>> From The Cube studios in Palo Alto, in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from the cube and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Last year, we noted in a breaking analysis that the cloud ecosystem is innovating beyond the idea or notion of multi-cloud. We've said for years that multi-cloud is really not a strategy but rather a symptom of multi-vendor. And we coined this term supercloud to describe an abstraction layer that lives above the hyperscale infrastructure that hides the underlying complexities, the APIs, and the primitives of each of the respective clouds. It interconnects whether it's On-Prem, AWS, Azure, Google, stretching out to the edge and creates a value layer on top of that. So our vision is that supercloud is more than running an individual service in cloud native mode within an individual individual cloud rather it's this new layer that builds on top of the hyperscalers. And does things irrespective of location adds value and we'll get into that in more detail. Now it turns out that we weren't the only ones thinking about this, not surprisingly, the majority of the technology ecosystem has been working towards this vision in various forms, including some examples that actually don't try to hide the underlying primitives. And we'll talk about that, but give a consistent experience across the DevSecOps tool chain. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon, Cube insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we're going to share some recent examples and direct quotes about supercloud from the many Cube guests that we've had on over the last several weeks and months. And we've been trying to test this concept of supercloud. Is it technically feasible? Is it business rational? Is there business case for it? And we'll also share some recent ETR data to put this into context with some of the players that we think are going after this opportunity and where they are in their supercloud build out. And as you can see I'm not in the studio, everybody's got COVID so the studios shut down temporarily but breaking analysis continues. So here we go. Now, first thing is we uncovered an article from earlier this year by Lori MacVittie, is entitled, Supercloud: The 22 Answer to Multi-Cloud Challenges. What a great title. Of course we love it. Now, what really interested us here is not just the title, but the notion that it really doesn't matter what it's called, who cares? Supercloud, distributed cloud, someone even called it Metacloud recently, and we'll get into that. But Lori is a technologist. She's a developer by background. She works at F-Five and she's partial to the supercloud definition that was put forth by Cornell. You can see it here. That's a cloud architecture that enables application migration as a service across different availability zones or cloud providers, et cetera. And that the supercloud provides interfaces to allocate, migrate and terminate resources... And can span all major public cloud providers as well as private clouds. Now, of course, we would take that as well to the edge. So sure. That sounds about right and provides further confirmation that something new is really happening out there. And that was our initial premise when we put this fourth last year. Now we want to dig deeper and hear from the many Cube guests that we've interviewed recently probing about this topic. We're going to start with Chuck Whitten. He's Dell's new Co-COO and most likely part of the Dell succession plan, many years down the road hopefully. He coined the phrase multi-cloud by default versus multi-cloud by design. And he provides a really good business perspective. He's not a deep technologist. We're going to hear from Chuck a couple of times today including one where John Furrier asks him about leveraging hyperscale CapEx. That's an important concept that's fundamental to supercloud. Now, Ashesh Badani heads products at Red Hat and he talks about what he calls Metacloud. Again, it doesn't matter to us what you call it but it's the ecosystem gathering and innovating and we're going to get his perspective. Now we have a couple of clips from Danny Allan. He is the CTO of Veeam. He's a deep technologist and super into the weeds, which we love. And he talks about how Veeam abstracts the cloud layer. Again, a concept that's fundamental to supercloud and he describes what a supercloud is to him. And we also bring with Danny the edge discussion to the conversation. Now the bottom line from Danny is we want to know is supercloud technically feasible? And is it a thing? And then we have Jeff Clarke. Jeff Clark is the Co-COO and Vice Chairman of Dell super experienced individual. He lays out his vision of supercloud and what John Furrier calls a business operating system. You're going to hear from John a couple times. And he, Jeff Clark has a dropped the mic moment, where he says, if we can do this X, we'll describe what X is, it's game over. Okay. So of course we wanted to then go to HPE, one of Dell's biggest competitors and Patrick Osborne is the vice president of the storage business unit at Hewlett Packet Enterprise. And so given Jeff Clarke's game over strategy, we want to understand how HPE sees supercloud. And the bottom line, according to Patrick Osborne is that it's real. So you'll hear from him. And now Raghu Raghuram is the CEO of VMware. He threw a curve ball at this supercloud concept. And he flat out says, no, we don't want to hide the underlying primitives. We want to give developers access to those. We want to create a consistent