the right thing on that basis. They're taking the services and when you talk about multicloud and making them available where the customer wants them, not forcing them to go where you want them, if that makes sense. And as far as where they're going in the future, I think they're gonna take a page outta what they've done with the Oracle database. They'll add things like JSON and XML and time series and spatial over time they'll make it a, a complete converged database like they did with the Oracle database. The difference being Oracle database will scale bigger and will have more transactions and be somewhat faster. And my SQL will be, for anyone who's not on the Oracle database, they're, they're not stupid, that's for sure. >>They've done Jason already. Right. But I give you that they could add graph and time series, right. Since eat with, Right, Right. Yeah, that's something absolutely right. That's, that's >>A sort of a logical move, right? >>Right. But that's, that's some kid ourselves, right? I mean has worked in Oracle's favor, right? 10 x 20 x, the amount of r and d, which is in the MyQ space, has been poured at trying to snatch workloads away from Oracle by starting with IBM 30 years ago, 20 years ago, Microsoft and, and, and, and didn't work, right? Database applications are extremely sticky when they run, you don't want to touch SIM and grow them, right? So that doesn't mean that heat phase is not an attractive offering, but it will be net new things, right? And what works in my SQL heat wave heat phases favor a little bit is it's not the massive enterprise applications which have like we the nails like, like you might be only running 30% or Oracle, but the connections and the interfaces into that is, is like 70, 80% of your enterprise. >>You take it out and it's like the spaghetti ball where you say, ah, no I really don't, don't want to do all that. Right? You don't, don't have that massive part with the equals heat phase sequel kind of like database which are more smaller tactical in comparison, but still I, I don't see them taking so much share. They will be growing because of a attractive value proposition quickly on the, the multi-cloud, right? I think it's not really multi-cloud. If you give people the chance to run your offering on different clouds, right? You can run it there. The multi-cloud advantages when the Uber offering comes out, which allows you to do things across those installations, right? I can migrate data, I can create data across something like Google has done with B query Omni, I can run predictive models or even make iron models in different place and distribute them, right? And Oracle is paving the road for that, but being available on these clouds. But the multi-cloud capability of database which knows I'm running on different clouds that is still yet to be built there. >>Yeah. And >>That the problem with >>That, that's the super cloud concept that I flowed and I I've always said kinda snowflake with a single global instance is sort of, you know, headed in that direction and maybe has a league. What's the issue with that mark? >>Yeah, the problem with the, with that version, the multi-cloud is clouds to charge egress fees. As long as they charge egress fees to move data between clouds, it's gonna make it very difficult to do a real multi-cloud implementation. Even Snowflake, which runs multi-cloud, has to pass out on the egress fees of their customer when data moves between clouds. And that's really expensive. I mean there, there is one customer I talked to who is beta testing for them, the MySQL heatwave and aws. The only reason they didn't want to do that until it was running on AWS is the egress fees were so great to move it to OCI that they couldn't afford it. Yeah. Egress fees are the big issue but, >>But Mark the, the point might be you might wanna root query and only get the results set back, right was much more tinier, which been the answer before for low latency between the class A problem, which we sometimes still have but mostly don't have. Right? And I think in general this with fees coming down based on the Oracle general E with fee move and it's very hard to justify those, right? But, but it's, it's not about moving data as a multi-cloud high value use case. It's about doing intelligent things with that data, right? Putting into other places, replicating it, what I'm saying the same thing what you said before, running remote queries on that, analyzing it, running AI on it, running AI models on that. That's the interesting thing. Cross administered in the same way. Taking things out, making sure compliance happens. Making sure when Ron says I don't want to be American anymore, I want to be in the European cloud that is gets migrated, right? So tho those are the interesting value use case which are really, really hard for enterprise to program hand by hand by developers and they would love to have out of the box and that's yet the innovation to come to, we have to come to see. But the first step to get there is that your software runs in multiple clouds and that's what Oracle's doing so well with my SQL >>Guys. Amazing. >>Go ahead. Yeah. >>Yeah. >>For example, >>Amazing amount of data knowledge and, and brain power in this market. Guys, I really want to thank you for coming on to the cube. Ron Holger. Mark, always a pleasure to have you on. Really appreciate your time. >>Well all the last names we're very happy for Romanic last and moderator. Thanks Dave for moderating us. All right, >>We'll see. We'll see you guys around. Safe travels to all and thank you for watching this power panel, The Truth About My SQL Heat Wave on the cube. Your leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage.

>> From The Cube Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data driven insights from The Cube at ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> The reverse momentum in tech stocks caused by rising interest rates, less attractive discounted cash flow models, and more tepid forward guidance, can be easily measured by public market valuations. And while there's lots of discussion about the impact on private companies and cash runway and 409A valuations, measuring the performance of non-public companies isn't as easy. IPOs have dried up and public statements by private companies, of course, they accentuate the good and they kind of hide the bad. Real data, unless you're an insider, is hard to find. Hello and welcome to this week's "Wikibon Cube Insights" powered by ETR. In this "Breaking Analysis", we unlock some of the secrets that non-public, emerging tech companies may or may not be sharing. And we do this by introducing you to a capability from ETR that we've not exposed you to over the past couple of years, it's called the Emerging Technologies Survey, and it is packed with sentiment data and performance data based on surveys of more than a thousand CIOs and IT buyers covering more than 400 companies. And we've invited back our colleague, Erik Bradley of ETR to help explain the survey and the data that we're going to cover today. Erik, this survey is something that I've not personally spent much time on, but I'm blown away at the data. It's really unique and detailed. First of all, welcome. Good to see you again. >> Great to see you too, Dave, and I'm really happy to be talking about the ETS or the Emerging Technology Survey. Even our own clients of constituents probably don't spend as much time in here as they should. >> Yeah, because there's so much in the mainstream, but let's pull up a slide to bring out the survey composition. Tell us about the study. How often do you run it? What's the background and the methodology? >> Yeah, you were just spot on the way you were talking about the private tech companies out there. So what we did is we decided to take all the vendors that we track that are not yet public and move 'em over to the ETS. And there isn't a lot of information out there. If you're not in Silicon (indistinct), you're not going to get this stuff. So PitchBook and Tech Crunch are two out there that gives some data on these guys. But what we really wanted to do was go out to our community. We have 6,000, ITDMs in our community. We wanted to ask them, "Are you aware of these companies? And if so, are you allocating any resources to them? Are you planning to evaluate them," and really just kind of figure out what we can do. So this particular survey, as you can see, 1000 plus responses, over 450 vendors that we track. And essentially what we're trying to do here is talk about your evaluation and awareness of these companies and also your utilization. And also if you're not utilizing 'em, then we can also figure out your sales conversion or churn. So this is interesting, not only for the ITDMs themselves to figure out what their peers are evaluating and what they should put in POCs against the big guys when contracts come up. But it's also really interesting for the tech vendors themselves to see how they're performing. >> And you can see 2/3 of the respondents are director level of above. You got 28% is C-suite. There is of course a North America bias, 70, 75% is North America. But these smaller companies, you know, that's when they start doing business. So, okay. We're going to do a couple of things here today. First, we're going to give you the big picture across the sectors that ETR covers within the ETS survey. And then we're going to look at the high and low sentiment for the larger private companies. And then we're going to do the same for the smaller private companies, the ones that don't have as much mindshare. And then I'm going to put those two groups together and we're going to look at two dimensions, actually three dimensions, which companies are being evaluated the most. Second, companies are getting the most usage and adoption of their offerings. And then third, which companies are seeing the highest churn rates, which of course is a silent killer of companies. And then finally, we're going to look at the sentiment and mindshare for two key areas that we like to cover often here on "Breaking Analysis", security and data. And data comprises database, including data warehousing, and then big data analytics is the second part of data. And then machine learning and AI is the third section within data that we're going to look at. Now, one other thing before we get into it, ETR very often will include open source offerings in the mix, even though they're not companies like TensorFlow or Kubernetes, for example. And we'll call that out during this discussion. The reason this is done is for context, because everyone is using open source. It is the heart of innovation and many business models are super glued to an open source offering, like take MariaDB, for example. There's the foundation and then there's with the open source code and then there, of course, the company that sells services around the offering. Okay, so let's first look at the highest and lowest sentiment among these private firms, the ones that have the highest mindshare. So they're naturally going to be somewhat larger. And we do this on two dimensions, sentiment on the vertical axis and mindshare on the horizontal axis and note the open source tool, see Kubernetes, Postgres, Kafka, TensorFlow, Jenkins, Grafana, et cetera. So Erik, please explain what we're looking at here, how it's derived and what the data tells us. >> Certainly, so there is a lot here, so we're going to break it down first of all by explaining just what mindshare and net sentiment is. You explain the axis. We have so many evaluation metrics, but we need to aggregate them into one so that way we can rank against each other. Net sentiment is really the aggregation of all the positive and subtracting out the negative. So the net sentiment is a very quick way of looking at where these companies stand versus their peers in their sectors and sub sectors. Mindshare is basically the awareness of them, which is good for very early stage companies. And you'll see some names on here that are obviously been around for a very long time. And they're clearly be the bigger on the axis on the outside. Kubernetes, for instance, as you mentioned, is open source. This de facto standard for all container orchestration, and it should be that far up into the right, because that's what everyone's using. In fact, the open source leaders are so prevalent in the emerging technology survey that we break them out later in our analysis, 'cause it's really not fair to include them and compare them to the actual companies that are providing the support and the security around that open source technology. But no survey, no analysis, no research would be complete without including these open source tech. So what we're looking at here, if I can just get away from the open source names, we see other things like Databricks and OneTrust . They're repeating as top net sentiment performers here. And then also the design vendors. People don't spend a lot of time on 'em, but Miro and Figma. This is their third survey in a row where they're just dominating that sentiment overall. And Adobe should probably take note of that because they're really coming after them. But Databricks, we all know probably would've been a public company by now if the market hadn't turned, but you can see just how dominant they are in a survey of nothing but private companies. And we'll see that again when we talk about the database later. >> And I'll just add, so you see automation anywhere on there, the big UiPath competitor company that was not able to get to the public markets. They've been trying. Snyk, Peter McKay's company, they've raised a bunch of money, big security player. They're doing some really interesting things in developer security, helping developers secure the data flow, H2O.ai, Dataiku AI company. We saw them at the Snowflake Summit. Redis Labs, Netskope and security. So a lot of names that we know that ultimately we think are probably going to be hitting the public market. Okay, here's the same view for private companies with less mindshare, Erik. Take us through this one. >> On the previous slide too real quickly, I wanted to pull that security scorecard and we'll get back into it. But this is a newcomer, that I couldn't believe how strong their data was, but we'll bring that up in a second. Now, when we go to the ones of lower mindshare, it's interesting to talk about open source, right? Kubernetes was all the way on the top right. Everyone uses containers. Here we see Istio up there. Not everyone is using service mesh as much. And that's why Istio is in the smaller breakout. But still when you talk about net sentiment, it's about the leader, it's the highest one there is. So really interesting to point out. Then we see other names like Collibra in the data side really performing well. And again, as always security, very well represented here. We have Aqua, Wiz, Armis, which is a standout in this survey this time around. They do IoT security. I hadn't even heard of them until I started digging into the data here. And I couldn't believe how well they were doing. And then of course you have AnyScale, which is doing a second best in this and the best name in the survey Hugging Face, which is a machine learning AI tool. Also doing really well on a net sentiment, but they're not as far along on that access of mindshare just yet. So these are again, emerging companies that might not be as well represented in the enterprise as they will be in a couple of years. >> Hugging Face sounds like something you do with your two year old. Like you said, you see high performers, AnyScale do machine learning and you mentioned them. They came out of Berkeley. Collibra Governance, InfluxData is on there. InfluxDB's a time series database. And yeah, of course, Alex, if you bring that back up, you get a big group of red dots, right? That's the bad zone, I guess, which Sisense does vis, Yellowbrick Data is a NPP database. How should we interpret the red dots, Erik? I mean, is it necessarily a bad thing? Could it be misinterpreted? What's your take on that? >> Sure, well, let me just explain the definition of it first from a data science perspective, right? We're a data company first. So the gray dots that you're seeing that aren't named, that's the mean that's the average. So in order for you to be on this chart, you have to be at least one standard deviation above or below that average. So that gray is where we're saying, "Hey, this is where the lump of average comes in. This is where everyone normally stands." So you either have to be an outperformer or an underperformer to even show up in this analysis. So by definition, yes, the red dots are bad. You're at least one standard deviation below the average of your peers. It's not where you want to be. And if you're on the lower left, not only are you not performing well from a utilization or an actual usage rate, but people don't even know who you are. So that's a problem, obviously. And the VCs and the PEs out there that are backing these companies, they're the ones who mostly are interested in this data. >> Yeah. Oh, that's great explanation. Thank you for that. No, nice benchmarking there and yeah, you don't want to be in the red. All right, let's get into the next segment here. Here going to look at evaluation rates, adoption and the all important churn. First new evaluations. Let's bring up that slide. And Erik, take us through this. >> So essentially I just want to explain what evaluation means is that people will cite that they either plan to evaluate the company or they're currently evaluating. So that means we're aware of 'em and we are choosing to do a POC of them. And then we'll see later how that turns into utilization, which is what a company wants to see, awareness, evaluation, and then actually utilizing them. That's sort of the life cycle for these emerging companies. So what we're seeing here, again, with very high evaluation rates. H2O, we mentioned. SecurityScorecard jumped up again. Chargebee, Snyk, Salt Security, Armis. A lot of security names are up here, Aqua, Netskope, which God has been around forever. I still can't believe it's in an Emerging Technology Survey But so many of these names fall in data and security again, which is why we decided to pick those out Dave. And on the lower side, Vena, Acton, those unfortunately took the dubious award of the lowest evaluations in our survey, but I prefer to focus on the positive. So SecurityScorecard, again, real standout in this one, they're in a security assessment space, basically. They'll come in and assess for you how your security hygiene is. And it's an area of a real interest right now amongst our ITDM community. >> Yeah, I mean, I think those, and then Arctic Wolf is up there too. They're doing managed services. You had mentioned Netskope. Yeah, okay. All right, let's look at now adoption. These are the companies whose offerings are being used the most and are above that standard deviation in the green. Take us through this, Erik. >> Sure, yet again, what we're looking at is, okay, we went from awareness, we went to evaluation. Now it's about utilization, which means a survey respondent's going to state "Yes, we evaluated and we plan to utilize it" or "It's already in our enterprise and we're actually allocating further resources to it." Not surprising, again, a lot of open source, the reason why, it's free. So it's really easy to grow your utilization on something that's free. But as you and I both know, as Red Hat proved, there's a lot of money to be made once the open source is adopted, right? You need the governance, you need the security, you need the support wrapped around it. So here we're seeing Kubernetes, Postgres, Apache Kafka, Jenkins, Grafana. These are all open source based names. But if we're looking at names that are non open source, we're going to see Databricks, Automation Anywhere, Rubrik all have the highest mindshare. So these are the names, not surprisingly, all names that probably should have been public by now. Everyone's expecting an IPO imminently. These are the names that have the highest mindshare. If we talk about the highest utilization rates, again, Miro and Figma pop up, and I know they're not household names, but they are just dominant in this survey. These are applications that are meant for design software and, again, they're going after an Autodesk or a CAD or Adobe type of thing. It is just dominant how high the utilization rates are here, which again is something Adobe should be paying attention to. And then you'll see a little bit lower, but also interesting, we see Collibra again, we see Hugging Face again. And these are names that are obviously in the data governance, ML, AI side. So we're seeing a ton of data, a ton of security and Rubrik was interesting in this one, too, high utilization and high mindshare. We know how pervasive they are in the enterprise already. >> Erik, Alex, keep that up for a second, if you would. So yeah, you mentioned Rubrik. Cohesity's not on there. They're sort of the big one. We're going to talk about them in a moment. Puppet is interesting to me because you remember the early days of that sort of space, you had Puppet and Chef and then you had Ansible. Red Hat bought Ansible and then Ansible really took off. So it's interesting to see Puppet on there as well. Okay. So now let's look at the churn because this one is where you don't want to be. It's, of course, all red 'cause churn is bad. Take us through this, Erik. >> Yeah, definitely don't want to be here and I don't love to dwell on the negative. So we won't spend as much time. But to your point, there's one thing I want to point out that think it's important. So you see Rubrik in the same spot, but Rubrik has so many citations in our survey that it actually would make sense that they're both being high utilization and churn just because they're so well represented. They have such a high overall representation in our survey. And the reason I call that out is Cohesity. Cohesity has an extremely high churn rate here about 17% and unlike Rubrik, they were not on the utilization side. So Rubrik is seeing both, Cohesity is not. It's not being utilized, but it's seeing a high churn. So that's the way you can look at this data and say, "Hm." Same thing with Puppet. You noticed that it was on the other slide. It's also on this one. So basically what it means is a lot of people are giving Puppet a shot, but it's starting to churn, which means it's not as sticky as we would like. One that was surprising on here for me was Tanium. It's kind of jumbled in there. It's hard to see in the middle, but Tanium, I was very surprised to see as high of a churn because what I do hear from our end user community is that people that use it, like it. It really kind of spreads into not only vulnerability management, but also that endpoint detection and response side. So I was surprised by that one, mostly to see Tanium in here. Mural, again, was another one of those application design softwares that's seeing a very high churn as well. >> So you're saying if you're in both... Alex, bring that back up if you would. So if you're in both like MariaDB is for example, I think, yeah, they're in both. They're both green in the previous one and red here, that's not as bad. You mentioned Rubrik is going to be in both. Cohesity is a bit of a concern. Cohesity just brought on Sanjay Poonen. So this could be a go to market issue, right? I mean, 'cause Cohesity has got a great product and they got really happy customers. So they're just maybe having to figure out, okay, what's the right ideal customer profile and Sanjay Poonen, I guarantee, is going to have that company cranking. I mean they had been doing very well on the surveys and had fallen off of a bit. The other interesting things wondering the previous survey I saw Cvent, which is an event platform. My only reason I pay attention to that is 'cause we actually have an event platform. We don't sell it separately. We bundle it as part of our offerings. And you see Hopin on here. Hopin raised a billion dollars during the pandemic. And we were like, "Wow, that's going to blow up." And so you see Hopin on the churn and you didn't see 'em in the previous chart, but that's sort of interesting. Like you said, let's not kind of dwell on the negative, but you really don't. You know, churn is a real big concern. Okay, now we're going to drill down into two sectors, security and data. Where data comprises three areas, database and data warehousing, machine learning and AI and big data analytics. So first let's take a look at the security sector. Now this is interesting because not only is it a sector drill down, but also gives an indicator of how much money the firm has raised, which is the size of that bubble. And to tell us if a company is punching above its weight and efficiently using its venture capital. Erik, take us through this slide. Explain the dots, the size of the dots. Set this up please. >> Yeah. So again, the axis is still the same, net sentiment and mindshare, but what we've done this time is we've taken publicly available information on how much capital company is raised and that'll be the size of the circle you see around the name. And then whether it's green or red is basically saying relative to the amount of money they've raised, how are they doing in our data? So when you see a Netskope, which has been around forever, raised a lot of money, that's why you're going to see them more leading towards red, 'cause it's just been around forever and kind of would expect it. Versus a name like SecurityScorecard, which is only raised a little bit of money and it's actually performing just as well, if not better than a name, like a Netskope. OneTrust doing absolutely incredible right now. BeyondTrust. We've seen the issues with Okta, right. So those are two names that play in that space that obviously are probably getting some looks about what's going on right now. Wiz, we've all heard about right? So raised a ton of money. It's doing well on net sentiment, but the mindshare isn't as well as you'd want, which is why you're going to see a little bit of that red versus a name like Aqua, which is doing container and application security. And hasn't raised as much money, but is really neck and neck with a name like Wiz. So that is why on a relative basis, you'll see that more green. As we all know, information security is never going away. But as we'll get to later in the program, Dave, I'm not sure in this current market environment, if people are as willing to do POCs and switch away from their security provider, right. There's a little bit of tepidness out there, a little trepidation. So right now we're seeing overall a slight pause, a slight cooling in overall evaluations on the security side versus historical levels a year ago. >> Now let's stay on here for a second. So a couple things I want to point out. So it's interesting. Now Snyk has raised over, I think $800 million but you can see them, they're high on the vertical and the horizontal, but now compare that to Lacework. It's hard to see, but they're kind of buried in the middle there. That's the biggest dot in this whole thing. I think I'm interpreting this correctly. They've raised over a billion dollars. It's a Mike Speiser company. He was the founding investor in Snowflake. So people watch that very closely, but that's an example of where they're not punching above their weight. They recently had a layoff and they got to fine tune things, but I'm still confident they they're going to do well. 