developer experience in that DevsSecOps tool chain and Kubernetes runtime environments, and connect all the elements in the application development stack. So that's a really interesting perspective that Raghu brings. And then we end on Itzik Reich. Itzik is a technologist and a technical team leader who's worked as a go between customers and product developers for a number of years. And we asked Itzik, is supercloud technically feasible and will it be a reality? So let's hear from these experts and you can decide for yourselves how real supercloud is today and where it is, run the sizzle >> Operative phrase is multi-cloud by default that's kind of the buzz from your keynote. What do you mean by that? >> Well, look, customers have woken up with multiple clouds, multiple public clouds, On-Premise clouds increasingly as the edge becomes much more a reality for customers clouds at the edge. And so that's what we mean by multi-cloud by default. It's not yet been designed strategically. I think our argument yesterday was, it can be and it should be. It is a very logical place for architecture to land because ultimately customers want the innovation across all of the hyperscale public clouds. They will see workloads and use cases where they want to maintain an On-Premise cloud, On-Premise clouds are not going away, I mentioned edge clouds, so it should be strategic. It's just not today. It doesn't work particularly well today. So when we say multi-cloud by default we mean that's the state of the world today. Our goal is to bring multi-cloud by design as you heard. >> Really great question, actually, since you and I talked, Dave, I've been spending some time noodling just over that. And you're right. There's probably some terminology, something that will get developed either by us or in collaboration with the industry. Where we sort of almost have the next almost like a Metacloud that we're working our way towards. >> So we manage both the snapshots and we convert it into the Veeam portable data format. And here's where the supercloud comes into play. Because if I can convert it into the Veeam portable data format, I can move that OS anywhere. I can move it from physical to virtual, to cloud, to another cloud, back to virtual, I can put it back on physical if I want to. It actually abstracts the cloud layer. There are things that we do when we go between cloud some use BIOS, some use UEFI, but we have the data in backup format, not snapshot format, that's theirs, but we have it in backup format that we can move around and abstract workloads across all of the infrastructure. >> And your catalog is control in control of that. Is that right? Am I thinking about that the right way? >> Yeah it is, 100%. And you know what's interesting about our catalog, Dave, the catalog is inside the backup. Yes. So here's, what's interesting about the edge, two things, on the edge you don't want to have any state, if you can help it. And so containers help with that You can have stateless environments, some persistent data storage But we not not only provide the portability in operating systems, we also do this for containers. And that's true. If you go to the cloud and you're using say EKS with relational database services RDS for the persistent data later, we can pick that up and move it to GKE or move it to OpenShift On-Premises. And so that's why I call this the supercloud, we have all of this data. Actually, I think you termed the term supercloud. >> Yeah. But thank you for... I mean, I'm looking for a confirmation from a technologist that it's technically feasible. >> It is technically feasible and you can do it today. >> You said also technology and business models are tied together and enabler. If you believe that then you have to believe that it's a business operating system that they want. They want to leverage whatever they can. And at the end of the day, they have to differentiate what they do. >> Well, that's exactly right. If I take that in what Dave was saying and I summarize it the following way, if we can take these cloud assets and capabilities, combine them in an orchestrated way to deliver a distributed platform, game over. >> We have a number of platforms that are providing whether it's compute or networking or storage, running those workloads that they plum up into the cloud they have an operational experience in the cloud and they now they have data services that are running in the cloud for us in GreenLake. So it's a reality, we have a number of platforms that support that. We're going to have a a set of big announcements coming up at HPE Discover. So we led with Electra and we have a block service. We have VM backup as a service and DR on top of that. So that's something that we're providing today. GreenLake has over, I think it's actually over 60 services right now that we're providing in the GreenLake platform itself. Everything from security, single sign on, customer IDs, everything. So it's real. We have the proofpoint for it. >> Yeah. So I want to clarify something that you said because this tends to be very commonly confused by customers. I use the word abstraction. And usually when people think of abstraction, they think it hides capabilities of the cloud providers. That's not what we are trying to do. In fact, that's the last thing we are trying to do. What we are trying to do is to provide a consistent developer experience regardless of where you want to build your application. So that you can use the cloud provider services if that's what you want to use. But the DevSecOp tool chain, the