'Cause they're approaching security as a data problem, which is probably people having trouble getting their arms around that. And then again, I see Arctic Wolf. They're not red, they're not green, but they've raised fair amount of money, but it's showing up to the right and decent level there. And a couple of the other ones that you mentioned, Netskope. Yeah, they've raised a lot of money, but they're actually performing where you want. What you don't want is where Lacework is, right. They've got some work to do to really take advantage of the money that they raised last November and prior to that. >> Yeah, if you're seeing that more neutral color, like you're calling out with an Arctic Wolf, like that means relative to their peers, this is where they should be. It's when you're seeing that red on a Lacework where we all know, wow, you raised a ton of money and your mindshare isn't where it should be. Your net sentiment is not where it should be comparatively. And then you see these great standouts, like Salt Security and SecurityScorecard and Abnormal. You know they haven't raised that much money yet, but their net sentiment's higher and their mindshare's doing well. So those basically in a nutshell, if you're a PE or a VC and you see a small green circle, then you're doing well, then it means you made a good investment. >> Some of these guys, I don't know, but you see these small green circles. Those are the ones you want to start digging into and maybe help them catch a wave. Okay, let's get into the data discussion. And again, three areas, database slash data warehousing, big data analytics and ML AI. First, we're going to look at the database sector. So Alex, thank you for bringing that up. Alright, take us through this, Erik. Actually, let me just say Postgres SQL. I got to ask you about this. It shows some funding, but that actually could be a mix of EDB, the company that commercializes Postgres and Postgres the open source database, which is a transaction system and kind of an open source Oracle. You see MariaDB is a database, but open source database. But the companies they've raised over $200 million and they filed an S-4. So Erik looks like this might be a little bit of mashup of companies and open source products. Help us understand this. >> Yeah, it's tough when you start dealing with the open source side and I'll be honest with you, there is a little bit of a mashup here. There are certain names here that are a hundred percent for profit companies. And then there are others that are obviously open source based like Redis is open source, but Redis Labs is the one trying to monetize the support around it. So you're a hundred percent accurate on this slide. I think one of the things here that's important to note though, is just how important open source is to data. If you're going to be going to any of these areas, it's going to be open source based to begin with. And Neo4j is one I want to call out here. It's not one everyone's familiar with, but it's basically geographical charting database, which is a name that we're seeing on a net sentiment side actually really, really high. When you think about it's the third overall net sentiment for a niche database play. It's not as big on the mindshare 'cause it's use cases aren't as often, but third biggest play on net sentiment. I found really interesting on this slide. >> And again, so MariaDB, as I said, they filed an S-4 I think $50 million in revenue, that might even be ARR. So they're not huge, but they're getting there. And by the way, MariaDB, if you don't know, was the company that was formed the day that Oracle bought Sun in which they got MySQL and MariaDB has done a really good job of replacing a lot of MySQL instances. Oracle has responded with MySQL HeatWave, which was kind of the Oracle version of MySQL. So there's some interesting battles going on there. If you think about the LAMP stack, the M in the LAMP stack was MySQL. And so now it's all MariaDB replacing that MySQL for a large part. And then you see again, the red, you know, you got to have some concerns about there. Aerospike's been around for a long time. SingleStore changed their name a couple years ago, last year. Yellowbrick Data, Fire Bolt was kind of going after Snowflake for a while, but yeah, you want to get out of that red zone. So they got some work to do. >> And Dave, real quick for the people that aren't aware, I just want to let them know that we can cut this data with the public company data as well. So we can cross over this with that because some of these names are competing with the larger public company names as well. So we can go ahead and cross reference like a MariaDB with a Mongo, for instance, or of something of that nature. So it's not in this slide, but at another point we can certainly explain on a relative basis how these private names are doing compared to the other ones as well. >> All right, let's take a quick look at analytics. Alex, bring that up if you would. Go ahead, Erik. >> Yeah, I mean, essentially here, I can't see it on my screen, my apologies. I just kind of went to blank on that. So gimme one second to catch up. >> So I could set it up while you're doing that. You got Grafana up and to the right. I mean, this is huge right. >> Got it thank you. I lost my screen there for a second. Yep. Again, open source name Grafana, absolutely up and to the right. But as we know, Grafana Labs is actually picking up a lot of speed based on Grafana, of course. And I think we might actually hear some noise from them coming this year. The names that are actually a little bit more disappointing than I want to call out are names like ThoughtSpot. It's been around forever. Their mindshare of course is second best here but based on the amount of time they've been around and the amount of money they've raised, it's not actually outperforming the way it should be. We're seeing Moogsoft obviously make some waves. That's very high net sentiment for that company. It's, you know, what, third, fourth position overall in this entire area, Another name like Fivetran, Matillion is doing well. Fivetran, even though it's got a high net sentiment, again, it's raised so much money that we would've expected a little bit more at this point. I know you know this space extremely well, but basically what we're looking at here and to the bottom left, you're going to see some names with a lot of red, large circles that really just aren't performing that well. InfluxData, however, second highest net sentiment. And it's really pretty early on in this stage and the feedback we're getting on this name is the use cases are great, the efficacy's great. And I think it's one to watch out for. >> InfluxData, time series database. The other interesting things I just noticed here, you got Tamer on here, which is that little small green. Those are the ones we were saying before, look for those guys. They might be some of the interesting companies out there and then observe Jeremy Burton's company. They do observability on top of Snowflake, not green, but kind of in that gray. So that's kind of cool. Monte Carlo is another one, they're sort of slightly green. They are doing some really interesting things in data and data mesh. So yeah, okay. So I can spend all day on this stuff, Erik, phenomenal data. I got to get back and really dig in. Let's end with machine learning and AI. Now this chart it's similar in its dimensions, of course, except for the money raised. We're not showing that size of the bubble, but AI is so hot. We wanted to cover that here, Erik, explain this please. Why TensorFlow is highlighted and walk us through this chart. >> Yeah, it's funny yet again, right? Another open source name, TensorFlow being up there. And I just want to explain, we do break out machine learning, AI is its own sector. A lot of this of course really is intertwined with the data side, but it is on its own area. And one of the things I think that's most important here to break out is Databricks. We started to cover Databricks in machine learning, AI. That company has grown into much, much more than that. So I do want to state to you Dave, and also the audience out there that moving forward, we're going to be moving Databricks out of only the MA/AI into other sectors. So we can kind of value them against their peers a little bit better. But in this instance, you could just see how dominant they are in this area. And one thing that's not here, but I do want to point out is that we have the ability to break this down by industry vertical, organization size. And when I break this down into Fortune 500 and Fortune 1000, both Databricks and Tensorflow are even better than you see here. So it's quite interesting to see that the names that are succeeding are also succeeding with the largest organizations in the world. And as we know, large organizations means large budgets. So this is one area that I just thought was really interesting to point out that as we break it down, the data by vertical, these two names still are the outstanding players. >> I just also want to call it H2O.ai. They're getting a lot of buzz in the marketplace and I'm seeing them a lot more. Anaconda, another one. Dataiku consistently popping up. DataRobot is also interesting because all the kerfuffle that's going on there. The Cube guy, Cube alum, Chris Lynch stepped down as executive chairman. All this stuff came out about how the executives were taking money off the table and didn't allow the employees to participate in that money raising deal. So that's pissed a lot of people off. And so they're now going through some kind of uncomfortable things, which is unfortunate because DataRobot, I noticed, we haven't covered them that much in "Breaking Analysis", but I've noticed them oftentimes, Erik, in the surveys doing really well. So you would think that company has a lot of potential. But yeah, it's an important space that we're going to continue to watch. Let me ask you Erik, can you contextualize this from a time series standpoint? I mean, how is this changed over time? >> Yeah, again, not show here, but in the data. I'm sorry, go ahead. >> No, I'm sorry. What I meant, I should have interjected. In other words, you would think in a downturn that these emerging companies would be less interesting to buyers 'cause they're more risky. What have you seen? >> Yeah, and it was interesting before we went live, you and I were having this conversation about "Is the downturn stopping people from evaluating these private companies or not," right. In a larger sense, that's really what we're doing here. How are these private companies doing when it comes down to the actual practitioners? The people with the budget, the people with the decision making. And so what I did is, we have historical data as you know, I went back to the Emerging Technology Survey we did in November of 21, right at the crest right before the market started to really fall and everything kind of started to fall apart there. And what I noticed is on the security side, very much so, we're seeing less evaluations than we were in November 21. So I broke it down. On cloud security, net sentiment went from 21% to 16% from November '21. That's a pretty big drop. And again, that sentiment is our one aggregate metric for overall positivity, meaning utilization and actual evaluation of the name. Again in database, we saw it drop a little bit from 19% to 13%. However, in analytics we actually saw it stay steady. So it's pretty interesting that yes, cloud security and security in general is always going to be important. But right now we're seeing less overall net sentiment in that space. But within analytics, we're seeing steady with growing mindshare. And also to your point earlier in machine learning, AI, we're seeing steady net sentiment and mindshare has grown a whopping 25% to 30%. So despite the downturn, we're seeing more awareness of these companies in analytics and machine learning and a steady, actual utilization of them. I can't say the same in security and database. They're actually shrinking a little bit since the end of last year. >> You know it's interesting, we were on a round table, Erik does these round tables with CISOs and CIOs, and I remember one time you had asked the question, "How do you think about some of these emerging tech companies?" And one of the executives said, "I always include somebody in the bottom left of the Gartner Magic Quadrant in my RFPs. I think he said, "That's how I found," I don't know, it was Zscaler or something like that years before anybody ever knew of them "Because they're going to help me get to the next level." So it's interesting to see Erik in these sectors, how they're holding up in many cases. >> Yeah. It's a very important part for the actual IT practitioners themselves. There's always contracts coming up and you always have to worry about your next round of negotiations. And that's one of the roles these guys play. You have to do a POC when contracts come up, but it's also their job to stay on top of the new technology. You can't fall behind. Like everyone's a software company. Now everyone's a tech company, no matter what you're doing. So these guys have to stay in on top of it. And that's what this ETS can do. You can go in here and look and say, "All right, I'm going to evaluate their technology," and it could be twofold. It might be that you're ready to upgrade your technology and they're actually pushing the envelope or it simply might be I'm using them as a negotiation ploy. So when I go back to the big guy who I have full intentions of writing that contract to, at least I have some negotiation leverage. >> Erik, we got to leave it there. I could spend all day. I'm going to definitely dig into this on my own time. Thank you for introducing this, really appreciate your time today. >> I always enjoy it, Dave and I hope everyone out there has a great holiday weekend. Enjoy the rest of the summer. And, you know, I love to talk data. So anytime you want, just point the camera on me and I'll start talking data. >> You got it. I also want to thank the team at ETR, not only Erik, but Darren Bramen who's a data scientist, really helped prepare this data, the entire team over at ETR. I cannot tell you how much additional data there is. We are just scratching the surface in this "Breaking Analysis". So great job guys. I want to thank Alex Myerson. Who's on production and he manages the podcast. Ken Shifman as well, who's just coming back from VMware Explore. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE. Does some great editing for us. Thank you. All of you guys. Remember these episodes, they're all available as podcast, wherever you listen. All you got to do is just search "Breaking Analysis" podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or you can email me to get in touch david.vellante@siliconangle.com. You can DM me at dvellante or comment on my LinkedIn posts and please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for Erik Bradley and The Cube 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 theCUBE and ETR, This is "Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante". >> Black Hat 22 was held in Las Vegas last week, the same time as theCUBE Supercloud event. Unlike AWS re:Inforce where words are carefully chosen to put a positive spin on security, Black Hat exposes all the warts of cyber and openly discusses its hard truths. It's a conference that's attended by technical experts who proudly share some of the vulnerabilities they've discovered, and, of course, by numerous vendors marketing their products and services. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this "Breaking Analysis", we summarize what we learned from discussions with several people who attended Black Hat and our analysis from reviewing dozens of keynotes, articles, sessions, and data from a recent Black Hat Attendees Survey conducted by Black Hat and Informa, and we'll end with the discussion of what it all means for the challenges around securing the supercloud. Now, I personally did not attend, but as I said at the top, we reviewed a lot of content from the event which is renowned for its hundreds of sessions, breakouts, and strong technical content that is, as they say, unvarnished. Chris Krebs, the former director of Us cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, CISA, he gave the keynote, and he spoke about the increasing complexity of tech stacks and the ripple effects that that has on organizational risk. Risk was a big theme at the event. Where re:Inforce tends to emphasize, again, the positive state of cybersecurity, it could be said that Black Hat, as the name implies, focuses on the other end of the spectrum. Risk, as a major theme of the event at the show, got a lot of attention. Now, there was a lot of talk, as always, about the expanded threat service, you hear that at any event that's focused on cybersecurity, and tons of emphasis on supply chain risk as a relatively new threat that's come to the CISO's minds. Now, there was also plenty of discussion about hybrid work and how remote work has dramatically increased business risk. According to data from in Intel 471's Mark Arena, the previously mentioned Black Hat Attendee Survey showed that compromise credentials posed the number one source of risk followed by infrastructure vulnerabilities and supply chain risks, so a couple of surveys here that we're citing, and we'll come back to that in a moment. At an MIT cybersecurity conference earlier last decade, theCUBE had a hypothetical conversation with former Boston Globe war correspondent, Charles Sennott, about the future of war and the role of cyber. We had similar discussions with Dr. Robert Gates on theCUBE at a ServiceNow event in 2016. At Black Hat, these discussions went well beyond the theoretical with actual data from the war in Ukraine. It's clear that modern wars are and will be supported by cyber, but the takeaways are that they will be highly situational, targeted, and unpredictable because in combat scenarios, anything can happen. People aren't necessarily at their keyboards. Now, the role of AI was certainly discussed as it is at every conference, and particularly cyber conferences. You know, it was somewhat dissed as over hyped, not surprisingly, but while AI is not a panacea to cyber exposure, automation and machine intelligence can definitely augment, what appear to be and have been stressed out, security teams can do this by recommending actions and taking other helpful types of data and presenting it in a curated form that can streamline the job of the SecOps team. Now, most cyber defenses are still going to be based on tried and true monitoring and telemetry data and log analysis and curating known signatures and analyzing consolidated data, but increasingly, AI will help with the unknowns, i.e. zero-day threats and threat actor behaviors after infiltration. Now, finally, while much lip service was given to collaboration and public-private partnerships, especially after Stuxsnet was revealed early last decade, the real truth is that threat intelligence in the private sector is still evolving. In particular, the industry, mid decade, really tried to commercially exploit proprietary intelligence and, you know, do private things like private reporting and monetize that, but attitudes toward collaboration are trending in a positive direction was one of the sort of outcomes that we heard at Black Hat. Public-private partnerships are being both mandated by government, and there seems to be a willingness to work together to fight an increasingly capable adversary. These things are definitely on the rise. Now, without this type of collaboration, securing the supercloud is going to become much more challenging and confined to narrow solutions. and we're going to talk about that little later in the segment. Okay, let's look at some of the attendees survey data from Black Hat. Just under 200 really serious security pros took the survey, so not enough to slice and dice by hair color, eye color, height, weight, and favorite movie genre, but enough to extract high level takeaways. You know, these strongly agree or disagree survey responses can sometimes give vanilla outputs, but let's look for the ones where very few respondents strongly agree or disagree with a statement or those that overwhelmingly strongly agree or somewhat agree. So it's clear from this that the respondents believe the following, one, your credentials are out there and available to criminals. Very few people thought that that was, you know, unavoidable. Second, remote work is here to stay, and third, nobody was willing to really jinx their firms and say that they strongly disagree that they'll have to respond to a major cybersecurity incident within the next 12 months. Now, as we've reported extensively, COVID has permanently changed the cybersecurity landscape and the CISO's priorities and playbook. Check out this data that queries respondents on the pandemic's impact on cybersecurity, new requirements to secure remote workers, more cloud, more threats from remote systems and remote users, and a shift away from perimeter defenses that are no longer as effective, e.g. firewall appliances. Note, however, the fifth response that's down there highlighted in green. It shows a meaningful drop in the percentage of remote workers that are disregarding corporate security policy, still too many, but 10 percentage points down from 2021 survey. Now, as we've said many times, bad user behavior will trump good security technology virtually every time. Consistent with the commentary from Mark Arena's Intel 471 threat report, fishing for credentials is the number one concern cited in the Black Hat Attendees Survey. This is a people and process problem more than a technology issue. Yes, using multifactor authentication, changing passwords, you know, using unique passwords, using password managers, et cetera, they're all great things, but if it's too hard for users to implement these things, they won't do it, they'll remain exposed, and their organizations will remain exposed. Number two in the graphic, sophisticated attacks that could expose vulnerabilities in the security infrastructure, again, consistent with the Intel 471 data, and three, supply chain risks, again, consistent with Mark Arena's commentary. Ask most CISOs their number one problem, and they'll tell you, "It's a lack of talent." That'll be on the top of their list. So it's no surprise that 63% of survey respondents believe they don't have the security staff necessary to defend against cyber threats. This speaks to the rise of managed security service providers that we've talked about previously on "Breaking Analysis". We've seen estimates that less than 50% of organizations in the US have a SOC, and we see those firms as ripe for MSSP support as well as larger firms augmenting staff with managed service providers. Now, after re:Invent, we put forth this conceptual model that discussed how the cloud was becoming the first line of defense for CISOs, and DevOps was being asked to do more, things like securing the runtime, the containers, the platform, et cetera, and audit was kind of that last line of defense. So a couple things we picked up from Black Hat which are consistent with this shift and some that are somewhat new, first, is getting visibility across the expanded threat surface was a big theme at Black Hat. This makes it even harder to identify risk, of course, this being the expanded threat surface. It's one thing to know that there's a vulnerability somewhere. It's another thing to determine the severity of the risk, but understanding how easy or difficult it is to exploit that vulnerability and how to prioritize action around that. Vulnerability is increasingly complex for CISOs as the security landscape gets complexified. So what's happening is the SOC, if there even is one at the organization, is becoming federated. No longer can there be one ivory tower that's the magic god room of data and threat detection and analysis. Rather, the SOC is becoming distributed following the data, and as we just mentioned, the SOC is being augmented by the cloud provider and the managed service providers, the MSSPs. So there's a lot of critical security data that is decentralized and this will necessitate a new cyber data model where data can be synchronized and shared across a federation of SOCs, if you will, or mini SOCs or SOC capabilities that live in and/or embedded in an organization's ecosystem. Now, to this point about cloud being the first line of defense, let's turn to a story from ETR that came out of our colleague Eric Bradley's insight in a one-on-one he did with a senior IR person at a manufacturing firm. In a piece that ETR published called "Saved by Zscaler", check out this comment. Quote, "As the last layer, we are filtering all the outgoing internet traffic through Zscaler. And when an attacker is already on your network, and they're trying to communicate with the outside to exchange encryption keys, Zscaler is already blocking the traffic. It happened to us. It happened and we were saved by Zscaler." So that's pretty cool. So not only is the cloud the first line of defense, as we sort of depicted in that previous graphic, here's an example where it's also the last line of defense. Now, let's end on what this all means to securing the supercloud. At our Supercloud 22 event last week in our Palo Alto CUBE Studios, we had a session on this topic on supercloud, securing the supercloud. Security, in our view, is going to be one of the most important and difficult challenges for the idea of supercloud to become real. We reviewed in last week's "Breaking Analysis" a detailed discussion with Snowflake co-founder and president of products, Benoit Dageville, how his company approaches security in their data cloud, what we call a superdata cloud. Snowflake doesn't use the term supercloud. They use the term datacloud, but what if you don't have the focus, the engineering depth, and the bank roll that Snowflake has? Does that mean superclouds will only be developed by those companies with deep pockets and enormous resources? Well, that's certainly possible, but on the securing the supercloud panel, we had three technical experts, Gee Rittenhouse of Skyhigh Security, Piyush Sharrma who's the founder of Accurics who sold to Tenable, and Tony Kueh, who's the former Head of Product at VMware. Now, John Furrier asked each of them, "What is missing? What's it going to take to secure the supercloud? What has to happen?" Here's what they said. Play the clip. >> This is the final question. We have one minute left. I wish we had more time. This is a great panel. We'll bring you guys back for sure after the event. What one thing needs to happen to unify or get through the other side of this fragmentation and then the challenges for supercloud? Because remember, the enterprise equation is solve complexity with more complexity. Well, that's not what the market wants. They want simplicity. They want SaaS. They want ease of use. They want infrastructure risk code. What has to happen? What do you think, each of you? >> So I can start, and extending to the previous conversation, I think we need a consortium. We need a framework that defines that if you really want to operate on supercloud, these are the 10 things that you must follow. It doesn't matter whether you take AWS, Slash, or TCP or you have all, and you will have the on-prem also, which means that it has to follow a pattern, and that pattern is what is required for supercloud, in my opinion. Otherwise, security is going everywhere. They're like they have to fix everything, find everything, and so on and so forth. It's not going to be possible. So they need a framework. They need a consortium, and this consortium needs to be, I think, needs to led by the cloud providers because they're the ones who have these foundational infrastructure elements, and the security vendor should contribute on providing more severe detections or severe findings. So that's, in my opinion, should be the model. >> Great, well, thank you, Gee. >> Yeah, I would think it's more along the lines of a business model. We've seen in cloud that the scale matters, and once you're big, you get bigger. We haven't seen that coalesce around either a vendor, a business model, or whatnot to bring all of this and connect it all together yet. So that value proposition in the industry, I think, is missing, but there's elements of it already available. >> I think there needs to be a mindset. If you look, again, history repeating itself. The internet sort of came together around set of IETF, RSC standards. Everybody embraced and extended it, right? But still, there was, at least, a baseline, and I think at that time, the largest and most innovative vendors understood that they couldn't do it by themselves, right? And so I think what we need is a mindset where these big guys, like Google, let's take an example. They're not going to win at all, but they can have a substantial share. So how do they collaborate with the ecosystem around a set of standards so that they can bring their differentiation and then embrace everybody together. >> Okay, so Gee's point about a business model is, you know, business model being missing, it's broadly true, but perhaps Snowflake serves as a business model where they've just gone out and and done it, setting or trying to set a de facto standard by which data can be shared and monetized. They're certainly setting that standard and mandating that standard within the Snowflake ecosystem with its proprietary framework. You know, perhaps that is one answer, but Tony lays out a scenario where there's a collaboration mindset around a set of standards with an ecosystem. You know, intriguing is this idea of a consortium or a framework that Piyush was talking about, and that speaks to the collaboration or lack thereof that we spoke of earlier, and his and Tony's proposal that the cloud providers should lead with the security vendor ecosystem playing a supporting role is pretty compelling, but can you see AWS and Azure and Google in a kumbaya moment getting together to make that happen? It seems unlikely, but maybe a better partnership between the US government and big tech could be a starting point. Okay, that's it for today. I want to thank the many people who attended Black Hat, reported on it, wrote about it, gave talks, did videos, and some that spoke to me that had attended the event, Becky Bracken, who is the EIC at Dark Reading. They do a phenomenal job and the entire team at Dark Reading, the news desk there, Mark Arena, whom I mentioned, Garrett O'Hara, Nash Borges, Kelly Jackson, sorry, Kelly Jackson Higgins, Roya Gordon, Robert Lipovsky, Chris Krebs, and many others, thanks for the great, great commentary and the content that you put out there, and thanks to Alex Myerson, who's on production, and Alex manages the podcasts for us. Ken Schiffman is also in our Marlborough studio as well, outside of Boston. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters, and Rob Hoff is our Editor-in-Chief at SiliconANGLE and does some great editing and helps with the titles of "Breaking Analysis" quite often. Remember these episodes, they're all available as podcasts, wherever you listen, just search for "Breaking Analysis Podcasts". I publish each on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com, and you could email me, get in touch with me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or you can DM me @dvellante or comment on my LinkedIn posts, and please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis". (upbeat music)

>> From the theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> Welcome to this week's Wikibon, theCUBE's insights powered by ETR. As we exited the isolation economy last year, supercloud is a term that we introduced to describe something new that was happening in the world of cloud. In this Breaking Analysis, we address the 10 most frequently asked questions we get around supercloud. Okay, let's review these frequently asked questions on supercloud that we're going to try to answer today. Look at an industry that's full of hype and buzzwords. Why the hell does anyone need a new term? Aren't hyperscalers building out superclouds? We'll try to answer why the term supercloud connotes something different from hyperscale clouds. And we'll talk about the problems that superclouds solve specifically. And we'll further define the critical aspects of a supercloud architecture. We often get asked, isn't this just multi-cloud? Well, we don't think so, and we'll explain why in this Breaking Analysis. Now in an earlier episode, we introduced the notion of super PaaS. Well, isn't a plain vanilla PaaS already a super PaaS? Again, we don't think so, and we'll explain why. Who will actually build and who are the players currently building superclouds? What workloads and services will run on superclouds? And 8-A or number nine, what are some examples that we can share of supercloud? And finally, we'll answer what you can expect next from us on supercloud? Okay, let's get started. Why do we need another buzzword? Well, late last year, ahead of re:Invent, we were inspired by a post from Jerry Chen called "Castles in the Cloud." Now in that blog post, he introduced the idea that there were sub-markets emerging in cloud that presented opportunities for investors and entrepreneurs that the cloud wasn't going to suck the hyperscalers. Weren't going to suck all the value out of the industry. And so we introduced this notion of supercloud to describe what we saw as a value layer emerging above the hyperscalers CAPEX gift, we sometimes call it. Now it turns out, that we weren't the only ones using the term as both Cornell and MIT have used the phrase in somewhat similar, but different contexts. The point is something new was happening in the AWS and other ecosystems. It was more than IaaS and PaaS, and wasn't just SaaS running in the cloud. It was a new architecture that integrates infrastructure, platform and software as services to solve new problems that the cloud vendors in our view, weren't addressing by themselves. It seemed to us that the ecosystem was pursuing opportunities across clouds that went beyond conventional implementations of multi-cloud. And we felt there was a structural change going on at the industry level, the supercloud, metaphorically was highlighting. So that's the background on why we felt a new catch phrase was warranted, love it or hate it. It's memorable and it's what we chose. Now to that last point about structural industry transformation. Andy Rappaport is sometimes and often credited with identifying the shift from the vertically integrated IBM mainframe era to the fragmented PC microprocesor-based era in his HBR article in 1991. In fact, it was David Moschella, who at the time was an IDC Analyst who first introduced the concept in 1987, four years before Rappaport's article was published. Moschella saw that it was clear that Intel, Microsoft, Seagate and others would replace the system vendors, and put that forth in a graphic that looked similar to the first two on this chart. We don't have to review the shift from IBM as the center of the industry to Wintel, that's well understood. What isn't as well known or accepted is what Moschella put out in his 2018 book called "Seeing Digital" which introduced the idea of "The Matrix" that's shown on the right hand side of this chart. Moschella posited that new services were emerging built on top of the internet and hyperscale clouds that would integrate other innovations and would define the next era of computing. He used the term Matrix because the conceptual depiction included not only horizontal technology rose like the cloud and the internet, but for the first time included connected industry verticals, the columns in this chart. Moschella pointed out that whereas historically, industry verticals had a closed value chain or stack and ecosystem of R&D, and production, and manufacturing, and distribution. And if you were in that industry, the expertise within that vertical generally stayed within that vertical and was critical to success. But because of digital and data, for the first time, companies were able to traverse industries, jump across industries and compete because data enabled them to do that. Examples, Amazon and content, payments, groceries, Apple, and payments, and content, and so forth. There are many examples. Data was now this unifying enabler and this marked a change in the structure of the technology landscape. And supercloud is meant to imply more than running in hyperscale clouds, rather it's the combination of multiple technologies enabled by CloudScale with new industry participants from those verticals, financial services and healthcare, manufacturing, energy, media, and virtually all in any industry. Kind of an extension of every company is a software company. Basically, every company now has the opportunity to build their own cloud or supercloud. And we'll come back to that. Let's first address what's different about superclouds relative to hyperscale clouds? You know, this one's pretty straightforward and obvious, I think. Hyperscale clouds, they're walled gardens where they want your data in their cloud and they want to keep you there. Sure, every cloud player realizes that not all data will go to their particular cloud so they're meeting customers where their data lives with initiatives like Amazon Outposts and Azure Arc, and Google Anthos. But at the end of the day, the more homogeneous they can make their environments, the better control, security, cost, and performance they can deliver. The more complex the environment, the more difficult it is to deliver on their brand promises. And of course, the lesser margin that's left for them to capture. Will the hyperscalers get more serious about cross-cloud services? Maybe, but they have plenty of work to do within their own clouds and within enabling their own ecosystems. They had a long way to go a lot of runway. So let's talk about specifically, what problems superclouds solve? We've all seen the stats from IDC or Gartner, or whomever the customers on average use more than one cloud. You know, two clouds, three clouds, five clouds, 20 clouds. And we know these clouds operate in disconnected silos for the most part. And that's a problem because each cloud requires different skills because the development environment is different as is the operating environment. They have different APIs, different primitives, and different management tools that are optimized for each respective hyperscale cloud. Their functions and value props don't extend to their competitors' clouds for the most part. Why would they? As a result, there's friction when moving between different clouds. It's hard to share data, it's hard to move work. It's hard to secure and govern data. It's hard to enforce organizational edicts and policies across these clouds, and on-prem. Supercloud is an architecture designed to create a single environment that enables management of workloads and data across clouds in an effort to take out complexity, accelerate application development, streamline operations and share data safely, irrespective of location. It's pretty straightforward, but non-trivial, which is why I always ask a company's CEO and executives if stock buybacks and dividends will yield as much return as building out superclouds that solve really specific and hard problems, and create differential value. Okay, let's dig a bit more into the architectural aspects of supercloud. In other words, what are the salient attributes of supercloud? So first and foremost, a supercloud runs a set of specific services designed to solve a unique problem and it can do so in more than one cloud. Superclouds leverage the underlying cloud native tooling of a hyperscale cloud, but they're optimized for a specific objective that aligns with the problem that they're trying to solve. For example, supercloud might be optimized for lowest cost or lowest latency, or sharing data, or governing, or securing that data, or higher performance for networking, for example. But the point is, the collection of services that is being delivered is focused on a unique value proposition that is not being delivered by the hyperscalers across clouds. A supercloud abstracts the underlying and siloed primitives of the native PaaS layer from the hyperscale cloud and then using its own specific platform as a service tooling, creates a common experience across clouds for developers and users. And it does so in a most efficient manner, meaning it has the metadata knowledge and management capabilities that can optimize for latency, bandwidth, or recovery, or data sovereignty, or whatever unique value that supercloud is delivering for the specific use case in their domain. And a supercloud comprises a super PaaS capability that allows ecosystem partners through APIs to add incremental value on top of the supercloud platform to fill gaps, accelerate features, and of course innovate. The services can be infrastructure-related, they could be application services, they could be data services, security services, user services, et cetera, designed and packaged to bring unique value to customers. Again, that hyperscalers are not delivering across clouds or on-premises. Okay, so another common question we get is, isn't that just multi-cloud? And what we'd say to that is yes, but no. You can call it multi-cloud 2.0, if you want, if you want to use it, it's kind of a commonly used rubric. But as Dell's Chuck Whitten proclaimed at Dell Technologies World this year, multi-cloud by design, is different than multi-cloud by default. Meaning to date, multi-cloud has largely been a symptom of what we've called multi-vendor or of M&A, you buy a company and they happen to use Google Cloud, and so you bring it in. And when you look at most so-called, multi-cloud implementations, you see things like an on-prem stack, which is wrapped in a container and hosted on a specific cloud or increasingly a technology vendor has done the work of building a cloud native version of their stack and running it on a specific cloud. But historically, it's been a unique experience within each cloud with virtually no connection between the cloud silos. Supercloud sets out to build incremental value across clouds and above hyperscale CAPEX that goes beyond cloud compatibility within each cloud. So if you want to call it multi-cloud 2.0, that's fine, but we chose to call it supercloud. Okay, so at this point you may be asking, well isn't PaaS already a version of supercloud? And again, we would say no, that supercloud and its corresponding superPaaS layer which is a prerequisite, gives the freedom to store, process and manage, and secure, and connect islands of data across a continuum with a common experience across clouds. And the services offered are specific to that supercloud and will vary by each offering. Your OpenShift, for example, can be used to construct a superPaaS, but in and of itself, isn't a superPaaS, it's generic. A superPaaS might be developed to support, for instance, ultra low latency database work. It would unlikely again, taking the OpenShift example, it's unlikely that off-the-shelf OpenShift would be used to develop such a low latency superPaaS layer for ultra low latency database work. The point is supercloud and its inherent superPaaS will be optimized to solve specific problems like that low latency example for distributed databases or fast backup and recovery for data protection, and ransomware, or data sharing, or data governance. Highly specific use cases that the supercloud is designed to solve for. Okay, another question we often get is who has a supercloud today and who's building a supercloud, and who are the contenders? Well, most companies that consider themselves cloud players will, we believe, be building or are building superclouds. Here's a common ETR graphic that we like to show with Net Score or spending momentum on the Y axis and overlap or pervasiveness in the ETR surveys on the X axis. And we've randomly chosen a number of players that we think are in the supercloud mix, and we've included the hyperscalers because they are enablers. Now remember, this is a spectrum of maturity it's a maturity model and we've added some of those industry players that we see building superclouds like CapitalOne, Goldman Sachs, Walmart. This is in deference to Moschella's observation around The Matrix and the industry structural changes that are going on. This goes back to every company, being a software company and rather than pattern match an outdated SaaS model, we see new industry structures emerging where software and data, and tools, specific to an industry will lead the next wave of innovation and bring in new value that traditional technology companies aren't going to solve, and the hyperscalers aren't going to solve. You know, we've talked a lot about Snowflake's data cloud as an example of supercloud. After being at Snowflake Summit, we're more convinced than ever that they're headed in this direction. VMware is clearly going after cross-cloud services you know, perhaps creating a new category. Basically, every large company we see either pursuing supercloud initiatives or thinking about it. Dell showed project Alpine at Dell Tech World, that's a supercloud. Snowflake introducing a new application development capability based on their superPaaS, our term of course, they don't use the phrase. Mongo, Couchbase, Nutanix, Pure Storage, Veeam, CrowdStrike, Okta, Zscaler. Yeah, all of those guys. Yes, Cisco and HPE. Even though on theCUBE at HPE Discover, Fidelma Russo said on theCUBE, she wasn't a fan of cloaking mechanisms, but then we talked to HPE's Head of Storage Services, Omer Asad is clearly headed in the direction that we would consider supercloud. Again, those cross-cloud services, of course, their emphasis is connecting as well on-prem. That single experience, which traditionally has not existed with multi-cloud or hybrid. And we're seeing the emergence of companies, smaller companies like Aviatrix and Starburst, and Clumio and others that are building versions of superclouds that solve for a specific problem for their customers. Even ISVs like Adobe, ADP, we've talked to UiPath. They seem to be looking at new ways to go beyond the SaaS model and add value within their cloud ecosystem specifically, around data as part of their and their customers digital transformations. So yeah, pretty much every tech vendor with any size or momentum and new industry players are coming out of hiding, and competing. Building superclouds that look a lot like Moschella's Matrix, with machine intelligence and blockchains, and virtual realities, and gaming, all enabled by the internet and hyperscale cloud CAPEX. So it's moving fast and it's the future in our opinion. So don't get too caught up in the past or you'll be left behind. Okay, what about examples? We've given a number in the past, but let's try to be a little bit more specific. Here are a few we've selected and we're going to answer the two questions in one section here. What workloads and services will run in superclouds and what are some examples? Let's start with analytics. Our favorite example is Snowflake, it's one of the furthest along with its data cloud, in our view. It's a supercloud optimized for data sharing and governance, query performance, and security, and ecosystem enablement. When you do things inside of that data cloud, what we call a super data cloud. Again, our term, not theirs. You can do things that you could not do in a single cloud. You can't do this with Redshift, You can't do this with SQL server and they're bringing new data types now with merging analytics or at least accommodate analytics and transaction type data, and bringing open source tooling with things like Apache Iceberg. And so it ticks the boxes we laid out earlier. I would say that a company like Databricks is also in that mix doing it, coming at it from a data science perspective, trying to create that consistent experience for data scientists and data engineering across clouds. Converge databases, running transaction and analytic workloads is another example. Take a look at what Couchbase is doing with Capella and how it's enabling stretching the cloud to the edge with ARM-based platforms and optimizing for low latency across clouds, and even out to the edge. Document database workloads, look at MongoDB, a very developer-friendly platform that with the Atlas is moving toward a supercloud model running document databases very, very efficiently. How about general purpose workloads? This is where VMware comes into to play. Very clearly, there's a need to create a common operating environment across clouds and on-prem, and out to the edge. And I say VMware is hard at work on that. Managing and moving workloads, and balancing workloads, and being able to recover very quickly across clouds for everyday applications. Network routing, take a look at what Aviatrix is doing across clouds, industry workloads. We see CapitalOne, it announced its cost optimization platform for Snowflake, piggybacking on Snowflake supercloud or super data cloud. And in our view, it's very clearly going to go after other markets is going to test it out with Snowflake, running, optimizing on AWS and it's going to expand to other clouds as Snowflake's business and those other clouds grows. Walmart working with Microsoft to create an on-premed Azure experience that's seamless. Yes, that counts, on-prem counts. If you can create that seamless and continuous experience, identical experience from on-prem to a hyperscale cloud, we would include that as a supercloud. You know, we've written about what Goldman is doing. Again, connecting its on-prem data and software tooling, and other capabilities to AWS for scale. And we can bet dollars to donuts that Oracle will be building a supercloud in healthcare with its Cerner acquisition. Supercloud is everywhere you look. So I'm sorry, naysayers it's happening all around us. So what's next? Well, with all the industry buzz and debate about the future, John Furrier and I, have decided to host an event in Palo Alto, we're motivated and inspired to further this conversation. And we welcome all points of view, positive, negative, multi-cloud, supercloud, hypercloud, all welcome. So theCUBE on Supercloud is coming on August 9th, out of our Palo Alto studios, we'll be running a live program on the topic. We've reached out to a number of industry participants, VMware, Snowflake, Confluent, Sky High Security, Gee Rittenhouse's new company, HashiCorp, CloudFlare. We've hit up Red Hat and we expect many of these folks will be in our studios on August 9th. And we've invited a number of industry participants as well that we're excited to have on. From industry, from financial services, from healthcare, from retail, we're inviting analysts, thought leaders, investors. We're going to have more detail in the coming weeks, but for now, if you're interested, please reach out to me or John with how you think you can advance the discussion and we'll see if we can fit you in. So mark your calendars, stay tuned for more information. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks to Alex Myerson who handles production and manages the podcast for Breaking Analysis. And I want to thank Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they help get the word out on social and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE, who does a lot of editing and appreciate you posting on SiliconANGLE, Rob. Thanks to all of you. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcast. It publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. You can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @DVellante, or comment on my LinkedIn post. And please do check out ETR.ai for the best survey data. And the enterprise tech business will be at AWS NYC Summit next Tuesday, July 12th. So if you're there, please do stop by and say hello to theCUBE, it's at the Javits Center. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. And we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (bright music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vallante. >> Welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights powered by ETR. As we exited the isolation economy last year, Supercloud is a term that we introduced to describe something new that was happening in the world of cloud. In this "Breaking Analysis," we address the 10 most frequently asked questions we get around Supercloud. Okay, let's review these frequently asked questions on Supercloud that we're going to try to answer today. Look at an industry that's full of hype and buzzwords. Why the hell does anyone need a new term? Aren't hyperscalers building out Superclouds? We'll try to answer why the term Supercloud connotes something different from hyperscale clouds. And we'll talk about the problems that Superclouds solve specifically, and we'll further define the critical aspects of a Supercloud architecture. We often get asked, "Isn't this just multi-cloud?" Well, we don't think so, and we'll explain why in this "Breaking Analysis." Now, in an earlier episode, we introduced the notion of super PaaS. Well, isn't a plain vanilla PaaS already a super PaaS? Again, we don't think so, and we'll explain why. Who will actually build and who are the players currently building Superclouds? What workloads and services will run on Superclouds? And eight A or number nine, what are some examples that we can share of Supercloud? And finally, we'll answer what you can expect next from us on Supercloud. Okay, let's get started. Why do we need another buzzword? Well, late last year ahead of re:Invent, we were inspired by a post from Jerry Chen called castles in the cloud. Now, in that blog post, he introduced the idea that there were submarkets emerging in cloud that presented opportunities for investors and entrepreneurs. That the cloud wasn't going to suck the hyperscalers, weren't going to suck all the value out of the industry. And so we introduced this notion of Supercloud to describe what we saw as a value layer emerging above the hyperscalers CAPEX gift, we sometimes call it. Now, it turns out that we weren't the only ones using the term, as both Cornell and MIT, have used the phrase in somewhat similar, but different contexts. The point is, something new was happening in the AWS and other ecosystems. It was more than IS and PaaS, and wasn't just SaaS running in the cloud. It was a new architecture that integrates infrastructure, platform and software as services, to solve new problems that the cloud vendors, in our view, weren't addressing by themselves. It seemed to us that the ecosystem was pursuing opportunities across clouds that went beyond conventional implementations of multi-cloud. And we felt there was a structural change going on at the industry level. The Supercloud metaphorically was highlighting. So that's the background on why we felt a new catch phrase was warranted. Love it or hate it, it's memorable and it's what we chose. Now, to that last point about structural industry transformation. Andy Rapaport is sometimes and often credited with identifying the shift from the vertically integrated IBM mainframe era to the fragmented PC microprocesor based era in his HBR article in 1991. In fact, it was David Moschella, who at the time was an IDC analyst who first introduced the concept in 1987, four years before Rapaport's article was published. Moschella saw that it was clear that Intel, Microsoft, Seagate and others would replace the system vendors and put that forth in a graphic that looked similar to the first two on this chart. We don't have to review the shift from IBM as the center of the industry to Wintel. That's well understood. What isn't as well known or accepted is what Moschella put out in his 2018 book called "Seeing Digital" which introduced the idea of the matrix that's shown on the right hand side of this chart. Moschella posited that new services were emerging, built on top of the internet and hyperscale clouds that would integrate other innovations and would define the next era of computing. He used the term matrix, because the conceptual depiction included, not only horizontal technology rows, like the cloud and the internet, but for the first time included connected industry verticals, the columns in this chart. Moschella pointed out that, whereas historically, industry verticals had a closed value chain or stack and ecosystem of R&D and production and manufacturing and distribution. And if you were in that industry, the expertise within that vertical generally stayed within that vertical and was critical to success. But because of digital and data, for the first time, companies were able to traverse industries jump across industries and compete because data enabled them to do that. Examples, Amazon and content, payments, groceries, Apple and payments, and content and so forth. There are many examples. Data was now this unifying enabler and this marked a change in the structure of the technology landscape. And Supercloud is meant to imply more than running in hyperscale clouds. Rather, it's the combination of multiple technologies, enabled by cloud scale with new industry participants from those verticals; financial services, and healthcare, and manufacturing, energy, media, and virtually all and any industry. Kind of an extension of every company is a software company. Basically, every company now has the opportunity to build their own cloud or Supercloud. And we'll come back to that. Let's first address what's different about Superclouds relative to hyperscale clouds. Now, this one's pretty straightforward and obvious, I think. Hyperscale clouds, they're walled gardens where they want your data in their cloud and they want to keep you there. Sure, every cloud player realizes that not all data will go to their particular cloud. So they're meeting customers where their data lives with initiatives like Amazon Outposts and Azure Arc and Google Antos. But at the end of the day, the more homogeneous they can make their environments, the better control, security, costs, and performance they can deliver. The more complex the environment, the more difficult it is to deliver on their brand promises. And, of course, the less margin that's left for them to capture. Will the hyperscalers get more serious about cross cloud services? Maybe, but they have plenty of work to do within their own clouds and within enabling their own ecosystems. They have a long way to go, a lot of runway. So let's talk about specifically, what problems Superclouds solve. We've all seen the stats from IDC or Gartner or whomever, that customers on average use more than one cloud, two clouds, three clouds, five clouds, 20 clouds. And we know these clouds operate in disconnected silos for the most part. And that's a problem, because each cloud requires different skills, because the development environment is different as is the operating environment. They have different APIs, different primitives, and different management tools that are optimized for each respective hyperscale cloud. Their functions and value props don't extend to their competitors' clouds for the most part. Why would they? As a result, there's friction when moving between different clouds. It's hard to share data. It's hard to move work. It's hard to secure and govern data. It's hard to enforce organizational edicts and policies across these clouds and on-prem. Supercloud is an architecture designed to create a single environment that enables management of workloads and data across clouds in an effort to take out complexity, accelerate application development, streamline operations, and share data safely, irrespective of location. It's pretty straightforward, but non-trivial, which is why I always ask a company's CEO and executives if stock buybacks and dividends will yield as much return as building out Superclouds that solve really specific and hard problems and create differential value. Okay, let's dig a bit more into the architectural aspects of Supercloud. In