runtime environment which turns out to be Kubernetes and how you control the Kubernetes environment, how do you manage and secure and connect all of these things. Those are the places where we are adding the value. And so really the VMware value proposition is you can build on the cloud of your choice but providing these consistent elements, number one, you can make better use of us, your scarce developer or operator resources and expertise. And number two, you can move faster. And number three, you can just spend less as a result of this. So that's really what we are trying to do. We are not... So I just wanted to clarify the word abstraction. In terms of where are we? We are still, I would say, in the early stages. So if you look at what customers are trying to do, they're trying to build these greenfield applications. And there is an entire ecosystem emerging around Kubernetes. There is still, Kubernetes is not a developer platform. The developer experience on top of Kubernetes is highly inconsistent. And so those are some of the areas where we are introducing new innovations with our Tanzu Application Platform. And then if you take enterprise applications, what does it take to have enterprise applications running all the time be entirely secure, et cetera. >> Well, look, the multi-cloud by default today are isolated clouds. They don't work together. Your data is siloed. It's locked up and it is expensive to move and make sense of it. So I think the word you and I were batting around before, this is an interconnected tissue. That's what the world needs. They need the clouds to work together as a single platform. That's the problem that we're trying to solve. And you saw it in some of our announcements here that we're starting to make steps on that journey to make multi-cloud work together much simpler. >> It's interesting, you mentioned the hyperscalers and all that CapEx investments. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of a cloud and build on the CapEx and then ultimately have the solutions machine learning as one area. You see some specialization with the clouds. But you start to see the rise of superclouds, Dave calls them, and that's where you can innovate on a cloud then go to the multiple clouds. Snowflakes is one, we see a lot of examples of supercloud... >> Project Alpine was another one. I mean, it's early, but it's its clearly where you're going. The technology is just starting to come around. I mean it's real. >> Yeah. I mean, why wouldn't you want to take advantage of all of the cloud innovation out there? >> Is that something that's, that supercloud idea is a reality from a technologist perspective. >> I think it is. So for example Katie Gordon, which I believe you've interviewed earlier this week, was demonstrating the Kubernetes data mobility aspect which is another project. That's exactly part of the it's rationale, the rationale of customers being able to move some of their Kubernetes workloads to the cloud and back and between different clouds. Why are we doing? Because customers wants to have the ability to move between different cloud providers, using a common API that will be able to orchestrate all of those things with a self-service that may be offered via the APEX console itself. So it's all around enabling developers and meeting them where they are today and also meeting them into tomorrow's world where they actually may have changed their mind to do those things. So yes we are walking on all of those different aspects. >> Okay. Let's take a quick look at some of the ETR data. This is an X-Y graph. You've seen it a number of times on breaking analysis, it plots the net score or spending momentum on the Y-axis and overlap or pervasiveness in the ETR dataset on the X-axis, used to be called market share. I think that term was off putting to some people, but anyway it's an indicator of presence in the dataset. Now that red dotted line that's rarefied air where anything above that line is considered highly elevated. Now you can see we've plotted Azure and AWS in the upper right. GCP is in there and Kubernetes. We've done that as reference points. They're not necessarily building supercloud platforms. We'll see if they ever want to do so. And Kubernetes of course not a company, but we put 'em in there for context. And we've cherry picked a few players that we believe are building out or are important for supercloud build out. Let's start with Snowflake. We've talked a lot about this company. You can see they're highly elevated on the vertical axis. We see the data cloud as a supercloud in the making. You've got pure storage in there. They made the public, the early part of its supercloud journey at Accelerate 2019 when it unveiled a hybrid block storage service inside of AWS, it connects its On-Prem to AWS and creates that singular experience for pure customers. We see Hashi, HashiCorp as an enabling infrastructure, as code. So they're enabling infrastructure as code across different clouds and different locations. You see Nutanix. They're embarking on their multi-cloud strategy but it's doing so in a way that we think is supercloud, like now. Now Veeam, we were just at VeeamON. And this company has tied Dell for the number one revenue player in data protection. That's according to IDC. And we don't think it won't be long before it holds that position alone at the top as it's growing faster than in Dell in the space. We'll see, Dell is kind of waking up a little bit and putting more resource on that. But Veeam, they're a pure play vendor in data