other words, what are the salient attributes of Supercloud? So, first and foremost, a Supercloud runs a set of specific services designed to solve a unique problem, and it can do so in more than one cloud. Superclouds leverage the underlying cloud native tooling of a hyperscale cloud, but they're optimized for a specific objective that aligns with the problem that they're trying to solve. For example, Supercloud might be optimized for lowest cost or lowest latency or sharing data or governing or securing that data or higher performance for networking, for example. But the point is, the collection of services that is being delivered is focused on a unique value proposition that is not being delivered by the hyperscalers across clouds. A Supercloud abstracts the underlying and siloed primitives of the native PaaS layer from the hyperscale cloud, and then using its own specific platform as a service tooling, creates a common experience across clouds for developers and users. And it does so in the most efficient manner, meaning it has the metadata knowledge and management capabilities that can optimize for latency, bandwidth, or recovery or data sovereignty, or whatever unique value that Supercloud is delivering for the specific use case in their domain. And a Supercloud comprises a super PaaS capability that allows ecosystem partners through APIs to add incremental value on top of the Supercloud platform to fill gaps, accelerate features, and of course, innovate. The services can be infrastructure related, they could be application services, they could be data services, security services, user services, et cetera, designed and packaged to bring unique value to customers. Again, that hyperscalers are not delivering across clouds or on premises. Okay, so another common question we get is, "Isn't that just multi-cloud?" And what we'd say to that is yeah, "Yes, but no." You can call it multi-cloud 2.0, if you want. If you want to use, it's kind of a commonly used rubric. But as Dell's Chuck Whitten proclaimed at Dell Technologies World this year, multi-cloud, by design, is different than multi-cloud by default. Meaning, to date, multi-cloud has largely been a symptom of what we've called multi-vendor or of M&A. You buy a company and they happen to use Google cloud. And so you bring it in. And when you look at most so-called multi-cloud implementations, you see things like an on-prem stack, which is wrapped in a container and hosted on a specific cloud. Or increasingly, a technology vendor has done the work of building a cloud native version of their stack and running it on a specific cloud. But historically, it's been a unique experience within each cloud, with virtually no connection between the cloud silos. Supercloud sets out to build incremental value across clouds and above hyperscale CAPEX that goes beyond cloud compatibility within each cloud. So, if you want to call it multi-cloud 2.0, that's fine, but we chose to call it Supercloud. Okay, so at this point you may be asking, "Well isn't PaaS already a version of Supercloud?" And again, we would say, "No." That Supercloud and its corresponding super PaaS layer, which is a prerequisite, gives the freedom to store, process, and manage and secure and connect islands of data across a continuum with a common experience across clouds. And the services offered are specific to that Supercloud and will vary by each offering. OpenShift, for example, can be used to construct a super PaaS, but in and of itself, isn't a super PaaS, it's generic. A super PaaS might be developed to support, for instance, ultra low latency database work. It would unlikely, again, taking the OpenShift example, it's unlikely that off the shelf OpenShift would be used to develop such a low latency, super PaaS layer for ultra low latency database work. The point is, Supercloud and its inherent super PaaS will be optimized to solve specific problems like that low latency example for distributed databases or fast backup in recovery for data protection and ransomware, or data sharing or data governance. Highly specific use cases that the Supercloud is designed to solve for. Okay, another question we often get is, "Who has a Supercloud today and who's building a Supercloud and who are the contenders?" Well, most companies that consider themselves cloud players will, we believe, be building or are building Superclouds. Here's a common ETR graphic that we like to show with net score or spending momentum on the Y axis, and overlap or pervasiveness in the ETR surveys on the X axis. And we've randomly chosen a number of players that we think are in the Supercloud mix. And we've included the hyperscalers because they are enablers. Now, remember, this is a spectrum of maturity. It's a maturity model. And we've added some of those industry players that we see building Superclouds like Capital One, Goldman Sachs, Walmart. This is in deference to Moschella's observation around the matrix and the industry structural changes that are going on. This goes back to every company being a software company. And rather than pattern match and outdated SaaS model, we see new industry structures emerging where software and data and tools specific to an industry will lead the next wave of innovation and bring in new value that traditional technology companies aren't going to solve. And the hyperscalers aren't going to solve. We've talked a lot about Snowflake's data cloud as an example of Supercloud. After being at Snowflake Summit, we're more convinced than ever that they're headed in this direction. VMware is clearly going after cross cloud services, perhaps creating a new category. Basically, every large company we see either pursuing Supercloud initiatives or thinking about it. Dell showed Project Alpine at Dell Tech World. That's a Supercloud. Snowflake introducing a new application development capability based on their super PaaS, our term, of course. They don't use the phrase. Mongo, Couchbase, Nutanix, Pure Storage, Veeam, CrowdStrike, Okta, Zscaler. Yeah, all of those guys. Yes, Cisco and HPE. Even though on theCUBE at HPE Discover, Fidelma Russo said on theCUBE, she wasn't a fan of cloaking mechanisms. (Dave laughing) But then we talked to HPE's head of storage services, Omer Asad, and he's clearly headed in the direction that we would consider Supercloud. Again, those cross cloud services, of course, their emphasis is connecting as well on-prem. That single experience, which traditionally has not existed with multi-cloud or hybrid. And we're seeing the emergence of smaller companies like Aviatrix and Starburst and Clumio and others that are building versions of Superclouds that solve for a specific problem for their customers. Even ISVs like Adobe, ADP, we've talked to UiPath. They seem to be looking at new ways to go beyond the SaaS model and add value within their cloud ecosystem, specifically around data as part of their and their customer's digital transformations. So yeah, pretty much every tech vendor with any size or momentum, and new industry players are coming out of hiding and competing, building Superclouds that look a lot like Moschella's matrix, with machine intelligence and blockchains and virtual realities and gaming, all enabled by the internet and hyperscale cloud CAPEX. So it's moving fast and it's the future in our opinion. So don't get too caught up in the past or you'll be left behind. Okay, what about examples? We've given a number in the past but let's try to be a little bit more specific. Here are a few we've selected and we're going to answer the two questions in one section here. What workloads and services will run in Superclouds and what are some examples? Let's start with analytics. Our favorite example of Snowflake. It's one of the furthest along with its data cloud, in our view. It's a Supercloud optimized for data sharing and governance, and query performance, and security, and ecosystem enablement. When you do things inside of that data cloud, what we call a super data cloud. Again, our term, not theirs. You can do things that you could not do in a single cloud. You can't do this with Redshift. You can't do this with SQL server. And they're bringing new data types now with merging analytics or at least accommodate analytics and transaction type data and bringing open source tooling with things like Apache Iceberg. And so, it ticks the boxes we laid out earlier. I would say that a company like Databricks is also in that mix, doing it, coming at it from a data science perspective trying to create that consistent experience for data scientists and data engineering across clouds. Converge databases, running transaction and analytic workloads is another example. Take a look at what Couchbase is doing with Capella and how it's enabling stretching the cloud to the edge with arm based platforms and optimizing for low latency across clouds, and even out to the edge. Document database workloads, look at Mongo DB. A very developer friendly platform that where the Atlas is moving toward a Supercloud model, running document databases very, very efficiently. How about general purpose workloads? This is where VMware comes into play. Very clearly, there's a need to create a common operating environment across clouds and on-prem and out to the edge. And I say, VMware is hard at work on that, managing and moving workloads and balancing workloads, and being able to recover very quickly across clouds for everyday applications. Network routing, take a look at what Aviatrix is doing across clouds. Industry workloads, we see Capital One. It announced its cost optimization platform for Snowflake, piggybacking on Snowflake's Supercloud or super data cloud. And in our view, it's very clearly going to go after other markets. It's going to test it out with Snowflake, optimizing on AWS, and it's going to expand to other clouds as Snowflake's business and those other clouds grows. Walmart working with Microsoft to create an on-premed Azure experience that's seamless. Yes, that counts, on-prem counts. If you can create that seamless and continuous experience, identical experience from on-prem to a hyperscale cloud, we would include that as a Supercloud. We've written about what Goldman is doing. Again, connecting its on-prem data and software tooling, and other capabilities to AWS for scale. And you can bet dollars to donuts that Oracle will be building a Supercloud in healthcare with its Cerner acquisition. Supercloud is everywhere you look. So I'm sorry, naysayers, it's happening all around us. So what's next? Well, with all the industry buzz and debate about the future, John Furrier and I have decided to host an event in Palo Alto. We're motivated and inspired to further this conversation. And we welcome all points of view, positive, negative, multi-cloud, Supercloud, HyperCloud, all welcome. So theCUBE on Supercloud is coming on August 9th out of our Palo Alto studios. We'll be running a live program on the topic. We've reached out to a number of industry participants; VMware, Snowflake, Confluent, Skyhigh Security, G. Written House's new company, HashiCorp, CloudFlare. We've hit up Red Hat and we expect many of these folks will be in our studios on August 9th. And we've invited a number of industry participants as well that we're excited to have on. From industry, from financial services, from healthcare, from retail, we're inviting analysts, thought leaders, investors. We're going to have more detail in the coming weeks, but for now, if you're interested, please reach out to me or John with how you think you can advance the discussion, and we'll see if we can fit you in. So mark your calendars, stay tuned for more information. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks to Alex Myerson who handles production and manages the podcast for "Breaking Analysis." And I want to thank Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight. They help get the word out on social and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE, who does a lot of editing and appreciate you posting on SiliconANGLE, Rob. Thanks to all of you. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search, breaking analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or you can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com. Or DM me @DVallante, or comment on my LinkedIn post. And please, do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. We'll be at AWS NYC summit next Tuesday, July 12th. So if you're there, please do stop by and say hello to theCUBE. It's at the Javits Center. This is Dave Vallante for theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. And we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (slow music)

>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> Snowflake Summit 2022 underscored that the ecosystem excitement which was once forming around Hadoop is being reborn, escalated and coalescing around Snowflake's data cloud. What was once seen as a simpler cloud data warehouse and good marketing with the data cloud is evolving rapidly with new workloads of vertical industry focus, data applications, monetization, and more. The question is, will the promise of data be fulfilled this time around, or is it same wine, new bottle? Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this "Breaking Analysis," we'll talk about the event, the announcements that Snowflake made that are of greatest interest, the major themes of the show, what was hype and what was real, the competition, and some concerns that remain in many parts of the ecosystem and pockets of customers. First let's look at the overall event. It was held at Caesars Forum. Not my favorite venue, but I'll tell you it was packed. Fire Marshall Full, as we sometimes say. Nearly 10,000 people attended the event. Here's Snowflake's CMO Denise Persson on theCUBE describing how this event has evolved. >> Yeah, two, three years ago, we were about 1800 people at a Hilton in San Francisco. We had about 40 partners attending. This week we're close to 10,000 attendees here. Almost 10,000 people online as well, and over over 200 partners here on the show floor. >> Now, those numbers from 2019 remind me of the early days of Hadoop World, which was put on by Cloudera but then Cloudera handed off the event to O'Reilly as this article that we've inserted, if you bring back that slide would say. The headline it almost got it right. Hadoop World was a failure, but it didn't have to be. Snowflake has filled the void created by O'Reilly when it first killed Hadoop World, and killed the name and then killed Strata. Now, ironically, the momentum and excitement from Hadoop's early days, it probably could have stayed with Cloudera but the beginning of the end was when they gave the conference over to O'Reilly. We can't imagine Frank Slootman handing the keys to the kingdom to a third party. Serious business was done at this event. I'm talking substantive deals. Salespeople from a host sponsor and the ecosystems that support these events, they love physical. They really don't like virtual because physical belly to belly means relationship building, pipeline, and deals. And that was blatantly obvious at this show. And in fairness, all theCUBE events that we've done year but this one was more vibrant because of its attendance and the action in the ecosystem. Ecosystem is a hallmark of a cloud company, and that's what Snowflake is. We asked Frank Slootman on theCUBE, was this ecosystem evolution by design or did Snowflake just kind of stumble into it? Here's what he said. >> Well, when you are a data clouding, you have data, people want to do things with that data. They don't want just run data operations, populate dashboards, run reports. Pretty soon they want to build applications and after they build applications, they want build businesses on it. So it goes on and on and on. So it drives your development to enable more and more functionality on that data cloud. Didn't start out that way, you know, we were very, very much focused on data operations. Then it becomes application development and then it becomes, hey, we're developing whole businesses on this platform. So similar to what happened to Facebook in many ways. >> So it sounds like it was maybe a little bit of both. The Facebook analogy is interesting because Facebook is a walled garden, as is Snowflake, but when you come into that garden, you have assurances that things are going to work in a very specific way because a set of standards and protocols is being enforced by a steward, i.e. Snowflake. This means things run better inside of Snowflake than if you try to do all the integration yourself. Now, maybe over time, an open source version of that will come out but if you wait for that, you're going to be left behind. That said, Snowflake has made moves to make its platform more accommodating to open source tooling in many of its announcements this week. Now, I'm not going to do a deep dive on the announcements. Matt Sulkins from Monte Carlo wrote a decent summary of the keynotes and a number of analysts like Sanjeev Mohan, Tony Bear and others are posting some deeper analysis on these innovations, and so we'll point to those. I'll say a few things though. Unistore extends the type of data that can live in the Snowflake data cloud. It's enabled by a new feature called hybrid tables, a new table type in Snowflake. One of the big knocks against Snowflake was it couldn't handle and transaction data. Several database companies are creating this notion of a hybrid where both analytic and transactional workloads can live in the same data store. Oracle's doing this for example, with MySQL HeatWave and there are many others. We saw Mongo earlier this month add an analytics capability to its transaction system. Mongo also added sequel, which was kind of interesting. Here's what Constellation Research analyst Doug Henschen said about Snowflake's moves into transaction data. Play the clip. >> Well with Unistore, they're reaching out and trying to bring transactional data in. Hey, don't limit this to analytical information and there's other ways to do that like CDC and streaming but they're very closely tying that again to that marketplace, with the idea of bring your data over here and you can monetize it. Don't just leave it in that transactional database. So another reach to a broader play across a big community that they're building. >> And you're also seeing Snowflake expand its workload types in its unique way and through Snowpark and its stream lit acquisition, enabling Python so that native apps can be built in the data cloud and benefit from all that structure and the features that Snowflake is built in. Hence that Facebook analogy, or maybe the App Store, the Apple App Store as I propose as well. Python support also widens the aperture for machine intelligence workloads. We asked Snowflake senior VP of product, Christian Kleinerman which announcements he thought were the most impactful. And despite the who's your favorite child nature of the question, he did answer. Here's what he said. >> I think the native applications is the one that looks like, eh, I don't know about it on the surface but he has the biggest potential to change everything. That's create an entire ecosystem of solutions for within a company or across companies that I don't know that we know what's possible. >> Snowflake also announced support for Apache Iceberg, which is a new open table format standard that's emerging. So you're seeing Snowflake respond to these concerns about its lack of openness, and they're building optionality into their cloud. They also showed some cost op optimization tools both from Snowflake itself and from the ecosystem, notably Capital One which launched a software business on top of Snowflake focused on optimizing cost and eventually the rollout data management capabilities, and all kinds of features that Snowflake announced that the show around governance, cross cloud, what we call super cloud, a new security workload, and they reemphasize their ability to read non-native on-prem data into Snowflake through partnerships with Dell and Pure and a lot more. Let's hear from some of the analysts that came on theCUBE this week at Snowflake Summit to see what they said about the announcements and their takeaways from the event. This is Dave Menninger, Sanjeev Mohan, and Tony Bear, roll the clip. >> Our research shows that the majority of organizations, the majority of people do not have access to analytics. And so a couple of the things they've announced I think address those or help to address those issues very directly. So Snowpark and support for Python and other languages is a way for organizations to embed analytics into different business processes. And so I think that'll be really beneficial to try and get analytics into more people's hands. And I also think that the native applications as part of the marketplace is another way to get applications into people's hands rather than just analytical tools. Because most people in the organization are not analysts. They're doing some line of business function. They're HR managers, they're marketing people, they're sales people, they're finance people, right? They're not sitting there mucking around in the data, they're doing a job and they need analytics in that job. >> Primarily, I think it is to contract this whole notion that once you move data into Snowflake, it's a proprietary format. So I think that's how it started but it's usually beneficial to the customers, to the users because now if you have large amount of data in paket files you can leave it on S3, but then you using the Apache Iceberg table format in Snowflake, you get all the benefits of Snowflake's optimizer. So for example, you get the micro partitioning, you get the metadata. And in a single query, you can join, you can do select from a Snowflake table union and select from an iceberg table and you can do store procedure, user defined function. So I think what they've done is extremely interesting. Iceberg by itself still does not have multi-table transactional capabilities. So if I'm running a workload, I might be touching 10 different tables. So if I use Apache Iceberg in a raw format, they don't have it, but Snowflake does. So the way I see it is Snowflake is adding more and more capabilities right into the database. So for example, they've gone ahead and added security and privacy. So you can now create policies and do even cell level masking, dynamic masking, but most organizations have more than Snowflake. So what we are starting to see all around here is that there's a whole series of data catalog companies, a bunch of companies that are doing dynamic data masking, security and governance, data observability which is not a space Snowflake has gone into. So there's a whole ecosystem of companies that is mushrooming. Although, you know, so they're using the native capabilities of Snowflake but they are at a level higher. So if you have a data lake and a cloud data warehouse and you have other like relational databases, you can run these cross platform capabilities in that layer. So that way, you know, Snowflake's done a great job of enabling that ecosystem. >> I think it's like the last mile, essentially. In other words, it's like, okay, you have folks that are basically that are very comfortable with Tableau but you do have developers who don't want to have to shell out to a separate tool. And so this is where Snowflake is essentially working to address that constituency. To Sanjeev's point, and I think part of it, this kind of plays into it is what makes this different from the Hadoop era is the fact that all these capabilities, you know, a lot of vendors are taking it very seriously to put this native. Now, obviously Snowflake acquired Streamlit. So we can expect that the Streamlit capabilities are going to be native. >> I want to share a little bit about the higher level thinking at Snowflake, here's a chart from Frank Slootman's keynote. It's his version of the modern data stack, if you will. Now, Snowflake of course, was built on the public cloud. If there were no AWS, there would be no Snowflake. Now, they're all about bringing data and live data and expanding the types of data, including structured, we just heard about that, unstructured, geospatial, and the list is going to continue on and on. Eventually I think it's going to bleed into the edge if we can figure out what to do with that edge data. Executing on new workloads is a big deal. They started with data sharing and they recently added security and they've essentially created a PaaS layer. We call it a SuperPaaS layer, if you will, to attract application developers. Snowflake has a developer-focused event coming up in November and they've extended the marketplace with 1300 native apps listings. And at the top, that's the holy grail, monetization. We always talk about building data products and we saw a lot of that at this event, very, very impressive and unique. Now here's the thing. There's a lot of talk in the press, in the Wall Street and the broader community about consumption-based pricing and concerns over Snowflake's visibility and its forecast and how analytics may be discretionary. But if you're a company building apps in Snowflake and monetizing like Capital One intends to do, and you're now selling in the marketplace, that is not discretionary, unless of course your costs are greater than your revenue for that service, in which case is going to fail anyway. But the point is we're entering a new error where data apps and data products are beginning to be built and Snowflake is attempting to make the data cloud the defacto place as to where you're going to build them. In our view they're well ahead in that journey. Okay, let's talk about some of the bigger themes that we heard at the event. Bringing apps to the data instead of moving the data to the apps, this was a constant refrain and one that certainly makes sense from a physics point of view. But having a single source of data that is discoverable, sharable and governed with increasingly robust ecosystem options, it doesn't have to be moved. Sometimes it may have to be moved if you're going across regions, but that's unique and a differentiator for Snowflake in our view. I mean, I'm yet to see a data ecosystem that is as rich and growing as fast as the Snowflake ecosystem. Monetization, we talked about that, industry clouds, financial services, healthcare, retail, and media, all front and center at the event. My understanding is that Frank Slootman was a major force behind this shift, this development and go to market focus on verticals. It's really an attempt, and he talked about this in his keynote to align with the customer mission ultimately align with their objectives which not surprisingly, are increasingly monetizing with data as a differentiating ingredient. We heard a ton about data mesh, there were numerous presentations about the topic. And I'll say this, if you map the seven pillars Snowflake talks about, Benoit Dageville talked about this in his keynote, but if you map those into Zhamak Dehghani's data mesh framework and the four principles, they align better than most of the data mesh washing that I've seen. The seven pillars, all data, all workloads, global architecture, self-managed, programmable, marketplace and governance. Those are the seven pillars that he talked about in his keynote. All data, well, maybe with hybrid tables that becomes more of a reality. Global architecture means the data is globally distributed. It's not necessarily physically in one place. Self-managed is key. Self-service infrastructure is one of Zhamak's four principles. And then inherent governance. Zhamak talks about computational, what I'll call automated governance, built in. And with all the talk about monetization, that aligns with the second principle which is data as product. So while it's not a pure hit and to its credit, by the way, Snowflake doesn't use data mesh in its messaging anymore. But by the way, its customers do, several customers talked about it. Geico, JPMC, and a number of other customers and partners are using the term and using it pretty closely to the concepts put forth by Zhamak Dehghani. But back to the point, they essentially, Snowflake that is, is building a proprietary system that substantially addresses some, if not many of the goals of data mesh. Okay, back to the list, supercloud, that's our term. We saw lots of examples of clouds on top of clouds that are architected to spin multiple clouds, not just run on individual clouds as separate services. And this includes Snowflake's data cloud itself but a number of ecosystem partners that are headed in a very similar direction. Snowflake still talks about data sharing but now it uses the term collaboration in its high level messaging, which is I think smart. Data sharing is kind of a geeky term. And also this is an attempt by Snowflake to differentiate from everyone else that's saying, hey, we do data sharing too. And finally Snowflake doesn't say data marketplace anymore. It's now marketplace, accounting for its application market. Okay, let's take a quick look at the competitive landscape via this ETR X-Y graph. Vertical access remembers net score or spending momentum and the x-axis is penetration, pervasiveness in the data center. That's what ETR calls overlap. Snowflake continues to lead on the vertical axis. They guide it conservatively last quarter, remember, so I wouldn't be surprised if that lofty height, even though it's well down from its earlier levels but I wouldn't be surprised if it ticks down again a bit in the July survey, which will be in the field shortly. Databricks is a key competitor obviously at a strong spending momentum, as you can see. We didn't draw it here but we usually draw that 40% line or red line at 40%, anything above that is considered elevated. So you can see Databricks is quite elevated. But it doesn't have the market presence of Snowflake. It didn't get to IPO during the bubble and it doesn't have nearly as deep and capable go-to market machinery. Now, they're getting better and they're getting some attention in the market, nonetheless. But as a private company, you just naturally, more people are aware of Snowflake. Some analysts, Tony Bear in particular, believe Mongo and Snowflake are on a bit of a collision course long term. I actually can see his point. You know, I mean, they're both platforms, they're both about data. It's long ways off, but you can see them sort of in a similar path. They talk about kind of similar aspirations and visions even though they're quite in different markets today but they're definitely participating in similar tam. The cloud players are probably the biggest or definitely the biggest partners and probably the biggest competitors to Snowflake. And then there's always Oracle. Doesn't have the spending velocity of the others but it's got strong market presence. It owns a cloud and it knows a thing about data and it definitely is a go-to market machine. Okay, we're going to end on some of the things that we heard in the ecosystem. 