protection. And you heard their CTO, Danny Allan's view on Supercloud, they're doing it today. And we heard extensive comments as well from Dell that's clearly where they're headed, project Alpine was an early example from Dell technologies world of Supercloud in our view. And HPE with GreenLake. Finally beginning to talk about that cross cloud experience. I think it in initially HPE has been more focused on the private cloud, we'll continue to probe. We'll be at HPE discover later on the spring, actually end of June. And we'll continue to probe to see what HPE is doing specifically with GreenLake. Now, finally, Cisco, we put them on the chart. We don't have direct quotes from recent shows and events but this data really shows you the size of Cisco's footprint within the ETR data set that's on the X-axis. Now the cut of this ETR data includes all sectors across the ETR taxonomy which is not something that we commonly show but you can see the magnitude of Cisco's presence. It's impressive. Now, they had better, Cisco that is, had better be building out a supercloud in our view or they're going to be left behind. And I'm quite certain that they're actually going to do so. So we have a lot of evidence that we're putting forth here and seeing in the marketplace what we said last year, the ecosystem is take taking shape, supercloud is forming and becoming a thing. And really in our view, is the future of cloud. But there are always risks to these predictive scenarios and we want to acknowledge those. So first, look, we could end up with a bunch of bespoke superclouds. Now one supercloud is better than three separate cloud native services that do fundamentally the same thing from the same vendor. One for AWS, one for GCP and one for Azure. So maybe that's not all that bad. But to point number two, we hope there evolves a set of open standards for self-service infrastructure, federated governance, and data sharing that will evolve as a horizontal layer versus a set of proprietary vendor specific tools. Now, maybe a company like Veeam will provide that as a data management layer or some of Veeam's competitors or maybe it'll emerge again as open source. As well, and this next point, we see the potential for edge disruptions, changing the economics of the data center. Edge in fact could evolve on its own, independent of the cloud. In fact, David Floria sees the edge somewhat differently from Danny Allan. Floria says he sees a requirement for distributed stateful environments that are ephemeral where recovery is built in. And I said, David, stateful? Ephemeral? Stateful ephemeral? Isn't that an oxymoron? And he responded that, look, if it's not ephemeral the costs are going to be prohibitive. He said the biggest mistake the companies could make is thinking that the edge is simply an extension of their current cloud strategies. We're seeing that a lot. Dell largely talks about the edge as retail. Now, and Telco is a little bit different, but back to Floria's comments, he feels companies have to completely reimagine an integrated file and recovery system which is much more data efficient. And he believes that the technology will evolve with massive volumes and eventually seep into enterprise cloud and distributed data centers with better economics. In other words, as David Michelle recently wrote, we're about 15 years into the most recent cloud cycle and history shows that every 15 years or so, something new comes along that is a blind spot and highly disruptive to existing leaders. So number four here is really important. Remember, in 2007 before AWS introduced the modern cloud, IBM outpost, sorry, IBM outspent Amazon and Google and RND and CapEx and was really comparable to Microsoft. But instead of inventing cloud, IBM spent hundreds of billions of dollars on stock buybacks and dividends. And so our view is that innovation rewards leaders. And while it's not without risks, it's what powers the technology industry it always has and likely always will. So we'll be watching that very closely, how companies choose to spend their free cash flow. Okay. That's it for now. Thanks for watching this episode of The Cube Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks to Stephanie Chan who does some of the background research? Alex Morrison is on production and is going to compile all this stuff. Thank you, Alex. We're all remote this week. Kristen Nicole and Cheryl Knight do Cube distribution and social distribution and get the word out, so thank you. Robert Hof is our editor in chief. Don't forget the checkout etr.ai for all the survey action. Remember I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com and you can check out all the breaking analysis podcasts. All you can do is search breaking analysis podcast so you can pop in the headphones and listen while you're on a walk. You can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com. If you want to get in touch or DM me at DVellante, you can always hit me up into a comment on our LinkedIn posts. This is Dave Vellante. Thank you for watching this episode of break analysis, stay safe, be well and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