'Cause look, we've heard before how particular technology, enterprise data warehouse, data hubs, MDM, data lakes, Hadoop, et cetera. We're going to solve all of our data problems and of course they didn't. And in fact, sometimes they create more problems that allow vendors to push more incremental technology to solve the problems that they created. Like tools and platforms to clean up the no schema on right nature of data lakes or data swamps. But here are some of the things that I heard firsthand from some customers and partners. First thing is, they said to me that they're having a hard time keeping up sometimes with the pace of Snowflake. It reminds me of AWS in 2014, 2015 timeframe. You remember that fire hose of announcements which causes increased complexity for customers and partners. I talked to several customers that said, well, yeah this is all well and good but I still need skilled people to understand all these tools that I'm integrated in the ecosystem, the catalogs, the machine learning observability. A number of customers said, I just can't use one governance tool, I need multiple governance tools and a lot of other technologies as well, and they're concerned that that's going to drive up their cost and their complexity. I heard other concerns from the ecosystem that it used to be sort of clear as to where they could add value you know, when Snowflake was just a better data warehouse. But to point number one, they're either concerned that they'll be left behind or they're concerned that they'll be subsumed. Look, I mean, just like we tell AWS customers and partners, you got to move fast, you got to keep innovating. If you don't, you're going to be left. Either if your customer you're going to be left behind your competitor, or if you're a partner, somebody else is going to get there or AWS is going to solve the problem for you. Okay, and there were a number of skeptical practitioners, really thoughtful and experienced data pros that suggested that they've seen this movie before. That's hence the same wine, new bottle. Well, this time around I certainly hope not given all the energy and investment that is going into this ecosystem. And the fact is Snowflake is unquestionably making it easier to put data to work. They built on AWS so you didn't have to worry about provisioning, compute and storage and networking and scaling. Snowflake is optimizing its platform to take advantage of things like Graviton so you don't have to, and they're doing some of their own optimization tools. The ecosystem is building optimization tools so that's all good. And firm belief is the less expensive it is, the more data will get brought into the data cloud. And they're building a data platform on which their ecosystem can build and run data applications, aka data products without having to worry about all the hard work that needs to get done to make data discoverable, shareable, and governed. And unlike the last 10 years, you don't have to be a keeper and integrate all the animals in the Hadoop zoo. Okay, that's it for today, thanks for watching. Thanks to my colleague, Stephanie Chan who helps research "Breaking Analysis" topics. Sometimes Alex Myerson is on production and manages the podcasts. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social and in our newsletters, and Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at Silicon, and Hailey does some wonderful editing, thanks to all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis Podcasts. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com and you can email me at David.Vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @DVellante. If you got something interesting, I'll respond. If you don't, I'm sorry I won't. Or comment on my LinkedIn post. Please check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto, in Boston bringing you Data Driven Insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> In the pre-cloud era hardware companies would run benchmarks, showing how database and or application performance ran better on their systems relative to competitors or previous generation boxes. And they would make a big deal out of it. And the independent software vendors, you know they'd do a little golf clap if you will, in the form of a joint press release it became a game of leaprog amongst hardware competitors. That was pretty commonplace over the years. The Dell Snowflake Deal underscores that the value proposition between hardware companies and ISVs is changing and has much more to do with distribution channels, volumes and the amount of data that lives On-Prem in various storage platforms. For cloud native ISVs like Snowflake they're realizing that despite their Cloud only dogma they have to grit their teeth and deal with On-premises data or risk getting shut out of evolving architectures. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we unpack what little is known about the Snowflake announcement from Dell Technologies World and discuss the implications of a changing Cloud landscape. We'll also share some new data for Cloud and Database platforms from ETR that shows Snowflake has actually entered the Earth's orbit when it comes to spending momentum on its platform. Now, before we get into the news I want you to listen to Frank's Slootman's answer to my question as to whether or not Snowflake would ever architect the platform to run On-Prem because it's doable technically, here's what he said, play the clip >> Forget it, this will only work in the Public Cloud. Because it's, this is how the utility model works, right. I think everybody is coming through this realization, right? I mean, excuses are running out at this point. You know, we think that it'll, people will come to the Public Cloud a lot sooner than we will ever come to the Private Cloud. It's not that we can't run a private Cloud. It's just diminishes the potential and the value that we bring. >> So you may be asking yourselves how do you square that circle? Because basically the Dell Snowflake announcement is about bringing Snowflake to the private cloud, right? Or is it let's get into the news and we'll find out. Here's what we know at Dell Technologies World. One of the more buzzy announcements was the, by the way this was a very well attended vet event. I should say about I would say 8,000 people by my estimates. But anyway, one of the more buzzy announcements was Snowflake can now run analytics on Non-native Snowflake data that lives On-prem in a Dell object store Dell's ECS to start with. And eventually it's software defined object store. Here's Snowflake's clark, Snowflake's Clark Patterson describing how it works this past week on theCUBE. Play the clip. The way it works is I can now access Non-native Snowflake data using what materialized views, external tables How does that work? >> Some combination of the, all the above. So we've had in Snowflake, a capability called External Tables, which you refer to, it goes hand in hand with this notion of external stages. Basically there's a through the combination of those two capabilities, it's a metadata layer on data, wherever it resides. So customers have actually used this in Snowflake for data lake data outside of Snowflake in the Cloud, up until this point. So it's effectively an extension of that functionality into the Dell On-Premises world, so that we can tap into those things. So we use the external stages to expose all the metadata about what's in the Dell environment. And then we build external tables in Snowflake. So that data looks like it is in Snowflake. And then the experience for the analyst or whomever it is, is exactly as though that data lives in the Snowflake world. >> So as Clark explained, this capability of External tables has been around in the Cloud for a while, mainly to suck data out of Cloud data lakes. Snowflake External Tables use file level metadata, for instance, the name of the file and the versioning so that it can be queried in a stage. A stage is just an external location outside of Snowflake. It could be an S3 bucket or an Azure Blob and it's soon will be a Dell object store. And in using this feature, the Dell looks like it lives inside of Snowflake and Clark essentially, he's correct to say to an analyst that looks exactly like the data is in Snowflake, but uh, not exactly the data's read only which means you can't do what are called DML operations. DML stands for Data Manipulation Language and allows for things like inserting data into tables or deleting and modifying existing data. But the data can be queried. However, the performance of those queries to External Tables will almost certainly be slower. Now users can build things like materialized views which are going to speed things up a bit, but at the end of the day, it's going to run faster than the Cloud. And you can be almost certain that's where Snowflake wants it to run, but some organizations can't or won't move data into the Cloud for a variety of reasons, data sovereignty, compliance security policies, culture, you know, whatever. So data can remain in place On-prem, or it can be moved into the Public Cloud with this new announcement. Now, the compute today presumably is going to be done in the Public Cloud. I don't know where else it's going to be done. They really didn't talk about the compute side of things. Remember, one of Snowflake's early innovations was to separate compute from storage. And what that gave them is you could more efficiently scale with unlimited resources when you needed them. And you could shut off the compute when you don't need us. You didn't have to buy, and if you need more storage you didn't have to buy more compute and vice versa. So everybody in the industry has copied that including AWS with Redshift, although as we've reported not as elegantly as Snowflake did. RedShift's more of a storage tiering solution which minimizes the compute required but you can't really shut it off. And there are companies like Vertica with Eon Mode that have enabled this capability to be done On-prem, you know, but of course in that instance you don't have unlimited elastic compute scale on-Prem but with solutions like Dell Apex and HPE GreenLake, you can certainly, you can start to simulate that Cloud elasticity On-prem. I mean, it's not unlimited but it's sort of gets you there. According to a Dell Snowflake joint statement, the companies the quote, the companies will pursue product integrations and joint go to market efforts in the second half of 2022. So that's a little vague and kind of benign. It's not really clear when this is going to be available based on that statement from the two first, but, you know, we're left wondering will Dell develop an On-Prem compute capability and enable queries to run locally maybe as part of an extended apex offering? I mean, we don't know really not sure there's even a market for that but it's probably a good bet that again, Snowflake wants that data to land in the Snowflake data Cloud kind of makes you wonder how this deal came about. You heard Sloop on earlier Snowflake has always been pretty dogmatic about getting data into its native snowflake format to enable the best performance as we talked about but also data sharing and governance. But you could imagine that data architects they're building out their data mesh we've reported on this quite extensively and their data fabric and those visions around that. And they're probably telling Snowflake, Hey if you want to be a strategic partner of ours you're going to have to be more inclusive of our data. That for whatever reason we're not putting in your Cloud. So Snowflake had to kind of hold its nose and capitulate. Now the good news is it further opens up Snowflakes Tam the total available market. It's obviously good marketing posture. And ultimately it provides an on ramp to the Cloud. And we're going to come back to that shortly but let's look a little deeper into what's happening with data platforms and to do that we'll bring in some ETR data. Now, let me just say as companies like Dell, IBM, Cisco, HPE, Lenovo, Pure and others build out their hybrid Clouds. The cold hard fact is not only do they have to replicate the Cloud Operating Model. You will hear them talk about that a lot, but they got to do that. So it, and that's critical from a user experience but in order to gain that flywheel momentum they need to build a robust ecosystem that goes beyond their proprietary portfolios. And, you know, honestly they're really not even in the first inning most companies and for the likes of Snowflake to sort of flip this, they've had to recognize that not everything is moving into the Cloud. Now, let's bring up the next slide. One of the big areas of discussion at Dell Tech World was Apex. That's essentially Dell's nascent as a service offering. Apex is infrastructure as a Service Cloud On-prem and obviously has the vision of connecting to the Cloud and across Clouds and out to the Edge. And it's no secret that database is one of the most important ingredients of infrastructure as a service generally in Cloud Infrastructure specifically. So this chart here shows the ETR data for data platforms inside of Dell accounts. So the beauty of ETR platform is you can cut data a million different ways. So we cut it. We said, okay, give us the Cloud platforms inside Dell accounts, how are they performing? Now, this is a two dimensional graphic. You got net score or spending momentum on the vertical axis and what ETR now calls Overlap formally called Market Share which is a measure of pervasiveness in the survey. That's on the horizontal axis that red dotted line at 40% represents highly elevated spending on the Y. The table insert shows the raw data for how the dots are positioned. Now, the first call out here is Snowflake. According to ETR quote, after 13 straight surveys of astounding net scores, Snowflake has finally broken the trend with its net score dropping below the 70% mark among all respondents. Now, as you know, net score is measured by asking customers are you adding the platform new? That's the lime green in the bar that's pointing from Snowflake in the graph and or are you increasing spend by 6% or more? That's the forest green is spending flat that's the gray is you're spend decreasing by 6% or worse. That's the pinkish or are you decommissioning the platform bright red which is essentially zero for Snowflake subtract the reds from the greens and you get a net score. Now, what's somewhat interesting is that snowflakes net score overall in the survey is 68 which is still huge, just under 70%, but it's net score inside the Dell account base drops to the low sixties. Nonetheless, this chart tells you why Snowflake it's highly elevated spending momentum combined with an increasing presence in the market over the past two years makes it a perfect initial data platform partner for Dell. Now and in the Ford versus Ferrari dynamic. That's going on between the likes of Dell's apex and HPE GreenLake database deals are going to become increasingly important beyond what we're seeing with this recent Snowflake deal. Now noticed by the way HPE is positioned on this graph with its acquisition of map R which is now part of HPE Ezmeral. But if these companies want to be taken seriously as Cloud players, they need to further expand their database affinity to compete ideally spinning up databases as part of their super Clouds. We'll come back to that that span multiple Clouds and include Edge data platforms. We're a long ways off from that. But look, there's Mongo, there's Couchbase, MariaDB, Cloudera or Redis. All of those should be on the short list in my view and why not Microsoft? And what about Oracle? Look, that's to be continued on maybe as a future topic in a, in a Breaking Analysis but I'll leave you with this. There are a lot of people like John Furrier who believe that Dell is playing with fire in the Snowflake deal because he sees it as a one way ticket to the Cloud. He calls it a one way door sometimes listen to what he said this past week. >> I would say that that's a dangerous game because we've seen that movie before, VMware and AWS. >> Yeah, but that we've talked about this don't you think that was the right move for VMware? >> At the time, but if you don't nurture the relationship AWS will take all those customers ultimately from VMware. >> Okay, so what does the data say about what John just said? How is VMware actually doing in Cloud after its early missteps and then its subsequent embracing of AWS and other Clouds. Here's that same XY graphic spending momentum on the Y and pervasiveness on the X and the same table insert that plots the dots and the, in the breakdown of Dell's net score granularity. You see that at the bottom of the chart in those colors. So as usual, you see Azure and AWS up and to the right with Google well behind in a distant third, but still in the mix. So very impressive for Microsoft and AWS to have both that market presence in such elevated spending momentum. But the story here in context is that the VMware Cloud on AWS and VMware's On-Prem Cloud like VMware Cloud Foundation VCF they're doing pretty well in the market. Look, at HPE, gaining some traction in Cloud. And remember, you may not think HPE and Dell and VCF are true Cloud but these are customers answering the survey. So their perspective matters more than the purest view. And the bad news is the Dell Cloud is not setting the world on fire from a momentum standpoint on the vertical axis but it's above the line of zero and compared to Dell's overall net score of 20 you could see it's got some work to do. Okay, so overall Dell's got a pretty solid net score to you know, positive 20, as I say their Cloud perception needs to improve. Look, Apex has to be the Dell Cloud brand not Dell reselling VMware. And that requires more maturity of Apex it's feature sets, its selling partners, its compensation models and it's ecosystem. And I think Dell clearly understands that. I think they're pretty open about that. Now this includes partners that go beyond being just sellers has to include more tech offerings in the marketplace. And actually they got to build out a marketplace like Cloud Platform. So they got a lot of work to do there. And look, you've got Oracle coming up. I mean they're actually kind of just below the magic 40% in the line which is pro it's pretty impressive. And we've been telling you for years, you can hate Oracle all you want. You can hate its price, it's closed system all of that it's red stack shore. You can say it's legacy. You can say it's old and outdated, blah, blah, blah. You can say Oracle is irrelevant in trouble. You are dead wrong. When it comes to mission critical workloads. Oracle is the king of the hill. They're a founder led company that knows exactly what it's doing and they're showing Cloud momentum. Okay, the last point is that while Microsoft AWS and Google have major presence as shown on the X axis. VMware and Oracle now have more than a hundred citations in the survey. You can see that on the insert in the right hand, right most column. And IBM had better keep the momentum from last quarter going, or it won't be long before they get passed by Dell and HP in Cloud. So look, John might be right. And I would think Snowflake quietly agrees that this Dell deal is all about access to Dell's customers and their data. So they can Hoover it into the Snowflake Data Cloud but the data right now, anyway doesn't suggest that's happening with VMware. Oh, by the way, we're keeping an eye close eye on NetApp who last September ink, a similar deal to VMware Cloud on AWS to see how that fares. Okay, let's wrap with some closing thoughts on what this deal means. We learned a lot from the Cloud generally in AWS, specifically in two pizza teams, working backwards, customer obsession. We talk about flywheel all the time and we've been talking today about marketplaces. These have all become common parlance and often fundamental narratives within strategic plans investor decks and customer presentations. Cloud ecosystems are different. They take both competition and partnerships to new heights. You know, when I look at Azure service offerings like Apex, GreenLake and similar services and I see the vendor noise or hear the vendor noise that's being made around them. I kind of shake my head and ask, you know which movie were these companies watching last decade? I really wish we would've seen these initiatives start to roll out in 2015, three years before AWS announced Outposts not three years after but Hey, the good news is that not only was Outposts a wake up call for the On-Prem crowd but it's showing how difficult it is to build a platform like Outposts and bring it to On-Premises. I mean, Outpost isn't currently even a rounding era in the marketplace. It really doesn't do much in terms of database support and support of other services. And, you know, it's unclear where that that is going. And I don't think it has much momentum. And so the Hybrid Cloud Vendors they've had time to figure it out. But now it's game on, companies like Dell they're promising a consistent experience between On-Prem into the Cloud, across Clouds and out to the Edge. They call it MultCloud which by the way my view has really been multi-vendor Chuck, Chuck Whitten. Who's the new co-COO of Dell called it Multi-Cloud by default. (laughing) That's really, I think an accurate description of that. I call this new world Super Cloud. To me, it's different than MultiCloud. It's a layer that runs on top of hyperscale infrastructure kind of hides the underlying complexity of the Cloud. It's APIs, it's primitives. And it stretches not only across Clouds but out to the Edge. That's a big vision and that's going to require some seriously intense engineering to build out. It's also going to require partnerships that go beyond the portfolios of companies like Dell like their own proprietary stacks if you will. It's going to have to replicate the Cloud Operating Model and to do that, you're going to need more and more deals like Snowflake and even deeper than Snowflake, not just in database. Sure, you'll need to have a catalog of databases that run in your On-Prem and Hybrid and Super Cloud but also other services that customers can tap. I mean, can you imagine a day when Dell offers and embraces a directly competitive service inside of apex. I have trouble envisioning that, you know not with their historical posture, you think about companies like, you know, Nutanix, you know, or Cisco where they really, you know those relationships cooled quite quickly but you know, look, think about it. That's what AWS does. It offers for instance, Redshift and Snowflake side by side happily and the Redshift guys they probably hate Snowflake. I wouldn't blame them, but the EC Two Folks, they love them. And Adam SloopesKy understands that ISVs like Snowflake are a key part of the Cloud ecosystem. Again, I have a hard time envisioning that occurring with Dell or even HPE, you know maybe less so with HPE, but what does this imply that the Edge will allow companies like Dell to a reach around on the Cloud and somehow create a new type of model that begrudgingly accommodates the Public Cloud but drafts of the new momentum of the Edge, which right now to these companies is kind of mostly telco and retail. It's hard to see that happening. I think it's got to evolve in a more comprehensive and inclusive fashion. What's much more likely is companies like Dell are going to substantially replicate that Cloud Operating Model for the pieces that they own pieces that they control which admittedly are big pieces of the market. But unless they're able to really tap that ecosystem magic they're not going to be able to grow much beyond their existing install bases. You take that lime green we showed you earlier that new adoption metric from ETR as an example, by my estimates, AWS and Azure are capturing new accounts at a rate between three to five times faster than Dell and HPE. And in the more mature US and mere markets it's probably more like 10 X and a major reason is because of the Cloud's robust ecosystem and the optionality and simplicity of transaction that that is bringing to customers. Now, Dell for its part is a hundred billion dollar revenue company. And it has the capability to drive that kind of dynamic. If it can pivot its partner ecosystem mindset from kind of resellers to Cloud services and technology optionality. Okay, that's it for now? Thanks to my colleagues, Stephanie Chan who helped research topics for Breaking Analysis. Alex Myerson is on the production team. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight and Rob Hof, on editorial they helped get the word out and thanks to Jordan Anderson for the new Breaking Analysis branding and graphics package. Remember these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you do is search Breaking Analysis podcasts. You could check out ETR website @etr.ai. We publish a full report every week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. You want to get in touch. @dave.vellente @siliconangle.com. You can DM me @dvellante. You can make a comment on our LinkedIn posts. This is Dave Vellante for the Cube Insights powered by ETR. Have a great week, stay safe, be well. And we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>>Well, welcome everybody to our last session of the day. I want to introduce you to Sean O'Meara. Orfield Cto. Hey, Sean. >>Hey, Nick. Good afternoon. It's been a crazy day. It has. It's been a busy run up to today in a busy day with a lot of great things going on. You know, we've heard from Adrian on his strategy this morning. The great way the Marantz is moving forward. We announced our new product line. You know, we spoke about the new doctor Enterprise Container Cloud line, New future for Mirant. Us. We had a great lineup of customers share their story. We introduced lanes following on the lanes launch a couple of weeks ago. Andi, we're introducing new great projects like our mosque project. New way to deliver open stack going into the future on then in parallel sel. This We ran a great tutorial tracker teachers you all about how to use these new products, and hopefully you'll go and everyone had opportunity to go and look through guys. Yeah. What's next? What is next? Yeah, lots going on. A lot of new things that we're thinking about for the future. Obviously, a lot of work to do on what we have right now. A lot of great things coming. But, you know, we've had this opportunity to talk about all these cool things that are coming down the road. And everybody these days seems to be talking about topics like edge computing or hybrid cloud. Or, you know, hyper scale data centers, even things like disaster recovery is a service. Andi, you know, we talk a lot about things like hyper converged, but frankly, it's boring. It's one thing a little. Good morning. Uh, you know, you and I have been talking about these topics for a while now, and I think it's about time when we spoke about some of the cool things that we're thinking about for the future, not necessarily looking out for the road map, but ideas for the future. Things that may could have an impact on the way we do business going to. So today we're gonna talk a little bit about things like pervasive computing. A nick, what is pervasive computing. >>Well, basically pervasive computing is when everything that you interact with, for the most part, is computerized. So in some ways, we're already there in that You know your phone is a computer. Your refrigerator may have a computer in it. Um, your smart watch your car has a computer in it. And the the most obvious sign of that is this whole Internet of things where, you know your vacuum is, uh is connected to your phone and all of that. And so pervasive computing is this, uh is this sense of you don't even really think about it. You just kind of assume that everything is computerized. >>So how is that different from ubiquitous computing? >>Oh, God. You hit, You hit my hot button. Okay, so if you look, there are a lot of places that will say that pervasive computing and ubiquitous computing are the same thing, but not the same thing. Don't use them interchangeably. They're not the same thing. You big. What is computing is where you can do your computing virtually anywhere. So, for example, you know, I've got, uh I've got a document. I started it on my laptop. I can then go and finish it sitting on the beach on my phone. Or, you know, I can go and do it in a coffee shop or a library. or wherever. So the idea of ubiquitous computing is similar in that, yes, there's computing everywhere, but it's more about your data being universally accessible. So essentially it is cloud computing. That is what this whole ubiquitous computing thing is about. >>Okay on that then differs from pervasive computing in the fact that pervasive is the devices that we have all around us versus the access to those devices. >>Exactly. It's it's really it's more about the data. So ubiquitous computing is more about My data is stored in some central place, and I could hit it from anywhere. There is a device, whereas pervasive computing is there is a device almost everywhere. Okay, so yeah, >>So why Why do we as Moran takes care about the vice of computing? >>Well, pervasive computing brings up a whole lot of new issues, and it's coming up really fast. I mean, you last night I was watching, you know, commercial where you know, somebody a woman's coming out and starting her car with her phone. Um, which sounds really cool. Um, but you know what they say Anything that you can access, you know, with your computer is hackable. So, you know, there are security issues that need to be considered when it comes to all of this, but that's that's the downside. But there's just this huge upside on pervasive computing that it's so exciting when you think about this. I mean, think about a world where remember I said your refrigerator might be attached to the network. Well, what if you could rent out space on your refrigerator to somebody someplace else in a secure way? Of course. You know what? If you could define your personal network as all of these devices that you own and it doesn't matter where your workloads run or, you know, you could define all of this stuff in such a way that the connectivity between objects is really huge. Um, so you know, I mean, you look at things like, you know, I f t t you know, it's like get a notification when the International space station passes over your house. Okay? I don't know why I would need that. Um, but it's the kind of thing that people >>would have a nine year old. You can run him outside and show Z. Oh, >>there you go. There you go. So I mean, that kind of level of connectivity between objects is really really it gives us this new level off. Uh, this new level of functionality that we would never even considered even 10 years ago. Um, it also extends the life of objects that we already have. So, you know, maybe you've got that, uh, that computerized vacuum cleaner, and you don't like the way that it you don't like the pattern that uses in your house. So you re program it or, uh Or I watched. I watched a guy decide that he didn't want to buy multiple vacuums for his house. So he programmed his programa will act Hume to fly between floors. It was actually pretty funny. Um, I it's some people just have too much time. >>It's driving the whole world of programmable at all levels. Really? Like the projects coming out of the car industry of creating a programmable car would fit into that category. Then, I >>suppose absolutely, absolutely needs developer tool kits. Um, that make it possible for anybody to re program these devices that you never would have thought of reprogramming before. So it's important. So do >>we want to talk about the questions. We would love people to give us some feedback on at this stage. >>I would love to talk about these questions. So what we did is we put together, uh, we put together a place for you to answer questions. If you're not watching this live. If you're watching this live, please go ahead. Drop your ideas in the chat. We would love to discuss them, you know. Do you want to see more of this? Or does it? Conversely, Does it scare you, Sean? You What? >>What do you >>think about these questions? >>Well, I mean, for me, the idea of the connected world at one level, the engineering me loves the idea. Another level. It comes to these questions of privacy. Vegas questions off. How do I control this going into the future? What prevents somebody from taking over my flying vacuum cleaner? I'm using it, you know? So it's an interesting question. I think there's a lot of cool, cool ideas. Yeah, and a lot of work to be done. I really want to hear other people's ideas as well and see how we can take this into the future. >>Definitely, definitely. I mean, look I mean, we're joking about it, but, you know, when somebody hacks into your grandmother's insulin pump, maybe not so funny. >>Yeah, a very real risk. >>A very real risk. A very real risk. But yeah, I mean, we'd love Thio. We'd love to hear how you'd like to see this used. So that's that's my That's kind of what I've been thinking about thes days. Um, but, you know, Sean, uh, now, you I know you are really concerned about this whole issue of developers and how they feel about infrastructure. So I would love to hear what you've got to say on that. >>Yeah, I'd like to sex, but a bit about that. You know, we we've done a lot of work over the last few years looking at how developing our history has been very focused on operations, but without big drive towards supporting developers providing better infrastructure for developers. One of the interesting things that keeps coming up to the four on Do you know, the way the world is changing is that big question is, do developers actually give a damn about infrastructure in any way, shape or form? Um, you know, ultimately more and more development languages and tools abstract that underlying infrastructure. What communities does is basically abstract. The infrastructure away, Um, mawr and more options. They're coming to market, which you can quite literally creating application without out of a writing a line of code. Um, so this morning, way Dio, we're doing it all the time, sometimes without even realizing it on. I think the definition of what a developer is is also changing to a certain extent. So you know the big question, which I have on which I'd like to understand Maureen, from talking to low developers is due. Developers care about infra What is it that you expect from infrastructure? What do they want going into the future? How are they going to interact with that infrastructure? I My personal opinion is that they don't really care about infrastructure, that they're going to find more ways to completely abstract away from that. And they just want to focus on delivering applications faster and getting value to market. But I might be wrong, and I'd really like to hear people's impact ideas and thoughts on that >>on. And that's exactly and that's why we're asking this question. Developers out there. Do you care? Or do you just want the whole thing completely abstracted away from you >>on? If you do care why, If you don't, what would you like to see? Another. It's a couple of questions to ask, but really like to hear those opinions on bond. You know, Do you just want the operations guys to live with it? You never want to hear about it again, just fine. It's actually good to say that we'll work it out. >>Yes, and that there's nothing. There's nothing wrong with pushing that up stack >>pretty much what we're trying to do here. >>Well, it is what we're trying to do. But at the same time, we want to do what's good for developers. And if you developers or like No, don't don't do that. Well, we want to know because, you know, we don't wanna work away here and some ivory tower and wind up with something that's not good for >>you after school. So cool. So, yeah, there are some other interesting things we're talking about. >>I know, I know. This is This is one of my favorites. This is one of my favorites. >>Zoo this? Yes. While >>we're on the subject of not getting involved with the infrastructure. Go ahead, Sean. Tell us about it. >>Thing is a pet topic of mine and something that that we've spoken about a lot. And thanks something that we we have spent many nights talking about. The idea is AI ops using artificial intelligence to drive operations within our infrastructure. And so a lot of people ask me, You know why? Um, essentially, What the hell is a I out on? I have answered this question many times, and it does often seem that we all take this AI ops thing for granted or look at it in a different way. To me, it is essentially, it's it's automation on steroids. That's what it boils down Thio. It's using intelligence systems that to replace the human cerebellum. I mean, let's just be blunt about this. We're trying to replace humans. Onda reason for that is we humans less meat sacks are airplane. We make mistakes all the time and compared to computers were incredibly slow. Um, you know, that's really the simplest point with the scale of modern infrastructure that we're dealing with the sheer volume. I mean, we've gone from, you know, thousands to tens of thousands of the EMS to now hundreds and thousands of containers spread across multiple time zones. Multiple places. We need to come up with better ways of managing this on the old fashioned stick through mechanism of automation. It's just too limited for that. Right >>when we say we want to replace meat sacks, we mean in a good way. >>We mean in a good way. I know it's a bit of a harsh way of putting it. Um, ultimately, humans have ability for creativity that machines just don't have. But machines can do other things, and they could do analysis of data a lot faster than we can. Quite often, we have to present that data to humans to have invalidate that information. But, you know, one of the options for us is to use artificial intelligence, quantified data, um, correlated, you know, look for root cause and then provide that information to us in such a way that we can make valid decisions based on that information a lot faster than we could otherwise, >>right? So what are the what are the implications? What are the practical implications of doing this so >>practically we can analyze massive amounts of data a lot faster than a single human. Could we even just a normal type system that's searching? We We have the tools to learn by looking at data and have machines do it a lot faster than we can. We can take action faster based on that data, because we get the data foster. We can take action and much more complex action that involves maybe many different layers of tasking much, much faster. Um, on we could start to do maintenance operations and maintenance tasks without having to wait for human beings to wake up or get to an office. But more importantly, we could start making tasks happen very complex tasks in a very specific orders, with much less potential for error. And those are the kinds of areas we're looking at. >>That's that's true. So how do you kind of see this moving forward? I mean, obviously, we're not gonna go from nothing to Skynet, and hopefully we never get to Skynet. Well, >>depends if you are in control of Skynet or not. Ultimately, Dionysus little computer. Um, practically speaking, we have a few things Thio hoops to jump through our suppose before we can look at where else is going to be really effective on the first one is a trust issue. We have to learn to trust it. And to do that, we have to put in a position where it can learn and start providing us that data analysis on that inference and then having humans validated. That's practically the very first step. No, it's a trust issue. You know, we've seen been watching sci fi for the last 30 years. Class on. Do you know the computers take over? Well, ultimately, is that real or not? Um, if we look at how we gonna get there? Probably midterm. Adaptive maintenance, maybe infrastructure orchestration. Smart allocation of resource is across cloud services. Well, >>we can talk for a minute About what that would would actually look like. So, I mean, we could talk about, you know, abs, midterms. I mean, in a practical sense, how would that actually work? >>Yeah, Okay. It's a great question. So, practically speaking, the first thing we're gonna do is we're going to start to collect all this data. We're gonna find all this data. I mean, the modern computer systems that we have infrastructure systems. We are producing many hundreds of gigabytes, sometimes terabytes of logging data every day. The majority of it gives far 13. I mean, we throw the majority of their logging information away or if it's not thrown away, it's stored some way for security purposes and never analyzed. So let's start by taking their data and actually analyzing it. To do that, we have laid and correlated, >>so we >>gotta put it all together. We've got a match it and we've got to start building patents. We're going to start looking for the patterns. This is where I is particularly good at starting to help us. Bold patterns start to look for those patterns. Initially, humans will have to do some training. Um, once we have that patent, once we've got that working, we can now start having the AI systems start to do some affairs. E, here's the recalls. So we the system can tell us based on the data based on the patterns we've been learning. We know from the past debt. If those three network links get full bad example, we're gonna have a failure in Region X, right. So start telling us while those network links of filling up tell us before they fall rather than after their full always they're falling up as we see trending information now seems like a simple I could do trending information with just normal monitoring systems. But if I can start to correlate that with greater users in, you know, Beijing Office versus Users in California office filling up those links and different times of the day, I can now start to make much more clever decisions, which is a human on its own, to try and correlate that information, which is be insane once you've done that way to go to the next stage, which is not to have the system act do actions for us. Based on that information right now, we're starting to get close to the scan it. Speaking of this doesn't have to be a big, complex pile of change. Smart ai solution. I have data on that AI solution is talking to my existing automation solutions to action. That change. That's how I see this moving forward, >>right? So essentially you, instead of saying, you know, deploy this too. Uh, this workload to AWS, you would say deploy this. Yeah, And then the system would look and go. Okay, It's this kind of workload. At this time of day at this size, it's gonna interact with this and this and this. And so it's gonna be best off in this region of this cloud provider on then. Uh, you know, two days from now, when the prices drop, we're gonna put it over there, >>even taking a different different. Spoken exactly that it could be. The Beijing office is coming online. Let's move the majority of the workload to a cloud that's closer to them. Reducing the network bandwidth. Yeah, and inference. Andi Also reducing the impact on international lines as Beijing winds down for the day, I can just move the majority of the workload into California on board Europe. In between, it's very simple examples, but have humans do that would be very complex and very time consuming >>exactly. And end. Just having humans notice those patterns would be difficult. But once you have the system noticing those patterns, then the humans could start to think, How can I take advantage of this, you know, So as you are talking about much longer term in the actual applicant patients themselves. So you know, everything can be optimized that way so >>everybody may optimized way can optimize down to the way we even potentially write applications in the future. Humans were still deciding the base logic. Humans were still deciding the creative components of that. Right as we as we build things, we can start to optimize them, breaking down into smaller and smaller units that are much more specific. But the complexity goes up. When we do that right. I want to use AI and AI solutions to start to manage that complexity across multiple spaces. Multiple time zones, etcetera. >>Exactly. Exactly. So. So that's the question, you know. What do you guys think? You know, we really want to know >>on Dhere again. You know, we mentioned this around the beginning, but do you think you could trust in a iob sedition? What would it take for you to trust in our absolution? And where do you practically see it being used in the short term? >>Yeah, that's that's the big question is where do you see it being used? Where would you like it to be used, you know? Is there something that you don't think would be possible, but you would like to see it, you know. But the main thing is, on a practical matter, what would you like to see? >>Let me ask. The question is like a different way. Do you have a problem that we could solve within a isolation today? E, They're really well >>right. A re a world problem. And And assuming that, you know, we are not gonna, you know, take over the world. >>Yeah. Important. My evil plan is to take over the world with >>man. I'm so sorry. First >>had to let that draw. >>I did. I did. I'm so sorry. Okay, Alright. So that's so That's a I ops. And we like I said, if you're watching this live, throw in the chat. We want to hear your ideas. If your, um if you're doing this, if you're watching this on the replay, go to the survey because we way, we really want to hear your ideas and your opinions. All right, So moving right along. All right. What the heck are you know, kernels? >>Uh, lovely questions. So, you know, the whole world is talking about containers today way we're talking about containers today. But containers like VMS or just one way to handle compute Andi. They're more and more ideas that are out there today, and people have been trying different ways off, shrinking the size of the compute environment. COMPUTER Paxil Another cool way of looking at this and saying That's been around for a little while. But it's getting your attraction to learn to sing called unique kernels, and what they are is they're basically highly optimized. Execute a bles that include the operating system, Um, there on OS settle libraries, um, and some very simplified application code all mixed into a very, very tiny package. Easiest way to describe them. They're super simplified. And I were talking about in the eye ops discussion this idea off taking everything into smaller and smaller individual functions but creating a certain level of complexity. Well, if we look at uni kernels, those are those smaller and smaller bundles and functions. They interact directly with the hardware or through a hyper visor. Um, so actually, no overhead. I mean the overhead If you just look at what a modern you clinics operating system is made up of these days, there are so many different parts and components. Even just the colonel has got anything from, you know, 5 to 7 different parts to it. Plus, of course, drivers and a boot loader. Then we look at the system libraries that set on top of that, you know? And then they're demons and utilities and shells and scream components and, you know, additional colonel stacks that go on top of that for hyper visors. What we're trying to say is, what, This text of space, I'm >>getting tired. Just listening, >>Thio. I'm tired talking about it. You know that the unique colonel, really, it just takes over their complexity. It puts the application the OS on the basic libraries necessary. That application in tow, one really tiny package. Um, yeah. Give you an idea what we're talking about here. We're talking about memory footprints or time package footprints in the kilobytes. You know, a small container is considered 100 make plus, we're talking kilobytes. We're talking memory utilization in the kilobyte two megabytes space because there's no no fact, no fluff, no unnecessary components. And then only the CPU that it needs. >>So Bill Gates was right 6. 40 k is all anybody will ever need >>Potentially. Yeah, right. E, there was there was an IBM CEO who said even less at some point. So we'll see >>how that go. What goes around comes around. >>But one of the really interesting things about this small size, which is really critical, is how fast they can boot. Yeah, we're talking boot times measured in 30 seconds. Wow, We're talking the ability to spin up specific functions only when you need them. Now, if we look at the knock on effect of that, we're looking at power saving. Who knew? Run the app when I need it because there's no Leighton. See to start it up. The app is tiny so I can pack a lot mawr into a lot less space game power seconds. But when I start looking at where you were talking about earlier, which the basic compute idea in the world all of a sudden that tiny little arm chips it in my raspberry pi that's running my fridge, My raspberry pi equivalent that's running my fridge no longer has a fact operating system around it. I can run tens thousands, potentially off these very tiny specific devices when I need them. Wow, I'm kind of excited about it. I'm excited by the idea. You >>can hear that >>I'm a hardware geek from from many, many moons ago on DSO. I kind of like the idea of being able to better utilize along this very low powered hardware that we have lying around and really take it into the future. Well, that's good. Yeah. So I'm not going to kill, not going to kill containers. But it is a parallel technology that I'm very interested in >>that that is true. Now what does it I mean in terms of, like, attack surface. That means it's got a much smaller attack surface, though, right? >>Yeah. Great. Great point. I mean, there's no there's no fluff. There's no extra components in the system. Therefore, the attack surface is very, very small. Um, you know, and because they're so small and can be distributed much, much faster and much more easily updating and upgrading them as much easier way can we can upgrade a 60 k b file across a GPRS connection on which I certainly can't do with 600 make, uh, four gig VM 600 made container. You know, just unrealistic. Um, e >>I was just going to say so. So now these. You know, kernels, they're they're so small. And they have on Lee what they absolutely need. Now, how do you access the hardware? >>So the hardware is accessed via hyper visor. So you have to have some kind of hyper visor running on top of the hard way. But because Because we need very little from their type adviser, we don't actually need to interact with that very much. It could be a very cut down operating system. Very, very simplified operating system. We're also not trying to run another layer on top of that. We're not We're not ending up with multiple potential VMS or something underneath it were completely removed. That layer, um, the the drivers, the necessary drivers are built into that particular colonel device. >>Oh, okay. That makes sense. >>Tiny footprint easily distributed, um, and once again, very specialized, >>right? Right. Well, that makes sense. Okay. So, yeah, I mean, I guess so. These these individual stacks, you know, comparing virtual machines to containers to unit colonels, there just a completely different architecture. But I can see how that would How That would work where you have the hi perverse. A little hyper buys are on top of rented teeth. OK, so moving right along certain. Where do we see these being used? >>Um, it's early days, although there are some very good practical applications out there. There's a big, big ecosystem of people trying different ways for this I o ts off the obvious immediate place. I i o t s a quick, easy place for something very specialized. Um, what's interesting to me? And you mentioned this earlier. You know, we're talking about medical devices. We're talking about potentially disposable medical devices. Now, if I can keep those devices to run on really low power very, very cheap, um, CPUs and all of a sudden I've got a device that is available to a lot more people. I don't need a massive, powerful CPU. I just need saying that runs a very specific function really fast, A very small scale. I could do well disposable devices. I can build medical devices that are so small we can potentially swallow them and other areas which are really interesting. And I spoke a little bit about it, but it's energy efficiency. Where We need to be very, very energy efficient. No. And that can also impact on massively scalable systems where I want to deal with tens of thousands of potential transactions from users going into a system. I can spin them up only when I need them. I don't need to keep them running all the time again. It comes back to that low latency on then. Anyway, that an incredibly fast food time is valuable. Um, a car, you know, Think about it. If if my if my electric car is constantly draining that battery when it's parked in the garage and I'm traveling or if it takes 20 minutes from my car to boot up its clinics. Colonel, when I wanted, I'm going to get very irritated. Well, >>that and if you have a specific function, you know, like, identify that thing, Yeah, it would be good if you haven't smashed into it before. Identified it as a baby carriage e dark today. Yes. >>So, Nick, you know, these is all really interesting topics. Um, yeah. We spoke about air ops. We spoke about the impact is gonna have on humans. Um, all of these changes to the world that we're living in from computer systems, the impact it's having on our lives biggest. An interesting question about the ethics of all of this >>ethics of all of this. Yes, because let's be let's be realistic. There are actual riel concerns when it comes to privacy, when it comes to how corporations operate, when it comes to how governments operate. Um, there are areas of the world's where, how all of this has has moved, it's absolutely I'll be honest, absolutely terrifying the economic disparity. Um, but when you really come right down to it, um, it's all about the human control over the technology because all of these ethical issues are are in our hands. Okay, we could joke about Sky Net. We can joke about things like that, but this is one place that technology can't help us. We have to do this. We have to be aware of what's going on. We have to be aware. Are they using facial recognition? Uh, you know, when you go to X y Z, are they using recidivism algorithms in sentencing? And how is that? How is that going? Is it? Are those algorithms fair? Certain groups get longer sentences because historical data, uh, is skewed. Be educated. Know how this works? Don't be afraid of any of this. None of this is, uh, none of this is rocket science. Really? Come right down to it. I mean, it's it's not simple, but you can learn this. You can do it. >>Ask good questions. Be interested to be part of the part of the discussion. Not just a passive bystander. >>Exactly. Don't just complain about what you think is going on. Learn about what is actually going on and be active, where you see something that needs to be fixed. So that's what that's what we can do about it. We need to be aware that there's an issue or potential issues, and we need to step in and fix it. So that z myself box, I'll step down zone >>important topic. And it's one that we all can have influence on on bits one. Those who are us who are actually involved in building these systems for the future. We can help make sure that the rules are there. That's right. Systems are built correctly on that. We have open dialogues and discussions around these points and topics and on going away, was she? I think we're coming to the end of the time on hopefully we've kept everybody interested in some of the things that we think are cool for the future. And we're putting our efforts into E O. But I think we need to wrap this up now. So, Nick, great chatting to you is always >>always, always a pleasure, Sean. >>It's been an amazing week. Um, been amazing. Couple of weeks, everybody leading up to this event on bond. No, thank you, everybody for listening to us. Please go and download and try. Dr. Enterprise, Uh, the container card is available. Will post the links here to better understand what we've been doing. Go and have a look through the tutorial track. You'll hear my voice. I'm sure you'll hear next voice and make other people's voices through those tutorials. Hopefully, we keep you all interested and then going download and try lens, Please. Finally, we want your feedback. We're interested to hear what you think would be the great ideas. Good, Bad. Otherwise let us know what you think about products. We are striving to make them better all the time. >>Absolutely. And we want your involvement. Was it all right? Thank you all. Bye bye. Yeah,

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> In June of this year, Snowflake filed a confidential document suggesting that it would do an IPO. Now of course, everybody knows about it, found out about it and it had a $20 billion valuation. So, many in the community and the investment community and so forth are excited about this IPO. It could be the hottest one of the year, and we're getting a number of questions from investors and practitioners and the entire Wiki bond, ETR and CUBE community. So, welcome everybody. This is Dave Vellante. This is "CUBE Insights" powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we're going to unpack five critical questions around Snowflake's IPO or pending IPO. And with me to discuss that is Erik Bradley. He's the Chief Engagement Strategists at ETR and he's also the Managing Director of VENN. Erik, thanks for coming on and great to see you as always. >> Great to see you too. Always enjoy being on the show. Thank you. >> Now for those of you don't know Erik, VENN is a roundtable that he hosts and he brings in CIOs, IT practitioners, CSOs, data experts and they have an open and frank conversation, but it's private to ETR clients. But they know who the individual is, what their role is, what their title is, et cetera and it's a kind of an ask me anything. And I participated in one of them this past week. Outstanding. And we're going to share with you some of that. But let's bring up the agenda slide if we can here. And these are really some of the questions that we're getting from investors and others in the community. There's really five areas that we want to address. The first is what's happening in this enterprise data warehouse marketplace? The second thing is kind of a one area. What about the legacy EDW players like Oracle and Teradata and Netezza? The third question we get a lot is can Snowflake compete with the big cloud players? Amazon, Google, Microsoft. I mean they're right there in the heart, in the thick of things there. And then what about that multi-cloud strategy? Is that viable? How much of a differentiator is that? And then we get a lot of questions on the TAM. Meaning the total available market. How big is that market? Does it justify the valuation for Snowflake? Now, Erik, you've been doing this now. You've run a couple VENNs, you've been following this, you've done some other work that you've done with Eagle Alpha. What's your, just your initial sort of takeaway from all this work that you've been doing. >> Yeah, sure. So my first take on Snowflake was about two and a half years ago. I actually hosted them for one of my VENN interviews and my initial thought was impressed. So impressed. They were talking at the time about their ability to kind of make ease of use of a multi-cloud strategy. At the time although I was impressed, I did not expect the growth and the hyper growth that we have seen now. But, looking at the company in its current iteration, I understand where the hype is coming from. I mean, it's 12 and a half billion private valuation in the last round. The least confidential IPO (laughs) anyone's ever seen (Dave laughs) with a 15 to $20 billion valuation coming out, which is more than Teradata, Margo and Cloudera combined. It's a great question. So obviously the success to this point is warranted, but we need to see what they're going to be able to do next. So I think the agenda you laid out is a great one and I'm looking forward to getting into some of those details. >> So let's start with what's happening in the marketplace and let's pull up a slide that I very much love to use. It's the classic X-Y. On the vertical axis here we show net score. And remember folks, net score is an indicator of spending momentum. ETR every quarter does like a clockwork survey where they're asking people, "Essentially are you spending more or less?" They subtract the less from the more and comes up with a net score. It's more complicated than, but like NPS, it's a very simple and reliable methodology. That's the vertical axis. And the horizontal axis is what's called market share. Market share is the pervasiveness within the data set. So it's calculated by the number of mentions of the vendor divided by the number of mentions within that sector. And what we're showing here is the EDW sector. And we've pulled out a few companies that I want to talk about. So the big three, obviously Microsoft, AWS and Google. And you can see Microsoft has a huge presence far to the right. AWS, very, very strong. A lot of Redshift in there. And then they're pretty high on the vertical axis. And then Google, not as much share, but very solid in that. Close to 60% net score. And then you can see above all of them from a vertical standpoint is Snowflake with a 77.5% net score. You can see them in the upper right there in the green. One of the highest Erik in the entire data set. So, let's start with some sort of initial comments on the big guys and Snowflakes. Your thoughts? >> Sure. Just first of all to comment on the data, what we're showing there is just the data warehousing sector, but Snowflake's actual net score is that high amongst the entire universe that we follow. Their data strength is unprecedented and we have forward-looking spending intention. So this bodes very well for them. Now, what you did say very accurately is there's a difference between their spending intentions on a net revenue level compared to AWS, Microsoft. There no one's saying that this is an apples-to-apples comparison when it comes to actual revenue. So we have to be very cognizant of that. There is domination (laughs) quite frankly from AWS and from Azure. And Snowflake is a necessary component for them not only to help facilitate a multi-cloud, but look what's happening right now in the US Congress, right? We have these tech leaders being grilled on their actual dominance. And one of the main concerns they have is the amount of data that they're collecting. So I think the environment is right to have another player like this. I think Snowflake really has a lot of longevity and our data is supporting that. And the commentary that we hear from our end users, the people that take the survey are supporting that as well. >> Okay, and then let's stay on this X-Y slide for a moment. I want to just pull out a couple of other comments here, because one of the questions we're asking is Whither, the legacy EDW players. So we've got in here, IBM, Oracle, you can see Teradata and then Hortonworks and MapR. We're going to talk a little bit about Hortonworks 'cause it's now Cloudera. We're going to talk a little bit about Hadoop and some of the data lakes. So you can see there they don't have nearly the net score momentum. Oracle obviously has a huge install base and is investing quite frankly in R&D and do an Exadata and it has its own cloud. So, it's got a lock on it's customers and if it keeps investing and adding value, it's not going away. IBM with Netezza, there's really been some questions around their commitment to that base. And I know that a lot of the folks in the VENNs that we've talked to Erik have said, "Well, we're replacing Netezza." Frank Slootman has been very vocal about going after Teradata. And then we're going to talk a little bit about the Hadoop space. But, can you summarize for us your thoughts in your research and the commentary from your community, what's going on with the legacy guys? Are these guys cooked? Can they hang on? What's your take? >> Sure. We focus on this quite a bit actually. So, I'm going to talk about it from the data perspective first, and then we'll go into some of the commentary and the panel. You even joined one yesterday. You know that it was touched upon. But, first on the data side, what we're noticing and capturing is a widening bifurcation between these cloud native and the legacy on-prem. It is undeniable. There is nothing that you can really refute. The data is concrete and it is getting worse. That gap is getting wider and wider and wider. Now, the one thing I will say is, nobody's going to rip out their legacy applications tomorrow. It takes years and years. So when you look at Teradata, right? Their market cap's only 2 billion, 2.3 billion. How much revenue growth do they need to stay where they are? Not much, right? No one's expecting them to grow 20%, which is what you're seeing on the left side of that screen. So when you look at the legacy versus the cloud native, there is very clear direction of what's happening. The one thing I would note from the data perspective is if you switched from net score or adoptions and you went to flat spending, you suddenly see Oracle and Teradata move over to that left a little bit, because again what I'm trying to say is I don't think they're going to catch up. No, but also don't think they're going away tomorrow. That these have large install bases, they have relationships. Now to kind of get into what you were saying about each particular one, IBM, they shut down Netezza. They shut it down and then they brought it back to life. How does that make you feel if you're the head of data architecture or you're DevOps and you're trying to build an application for a large company? I'm not going back to that. There's absolutely no way. Teradata on the other hand is known to be incredibly stable. They are known to just not fail. If you need to kind of re-architect or you do a migration, they work. Teradata also has a lot of compliance built in. So if you're a financials, if you have a regulated business or industry, there's still some data sets that you're not going to move up to the cloud. Whether it's a PII compliance or financial reasons, some of that stuff is still going to live on-prem. So Teradata is still has a very good niche. And from what we're hearing from our panels, then this is a direct quote if you don't mind me looking off screen for one second. But this is a great one. Basically said, "Teradata is the only one from the legacy camp who is putting up a fight and not giving up." Basically from a CIO perspective, the rest of them aren't an option anymore. But Teradata is still fighting and that's great to hear. They have their own data as a service offering and listen, they're a small market cap compared to these other companies we're talking about. But, to summarize, the data is very clear. There is a widening bifurcation between the two camps. I do not think legacy will catch up. I think all net new workloads are moving to data as a service, moving to cloud native, moving to hosted, but there are still going to be some existing legacy on-prem applications that will be supported with these older databases. And of those, Oracle and Teradata are still viable options. >> I totally agree with you and my colleague David Floyd is actually quite high on Teradata Vantage because he really does believe that a key component, we're going to talk about the TAM in a minute, but a key component of the TAM he believes must include the on-premises workloads. And Frank Slootman has been very clear, "We're not doing on-prem, we're not doing this halfway house." And so that's an opportunity for companies like Teradata, certainly Oracle I would put it in that camp is putting up a fight. Vertica is another one. They're very small, but another one that's sort of battling it out from the old NPP world. But that's great. Let's go into some of the specifics. Let's bring up here some of the specific commentary that we've curated here from the roundtables. I'm going to go through these and then ask you to comment. The first one is just, I mean, people are obviously very excited about Snowflake. It's easy to use, the whole thing zero to Snowflake in 90 minutes, but Snowflake is synonymous with cloud-native data warehousing. There are no equals. We heard that a lot from your VENN panelist. >> We certainly did. There was even more euphoria around Snowflake than I expected when we started hosting these series of data warehousing panels. And this particular gentleman that said that happens to be the global head of data architecture for a fortune 100 financials company. And you mentioned earlier that we did a report alongside Eagle Alpha. And we noticed that among fortune 100 companies that are also using the big three public cloud companies, Snowflake is growing market share faster than anyone else. They are positioned in a way where even if you're aligned with Azure, even if you're aligned with AWS, if you're a large company, they are gaining share right now. So that particular gentleman's comments was very interesting. He also made a comment that said, "Snowflake is the person who championed the idea that data warehousing is not dead yet. Use that old monthly Python line and you're not dead yet." And back in the day where the Hadoop came along and the data lakes turned into a data swamp and everyone said, "We don't need warehousing anymore." Well, that turned out to be a head fake, right? Hadoop was an interesting technology, but it's a complex technology. And it ended up not really working the way people want it. I think Snowflake came in at that point at an opportune time and said, "No, data warehousing isn't dead. We just have to separate the compute from the storage layer and look at what I can do. That increases flexibility, security. It gives you that ability to run across multi-cloud." So honestly the commentary has been nothing but positive. We can get into some of the commentary about people thinking that there's competition catching up to what they do, but there is no doubt that right now Snowflake is the name when it comes to data as a service. >> The other thing we heard a lot was ETL is going to get completely disrupted, you sort of embedded ETL. You heard one panelist say, "Well, it's interesting to see that guys like Informatica are talking about how fast they can run inside a Snowflake." But Snowflake is making that easy. That data prep is sort of part of the package. And so that does not bode well for ETL vendors. >> It does not, right? So ETL is a legacy of on-prem databases and even when Hadoop came along, it still needed that extra layer to kind of work with the data. But this is really, really disrupting them. Now the Snowflake's credit, they partner well. All the ETL players are partnered with Snowflake, they're trying to play nice with them, but the writings on the wall as more and more of this application and workloads move to the cloud, you don't need the ETL layer. Now, obviously that's going to affect their talent and Informatica the most. We had a recent comment that said, this was a CIO who basically said, "The most telling thing about the ETL players right now is every time you speak to them, all they talk about is how they work in a Snowflake architecture." That's their only metric that they talk about right now. And he said, "That's very telling." That he basically used it as it's their existential identity to be part of Snowflake. If they're not, they don't exist anymore. So it was interesting to have sort of a philosophical comment brought up in one of my roundtables. But that's how important playing nice and finding a niche within this new data as a service is for ETL, but to be quite honest, they might be going the same way of, "Okay, let's figure out our niche on these still the on-prem workloads that are still there." I think over time we might see them maybe as an M&A possibility, whether it's Snowflake or one of these new up and comers, kind of bring them in and sort of take some of the technology that's useful and layer it in. But as a large market cap, solo existing niche, I just don't know how long ETL is for this world. >> Now, yeah. I mean, you're right that if it wasn't for the marketing, they're not fighting fashion. But >> No. >> really there're some challenges there. Now, there were some contrarians in the panel and they signaled some potential icebergs ahead. And I guarantee you're going to see this in Snowflake's Red Herring when we actually get it. Like we're going to see all the risks. One of the comments, I'll mention the two and then we can talk about it. "Their engineering advantage will fade over time." Essentially we're saying that people are going to copycat and we've seen that. And the other point is, "Hey, we might see some similar things that happened to Hadoop." The public cloud players giving away these offerings at zero cost. Essentially marginal cost of adding another service is near zero. So the cloud players will use their heft to compete. Your thoughts? >> Yeah, first of all one of the reasons I love doing panels, right? Because we had three gentlemen on this panel that all had nothing but wonderful things to say. But you always get one. And this particular person is a CTO of a well known online public travel agency. We'll put it that way. And he said, "I'm going to be the contrarian here. I have seven different technologies from private companies that do the same thing that I'm evaluating." So that's the pressure from behind, right? The technology, they're going to catch up. Right now Snowflake has the best engineering which interestingly enough they took a lot of that engineering from IBM and Teradata if you actually go back and look at it, which was brought up in our panel as well. He said, "However, the engineering will catch up. They always do." Now from the other side they're getting squeezed because the big cloud players just say, "Hey, we can do this too. I can bundle it with all the other services I'm giving you and I can squeeze your pay. Pretty much give it a waive at the cost." So I do think that there is a very valid concern. When you come out with a $20 billion IPO evaluation, you need to warrant that. And when you see competitive pressures from both sides, from private emerging technologies and from the more dominant public cloud players, you're going to get squeezed there a little bit. And if pricing gets squeezed, it's going to be very, very important for Snowflake to continue to innovate. That comment you brought up about possibly being the next Cloudera was certainly the best sound bite that I got. And I'm going to use it as Clickbait in future articles, because I think everyone who starts looking to buy a Snowflake stock and they see that, they're going to need to take a look. But I would take that with a grain of salt. I don't think that's happening anytime soon, but what that particular CTO was referring to was if you don't innovate, the technology itself will become commoditized. And he believes that this technology will become commoditized. So therefore Snowflake has to continue to innovate. They have to find other layers to bring in. Whether that's through their massive war chest of cash they're about to have and M&A, whether that's them buying analytics company, whether that's them buying an ETL layer, finding a way to provide more value as they move forward is going to be very important for them to justify this valuation going forward. >> And I want to comment on that. The Cloudera, Hortonworks, MapRs, Hadoop, et cetera. I mean, there are dramatic differences obviously. I mean, that whole space was so hard, very difficult to stand up. You needed science project guys and lab coats to do it. It was very services intensive. As well companies like Cloudera had to fund all these open source projects and it really squeezed their R&D. I think Snowflake is much more focused and you mentioned some of the background of their engineers, of course Oracle guys as well. However, you will see Amazon's going to trot out a ton of customers using their RA3 managed storage and their flash. I think it's the DC two piece. They have a ton of action in the marketplace because it's just so easy. It's interesting one of the comments, you asked this yesterday, was with regard to separating compute from storage, which of course it's Snowflakes they basically invented it, it was one of their climbs to fame. The comment was what AWS has done to separate compute from storage for Redshift is largely a bolt on. Which I thought that was an interesting comment. I've had some other comments. My friend George Gilbert said, "Hey, despite claims to the contrary, AWS still hasn't separated storage from compute. What they have is really primitive." We got to dig into that some more, but you're seeing some data points that suggest there's copycatting going on. May not be as functional, but at the same time, Erik, like I was saying good enough is maybe good enough in this space. >> Yeah, and especially with the enterprise, right? You see what Microsoft has done. Their technology is not as good as all the niche players, but it's good enough and I already have a Microsoft license. So, (laughs) you know why am I going to move off of it. But I want to get back to the comment you mentioned too about that particular gentleman who made that comment about RedShift, their separation is really more of a bolt on than a true offering. It's interesting because I know who these people are behind the scenes and he has a very strong relationship with AWS. So it was interesting to me that in the panel yesterday he said he switched from Redshift to Snowflake because of that and some other functionality issues. So there is no doubt from the end users that are buying this. And he's again a fortune 100 financial organization. Not the same one we mentioned. That's a different one. But again, a fortune 100 well known financials organization. He switched from AWS to Snowflake. So there is no doubt that right now they have the technological lead. And when you look at our ETR data platform, we have that adoption reasoning slide that you show. When you look at the number one reason that people are adopting Snowflake is their feature set of technological lead. They have that lead now. They have to maintain it. Now, another thing to bring up on this to think about is when you have large data sets like this, and as we're moving forward, you need to have machine learning capabilities layered into it, right? So they need to make sure that they're playing nicely with that. And now you could go open source with the Apache suite, but Google is doing so well with BigQuery and so well with their machine learning aspects. And although they don't speak enterprise well, they don't sell to the enterprise well, that's changing. I think they're somebody to really keep an eye on because their machine learning capabilities that are layered into the BigQuery are impressive. Now, of course, Microsoft Azure has Databricks. They're layering that in, but this is an area where I think you're going to see maybe what's next. You have to have machine learning capabilities out of the box if you're going to do data as a service. Right now Snowflake doesn't really have that. Some of the other ones do. So I had one of my guest panelist basically say to me, because of that, they ended up going with Google BigQuery because he was able to run a machine learning algorithm within hours of getting set up. Within hours. And he said that that kind of capability out of the box is what people are going to have to use going forward. So that's another thing we should dive into a little bit more. >> Let's get into that right now. Let's bring up the next slide which shows net score. Remember this is spending momentum across the major cloud players and plus Snowflake. So you've got Snowflake on the left, Google, AWS and Microsoft. And it's showing three survey timeframes last October, April 20, which is right in the middle of the pandemic. And then the most recent survey which has just taken place this month in July. And you can see Snowflake very, very high scores. Actually improving from the last October survey. Google, lower net scores, but still very strong. Want to come back to that and pick up on your comments. AWS dipping a little bit. I think what's happening here, we saw this yesterday with AWS's results. 30% growth. Awesome. Slight miss on the revenue side for AWS, but look, I mean massive. And they're so exposed to so many industries. So some of their industries have been pretty hard hit. Microsoft pretty interesting. A little softness there. But one of the things I wanted to pick up on Erik, when you're talking about Google and BigQuery and it's ML out of the box was what we heard from a lot of the VENN participants. There's no question about it that Google technically I would say is one of Snowflake's biggest competitors because it's cloud native. Remember >> Yep. >> AWS did a license one time. License deal with PowerShell and had a sort of refactor the thing to be cloud native. And of course we know what's happening with Microsoft. They basically were on-prem and then they put stuff in the cloud and then all the updates happen in the cloud. And then they pushed to on-prem. But they have that what Frank Slootman calls that halfway house, but BigQuery no question technically is very, very solid. But again, you see Snowflake right now anyway outpacing these guys in terms of momentum. >> Snowflake is out outpacing everyone (laughs) across our entire survey universe. It really is impressive to see. And one of the things that they have going for them is they can connect all three. It's that multi-cloud ability, right? That portability that they bring to you is such an important piece for today's modern CIO as data architects. They don't want vendor lock-in. They are afraid of vendor lock-in. And this ability to make their data portable and to do that with ease and the flexibility that they offer is a huge advantage right now. However, I think you're a hundred percent right. Google has been so focused on the engineering side and never really focusing on the enterprise sales side. That is why they're playing catch up. I think they can catch up. They're bringing in some really important enterprise salespeople with experience. They're starting to learn how to talk to enterprise, how to sell, how to support. And nobody can really doubt their engineering. How many open sources have they given us, right? They invented Kubernetes and the entire container space. No one's really going to compete with them on that side if they learn how to sell it and support it. Yeah, right now they're behind. They're a distant third. Don't get me wrong. From a pure hosted ability, AWS is number one. Microsoft is yours. Sometimes it looks like it's number one, but you have to recognize that a lot of that is because of simply they're hosted 365. It's a SAS app. It's not a true cloud type of infrastructure as a service. But Google is a distant third, but their technology is really, really great. And their ability to catch up is there. And like you said, in the panels we were hearing a lot about their machine learning capability is right out of the box. And that's where this is going. What's the point of having this huge data if you're not going to be supporting it on new application architecture. And all of those applications require machine learning. >> Awesome. So we're. And I totally agree with what you're saying about Google. They just don't have it figured out how to sell the enterprise yet. And a hundred percent AWS has the best cloud. I mean, hands down. But a very, very competitive market as we heard yesterday in front of Congress. Now we're on the point about, can Snowflake compete with the big cloud players? I want to show one more data point. So let's bring up, this is the same chart as we showed before, but it's new adoptions. And this is really telling. >> Yeah. >> You can see Snowflake with 34% in the yellow, new adoptions, down yes from previous surveys, but still significantly higher than the other players. Interesting to see Google showing momentum on new adoptions, AWS down on new adoptions. And again, exposed to a lot of industries that have been hard hit. And Microsoft actually quite low on new adoption. So this is very impressive for Snowflake. And I want to talk about the multi-cloud strategy now Erik. This came up a lot. The VENN participants who are sort of fans of Snowflake said three things: It was really the flexibility, the security which is really interesting to me. And a lot of that had to do with the flexibility. The ability to easily set up roles and not have to waste a lot of time wrangling. And then the third was multi-cloud. And that was really something that came through heavily in the VENN. Didn't it? >> It really did. And again, I think it just comes down to, I don't think you can ever overstate how afraid these guys are of vendor lock-in. They can't have it. They don't want it. And it's best practice to make sure your sensitive information is being kind of spread out a little bit. We all know that people don't trust Bezos. So if you're in certain industries, you're not going to use AWS at all, right? So yeah, this ability to have your data portability through multi-cloud is the number one reason I think people start looking at Snowflake. And to go to your point about the adoptions, it's very telling and it bodes well for them going forward. Most of the things that we're seeing right now are net new workloads. So let's go again back to the legacy side that we were talking about, the Teradatas, IBMs, Oracles. They still have the monolithic applications and the data that needs to support that, right? Like an old ERP type of thing. But anyone who's now building a new application, bringing something new to market, it's all net new workloads. There is no net new workload that is going to go to SAP or IBM. It's not going to happen. The net new workloads are going to the cloud. And that's why when you switch from net score to adoption, you see Snowflake really stand out because this is about new adoption for net new workloads. And that's really where they're driving everything. So I would just say that as this continues, as data as a service continues, I think Snowflake's only going to gain more and more share for all the reasons you stated. Now get back to your comment about security. I was shocked by that. I really was. I did not expect these guys to say, "Oh, no. Snowflake enterprise security not a concern." So two panels ago, a gentleman from a fortune 100 financials said, "Listen, it's very difficult to get us to sign off on something for security. Snowflake is past it, it is enterprise ready, and we are going full steam ahead." Once they got that go ahead, there was no turning back. We gave it to our DevOps guys, we gave it to everyone and said, "Run with it." So, when a company that's big, I believe their fortune rank is 28. (laughs) So when a company that big says, "Yeah, you've got the green light. That we were okay with the internal compliance aspect, we're okay with the security aspect, this gives us multi-cloud portability, this gives us flexibility, ease of use." Honestly there's a really long runway ahead for Snowflake. >> Yeah, so the big question I have around the multi-cloud piece and I totally and I've been on record saying, "Look, if you're going looking for an agnostic multi-cloud, you're probably not going to go with the cloud vendor." (laughs) But I've also said that I think multi-cloud to date anyway has largely been a symptom as opposed to a strategy, but that's changing. But to your point about lock-in and also I think people are maybe looking at doing things across clouds, but I think that certainly it expands Snowflake's TAM and we're going to talk about that because they support multiple clouds and they're going to be the best at that. That's a mandate for them. The question I have is how much of complex joining are you going to be doing across clouds? And is that something that is just going to be too latency intensive? Is that really Snowflake's expertise? You're really trying to build that data layer. You're probably going to maybe use some kind of Postgres database for that. >> Right. >> I don't know. I need to dig into that, but that would be an opportunity from a TAM standpoint. I just don't know how real that is. >> Yeah, unfortunately I'm going to just be honest with this one. I don't think I have great expertise there and I wouldn't want to lead anyone a wrong direction. But from what I've heard from some of my VENN interview subjects, this is happening. So the data portability needs to be agnostic to the cloud. I do think that when you're saying, are there going to be real complex kind of workloads and applications? Yes, the answer is yes. And I think a lot of that has to do with some of the container architecture as well, right? If I can just pull data from one spot, spin it up for as long as I need and then just get rid of that container, that ethereal layer of compute. It doesn't matter where the cloud lies. It really doesn't. I do think that multi-cloud is the way of the future. I know that the container workloads right now in the enterprise are still very small. I've heard people say like, "Yeah, I'm kicking the tires. We got 5%." That's going to grow. And if Snowflake can make themselves an integral part of that, then yes. I think that's one of those things where, I remember the guy said, "Snowflake has to continue to innovate. They have to find a way to grow this TAM." This is an area where they can do so. I think you're right about that, but as far as my expertise, on this one I'm going to be honest with you and say, I don't want to answer incorrectly. So you and I need to dig in a little bit on this one. >> Yeah, as it relates to question four, what's the viability of Snowflake's multi-cloud strategy? I'll say unquestionably supporting multiple clouds, very viable. Whether or not portability across clouds, multi-cloud joins, et cetera, TBD. So we'll keep digging into that. The last thing I want to focus on here is the last question, does Snowflake's TAM justify its $20 billion valuation? And you think about the data pipeline. You go from data acquisition to data prep. I mean, that really is where Snowflake shines. And then of course there's analysis. You've got to bring in EMI or AI and ML tools. That's not Snowflake's strength. And then you're obviously preparing that, serving that up to the business, visualization. So there's potential adjacencies that they could get into that they may or may not decide to. But so we put together this next chart which is kind of the TAM expansion opportunity. And I just want to briefly go through it. We published this stuff so you can go and look at all the fine print, but it's kind of starts with the data lake disruption. You called it data swamp before. The Hadoop no schema on, right? Basically the ROI of Hadoop became reduction of investment as my friend Abby Meadow would say. But so they're kind of disrupting that data lake which really was a failure. And then really going after that enterprise data warehouse which is kind of I have it here as a 10 billion. It's actually bigger than that. It's probably more like a $20 billion market. I'll update this slide. And then really what Snowflake is trying to do is be data as a service. A data layer across data stores, across clouds, really make it easy to ingest and prepare data and then serve the business with insights. And then ultimately this huge TAM around automated decision making, real-time analytics, automated business processes. I mean, that is potentially an enormous market. We got a couple of hundred billion. I mean, just huge. Your thoughts on their TAM? >> I agree. I'm not worried about their TAM and one of the reasons why as I mentioned before, they are coming out with a whole lot of cash. (laughs) This is going to be a red hot IPO. They are going to have a lot of money to spend. And look at their management team. Who is leading the way? A very successful, wise, intelligent, acquisitive type of CEO. I think there is going to be M&A activity, and I believe that M&A activity is going to be 100% for the mindset of growing their TAM. The entire world is moving to data as a service. So let's take as a backdrop. I'm going to go back to the panel we did yesterday. The first question we asked was, there was an understanding or a theory that when the virus pandemic hit, people wouldn't be taking on any sort of net new architecture. They're like, "Okay, I have Teradata, I have IBM. Let's just make sure the lights are on. Let's stick with it." Every single person I've asked, they're just now eight different experts, said to us, "Oh, no. Oh, no, no." There is the virus pandemic, the shift from work from home. Everything we're seeing right now has only accelerated and advanced our data as a service strategy in the cloud. We are building for scale, adopting cloud for data initiatives. So, across the board they have a great backdrop. So that's going to only continue, right? This is very new. We're in the early innings of this. So for their TAM, that's great because that's the core of what they do. Now on top of it you mentioned the type of things about, yeah, right now they don't have great machine learning. That could easily be acquired and built in. Right now they don't have an analytics layer. I for one would love to see these guys talk to Alteryx. Alteryx is red hot. We're seeing great data and great feedback on them. If they could do that business intelligence, that analytics layer on top of it, the entire suite as a service, I mean, come on. (laughs) Their TAM is expanding in my opinion. >> Yeah, your point about their leadership is right on. And I interviewed Frank Slootman right in the heart of the pandemic >> So impressed. >> and he said, "I'm investing in engineering almost sight unseen. More circumspect around sales." But I will caution people. That a lot of people I think see what Slootman did with ServiceNow. And he came into ServiceNow. I have to tell you. It was they didn't have their unit economics right, they didn't have their sales model and marketing model. He cleaned that up. Took it from 120 million to 1.2 billion and really did an amazing job. People are looking for a repeat here. This is a totally different situation. ServiceNow drove a truck through BMCs install base and with IT help desk and then created this brilliant TAM expansion. Let's learn and expand model. This is much different here. And Slootman also told me that he's a situational CEO. He doesn't have a playbook. And so that's what is most impressive and interesting about this. He's now up against the biggest competitors in the world: AWS, Google and Microsoft and dozens of other smaller startups that have raised a lot of money. Look at the company like Yellowbrick. They've raised I don't know $180 million. They've got a great team. Google, IBM, et cetera. So it's going to be really, really fun to watch. I'm super excited, Erik, but I'll tell you the data right now suggest they've got a great tailwind and if they can continue to execute, this is going to be really fun to watch. >> Yeah, certainly. I mean, when you come out and you are as impressive as Snowflake is, you get a target on your back. There's no doubt about it, right? So we said that they basically created the data as a service. That's going to invite competition. There's no doubt about it. And Yellowbrick is one that came up in the panel yesterday about one of our CIOs were doing a proof of concept with them. We had about seven others mentioned as well that are startups that are in this space. However, none of them despite their great valuation and their great funding are going to have the kind of money and the market lead that Slootman is going to have which Snowflake has as this comes out. And what we're seeing in Congress right now with some antitrust scrutiny around the large data that's being collected by AWS as your Google, I'm not going to bet against this guy either. Right now I think he's got a lot of opportunity, there's a lot of additional layers and because he can basically develop this as a suite service, I think there's a lot of great opportunity ahead for this company. >> Yeah, and I guarantee that he understands well that customer acquisition cost and the lifetime value of the customer, the retention rates. Those are all things that he and Mike Scarpelli, his CFO learned at ServiceNow. Not learned, perfected. (Erik laughs) Well Erik, really great conversation, awesome data. It's always a pleasure having you on. Thank you so much, my friend. I really appreciate it. >> I appreciate talking to you too. We'll do it again soon. And stay safe everyone out there. >> All right, and thank you for watching everybody this episode of "CUBE Insights" powered by ETR. This is Dave Vellante, and we'll see you next time. (soft music)

>> From the SiliconANGLE Media Office in Boston, Massachusets, it's theCUBE! (techno music) Now, here's your host, Stu Miniman. >> Hi. I'm Stu Miniman and this is a Cube Conversation from our Boston area studio. Welcome back to the program. Bobby Patrick, who is the Chief Marketing Officer of UiPath. Bobby, good to see you. >> Great to be here Stu. >> Alright. Bobby, we're going to tackle head-on an interesting discussion that's been going on in the industry. Of course, Artificial Intelligence is this wave that is impacting a lot when you look at earnings reports, everyone's talking about it. Most companies are understanding how they're doing it. It is not a new term. I go back reading my history of technology, Ada Lovelace, 150 years ago when she was helping to define what a computer was. She made the Lovelace objective, I believe they said - >> Right. >> Which was later quoted by Turing and the like is that if we can describe it in code, it's probably not Artificial Intelligence cause their not building new things - >> Right. >> And being able to change on there, so there's hype around AI itself, but UiPath is one of the leaders in Robotic Process Automation and how that fits in with AI and Machine Learning, all of these other terms it can get a bit of an acronym soup and we all can't agree on what the terms are. So, let's start with some of the basics Bobby. Please give us RPA and AI and we'll get into it from there. >> Well, Robotic Process Automation, according to the analysts, like Forester are part of the overall AI broader kind of massive, massive market. AI itself has many different, different, routes. Deep learning right, and machine learning, natural language processing, right and so on. I think AI is a term that covers many different grounds. And RPA, AI applies two ways. It applies within RPA and that we have a technology called Computer Vision. It's how a robot looks at a screen like how a human does, which is very, very difficult actually. You look at a citrix terminal session, or a VDI session, different than an Excel sheet, different than as SASAB, and most processes across all of those, so a robot has to be able to look at all of, all of those screen elements, and understand them right. AI within Computer Vision around understanding documents, looking at unstructured data, looking at handwriting. Conversational understanding. Looking at text in an email determining context, helping with chatbots. But a number of those components, doesn't mean we have to build that all ourselves. What RPA does is we bring it all together. We make it easy to automate and build and create the data flow of a process. Then you can apply AI to that, right. So, I think, two years ago when I first joined UiPath, putting RPA and AI in the same sentence people laughed. Year ago we said, ya know what, RPA is really the path to AI in business operations. Now, ya know we say that we're the most highly valued AI company in the world and no one has ever disagreed. >> Yeah, so it's good to lay out some of the adopting cause one of the things to look at and say if I looked at this product two or three years ago, it's not the product that it is today. We know how fast software - >> Right. Is making changes along the line. Second thing, automation itself is something we've been talking about my entire career. >> Right. When I look at things we were doing 5, 10, 15 years ago, and calling automation, we kind of laugh at it. Because today, automation absolutely is making a lot of changes. RPA is taking that automation in a very strategic direction for many companies there. It's the conversation we had last year at your conference was, RPA is the gateway drug if you will. >> Right. >> Of that environment because automation has scared a lot of people. Am I just doing scripts, what do I control, what do I set? Maybe just give us that first grounding of where that automation path is, has come and is going. >> So, there's different kinds of automation right as you said. We've had automation for decades, primarily in IT. Automation was primarily around API to API integration. And that's really hard, right. It requires developers, engineers, it requires them to keep it current. It's expensive and takes a longer time. Along comes the technology, RPA and UiPath, right were you can automate fairly quickly. There's built in recorders and you can do it with a drag and drop, like a flow chart. You can automate a process, and that, that automation is immediately beneficial. Meaning that outcome, is immediate. And, the cost to doing that is small in comparison. And I think, maybe it's the longtail of automation in some ways. It's all of these things that we do around a SAP process. The reality is if you have SAP, or you have Oracle, or you have Workday, the human processes around that involve still a Spreadsheet. It involves PDF documents. A great, one of my favorite examples right now on YouTube with Microsoft is Chevron. Chevron has hundreds of thousands of PDF's that is generated from every oil rig every day. It has all kinds of data in different formats. Tables, different structured and semi-structured data. They would actually extract that data, manually. To be able to process that and analyze that, right. Working with Microsoft AI and UiPath RPA they're able to automate that entire massive process. And now they're on stage talking about it, Microsoft and UiPath events right. And, they call that AI. That's applying AI to a massive problem for them. They need the robot to be completely accurate though. You don't to worry that the data that is being extracted from the PDF's is inaccurate, right. So, Machine Learning goes into that. There's exception management that's a part of that process as well. They call it AI. >> Yeah, some of this is just, people in the industry, the industry watchers is, we get very particular on different terminology. Let's not conflate Artificial Intelligence, or Augmented Intelligence with Machine Learning, because their different environments. I've heard Forester talk about, right, it's a spectrum though, there's an umbrella for some of these. So, we like to get not too pedantic on individual terms itself. >> Right. >> Um - >> Let me give you more examples. I think the term robotic and RPA, yes, it's true that the vast majority of the last couple of years with RPA have been very rules based, right. Because most processes today like in a call center, there's a rule. Do this and this, then this and this. And so, you're automating that same rules based structure. But once that data's flowing through, you can actually then look at the history of that data and then turn a rules based automation into an experience based automation. And how do you do that? You apply Machine Learning algorithms. You apply Data Robot, LMAI, IBM Watson to it, right. But, it's still the RPA platform that is driving that automation, it's just no longer rules based it's experience based. A great example at UiPath Together Dubai recently, was Dubai customs. They had a process where when you declared something, let's say you box of chocolate, they had to open up a binder and find a classification code for that box of chocolate. Well, they use our RPA product and they make a call out to IBM Watson as a part of the automation, and they just write in, pink box of candy filled chocolate. And it takes its Deep Learning, it comes back with a classification code, all part of an automated process. What happens? Dubai customs lines go from being a two hours to a few minutes, right. It's a combination of our RPA capability and our automation board capability and the ability to bring in IBM Watson. Dubai customs says they applied AI now and solved a big problem. >> One of the things I was reading through the recent Gartner Magic Quadrant on RPA, and they had two classifications. One was, kind of the automation does it all, and the other was the people and machines. Things like chatbox, some of the examples you've been giving there seem to be that combination. Where do those two fit together or are those distinctions that you make? >> Yeah, I mean Gartner's interesting. Gartner's a very IT-centric analyst firm, right and IT often in my view are often very conventional thinkers and not the fastest to adopt breakthrough technologies. They weren't the fastest to adopt Cloud, they weren't the fastest to adopt on-demand CRM, and they weren't the fastest to jump onto RPA because they believe, why can't we use API for everything. And the Gartner analysts is kind of, in the beginning of the process of the Magic Quadrant, they spent a lot of time with us and they were trying hard to say that was, you should solve everything with an API. That's just not reality, right? It's not feasible, and it's not affordable, right? But, RPA is just not the automation of a task or process, it's then applying a whole other set of other technologies. We have 700 partners today in our ecosystem. Natural Language processing partners, right. Machine learning partners. Chatbox partners, you mentioned. So we want to be, we want to make it very easy. In a drag and drop way. To be able to apply these great technologies to an automation to solve some big problem. What's fun to me right now is there's a lot of great startups. They come out of say insurance, or they come out of financial services and they've got a great algorithm and they know the business really well. And they probably have one or two amazing customers, and they're stuck. We, for them, this came from a partner of ours, you're becoming, you UiPath, you're becoming our best route to market because you have the data. You have the work flow. Our job I think in some ways, is to make it easy to bring these technologies together to apply them to an automation to make that through a democratized way where a non-engineer can do this, and I think that's what's happening. >> Yeah, those integrations between environments can be very powerful something we see. Every shop has lots of applications, has lots of technical data and they're not just sweeping the floor of everything they have. What are some of the limits of AI and RPA today, what do you see things going? >> I think, Deep Learning we see very little of that. It's probably applied to some kind of science project and things within companies. I think for the vast majority of our customers, they use machine learning within RPA for Computer Vision by default. But, ya know they're still not really at a stage of mass adoption of what algorithms do I want to apply to a process. I think we're trying to make it easier for you to be able to drag and drop AI we call it, to make it easier to apply. But, I think we're in very early days. And as you mentioned, there's market confusion on it. I know one thing from our 90 plus customers that are in our advisory boards. I know from them they say their companies struggles with finding an ROI in AI, and, you know, I think we're helping there cause we're applying to real operations. They say the same thing about Blockchain. I don't know Stu. Do you know of a single example of a Blockchain ROI, great example? >> Yeah, it reminds me, Big Data was one of those, over half of the people failed to get the ROI they want. It's one of those promises of certain technology - >> Right. >> That high-level, you know let's poo-poo Bobby things that actually have tangible results - >> Yeah. >> And get things done. But you weren't following the strict guidelines of the API economy. >> Right, well true, exactly right. What I find amazing is, I mentioned in another one of our talks conversations that 23,000 have come to UiPath events this year. To our own events, not trade events and other shows, that's different. They want to get on stage and talk. They're delighted about this. And their talking about, generally speaking, RPA's helping them go digital. But they're all saying their ambition is to apply AI to make those processes smarter. To learn from - to go from rules based to experience based. I think what's beautiful about UiPath, is that we're a platform that you can get there overtime. You can apply - you can predict perhaps the algorithm 's you're going to want to use in two or three years. We're not going to force you, you can apply any algorithm you want to an automation work going through. I think that flexibility is actually for customers, they find it very comforting. >> It's one of those things I say, most companies have a cloud strategy. That needs to be written in, not etched in stone. You need to revisit it every quarter. Same thing with what happening AI and in your space things are changing so fast and they need to be agile. >> That's right. >> They need to be able to make changes. In October, you're going to have a lot of those customers up on stage talking. Where will this AI discussion fit into UiPath forward in Las Vegas. We talk a lot about our AI fabric, framework it's around document understanding, getting heavy robots getting smarter and smarter, what they see on the screen, what they see on a document, what they see with handwriting, and improving the accuracy of visual understanding. Looking at the, face recognition and other types of images and being able to understand the images. Conversational understanding. The tone of an email. Is this person really upset? How upset? Or, a conversational chatbot. Really evolving from mimicking humans with RPA to augmenting humans and I think that story, both in the innovations, the customer examples on stage, I think you're going to see the sophistication of automation's that are being used through UiPath grow exponentially. >> Okay, so I want to give you the final word on this. And I don't want to talk to the people that might poo-poo or argue RPA and AI and ML and all these things. Bring us inside your customers. What...where, how does that conversation start? Are they coming it from AI, ML, RPA or is there, ya know a business discussion that usually catalyzes this engagement? >> Our customer's are starting with digital. They're trying to go digital. They know they need digital transformation, it's been very, very hard. There's a real outcome that comes quickly from taking a mundane task that is expensive, and automating that. The outcomes are quick, often projects that involve our partners like Accenture and others. The payback period on the entire project with RPA can be 6 months, it's self-funding. What other technologies doing B2B is self-funding in one year? That's part of the incredible adoption birth. But, every single customer doesn't stop there. They say okay, I also want to know that this automation is, I want to know that I can go apply AI to this. It's in every conversation. So there's two big booms with UiPath and our RPA. The first is when you go digital, there's some great outcome. There's productivity gain, it's immediate, right. I guess I said the payback period is quick. The second big one is when you go and turn it from a rules based to an experience based process, or you apply AI to it, there's another set of business benefits down the road. As more algorithms come out and things, you keep applying to it. This is sort of the gift that keeps on giving. I think if we didn't have that connection to Machine Learning or AI, I think the enthusiasm level of the majority of our customers would not be anywhere near what it is today. >> Alright, well Bobby really appreciate digging into the customerality, RPA, AI all the acronym soup that was going on and we look forward to UiPath Forward at the Bellagio in Las Vegas this October. >> It'll be fun. Alright, I'm Stu Miniman, as always thank you so much for watching theCube.

(microphone not on) >> be 47 (laughter) >> Are you ready? >> Here we go, alright and, three, two... >> You know it's great to see real benchmarking data, because this is a very important domain and there is not a lot of benchmarking information out there around some of these other products that are available. But let's try to to turn that benchmarking information into business outcomes, and to do that we got, Kurt Kuckein, back from DDN. Kurt welcome back let's talk a bit about how are these high value outcomes that business seeks with AI going to be achieved as a consequence of this new performance, faster capabilities, etcetera. >> So there's a couple of considerations, the first consideration I think is just the selection of AI infrastructure itself. Right, we have customers telling us constantly that they don't know where to start. Now that they have readily available reference architectures that tell them, hey here's something you can implement get installed quickly, you're up and running, running your AI from day one. >> So the decision process for what to get is reduced. >> Exactly. >> Okay. >> Uh, number two is you're unlocking all ends of the investment with something like this right? You're maximizing the performance on the GPU side. You're maximizing the performance on the ingest side for the storage. You're maximizing the through-put of the entire system, so you're really gaining the most out of your investment there. And not just gaining the most out of the investment, but truly accelerating the application and that's the end goal right, that we're looking for with customers. Plenty of people can deliver fast storage, but it does- If it doesn't impact the application and deliver faster results, cut run times down, then what are you really gaining from having fast storage? And so that where we're focused, we're focused on application acceleration. >> So simpler architecture, faster implementation based on that, integrated capabilities, ultimately, all revealing or all resulting in, better application performance. >> Better application performance, and in the end something that's more reliable as well. >> Kurt, thanks for again for being on The Cube. >> Thanks for having me.