from the cube studios in palo alto in boston bringing you data driven insights from the cube and etr this is breaking analysis with dave vellante five publicly traded u.s based companies have market valuations over or just near a trillion dollars as of october 29th apple and microsoft topped the list each with 2.5 trillion followed by alphabet at 2 trillion amazon at 1.7 and facebook now meta at just under a trillion off from a tie of 1.1 trillion prior to its recent troubles these companies have reached extraordinary levels of success and power what if anything could disrupt their market dominance in his book seeing digital author david micheller made three key points that i want to call out first in the technology industry disruptions of the norm the waves of mainframes minis pcs mobile and the internet all saw new companies emerge and power structures that dwarfed previous eras of innovation is that dynamic changing second every industry has a disruption scenario not just the technology industry and third silicon valley broadly defined to include seattle or at least amazon has a dual disruption agenda the first being horizontally disrupting the technology industry and the second as digital disruptors in virtually any industry how relevant is that to the future power structure of the digital industry generally in amazon specifically hello and welcome to this week's wikibon cube insights powered by etr in this breaking analysis we welcome in author speaker researcher and thought leader david michela to assess what could possibly disrupt today's trillionaire companies and we're going to start with amazon dave good to see you welcome thanks dave good to see you yeah so dave approached us about a month or so ago he was working on these disruption scenarios and we agreed to make this a community research project where we're going to tap the knowledge of the cube crowd and its adjacent communities and to that end we're initiating a community survey that asks folks to rate the likelihood of seven plus one disruption scenarios so we have a slide here that sort of shows what that survey structure is going to look like and so as i say there's seven plus another one which is kind of an open open-ended and we're going to start with amazon as the disruptee so dave you've been writing about the technology industry for decades and digital disruption and china and automation and hundreds of other topics what prompted you to start this project yeah it's a great question you know as you said that the whole history of our business has been you know every decade or so you have a new set of leaders ibm digital microsoft the internet companies etc but when i started looking at it you know that seems in some ways to have actually stopped that you know microsoft is now 40 years old amazon is what 1995 is getting towards 30. you know google's been a dominant company for 20 years and you know apple of course and facebook more recently so so whatever reason this sort of longevity of these firms has been longer than we've seen in the past so i sort of say well is there anything that's going to change that so part of it and we'll get into it is what could happen to disrupt those big five but then the sort of second question was well maybe the uh disruptive energies of the of the tech business have moved elsewhere they've moved to crypto currencies or they've moved to tesla and so you start to sort of broaden your sense of disruption and when you talked about that dual disruption agenda that whole ability of tech to disrupt other sectors banking health care insurance automobiles whatever is sort of a second wave of disruption so uh we started coming out all right what sort of scenarios are we really looking at over say for the 2020s what might shake up the big five as we know them and how might disruption spread to sort of more industry specific parts of the world and that was really the the genesis of the project and really just my own thinking of all right what scenarios can i come up with and then reaching out to companies like yourselves to figure out okay how can we get more input on that how can we crowdsource it how can we get a sense of of what the community thinks of all this it's great love it and as you know we're very open to do that so we're going to crowdsource this we're going to open it up to virtually anyone and use multiple channels so let's go through some of the scenarios all of them actually and explain the reasoning behind their inclusion the first one the govern government mandated separation divestment and or limits on amazon's cloud computing retail media credit card and or in-house product groups it probably no coincidence that this was the first one you chose today but why start here well i think the government interest in doing something to get back at big tech is is pretty clear and probably one of the few things that has bipartisan support in washington these days and also government interventions have always been an enormous part of the tech industry's history the the antitrust efforts against ibm and att in particular and more recently microsoft a smaller one but it's it's always been there there's a vibe to do it now and when you look at all the big ones but particularly amazon you can see that potential divestments and breakups are sitting there right in front of you the separation of retail and aws uh perhaps breaking out credit card or music or media businesses these sorts of things are all on the surface at least relatively clean things to do and i think when you look at the formation of an alphabet or a meta those companies themselves are starting to see their own businesses as consisting of multiple firms yeah so i just want to kind of drill into the cloud piece just to emphasize the importance of aws in the context of amazon amazon announced earnings thursday night after the close aws is now a 64 billion revenue run rate company and they're growing at 39 percent year over year that's actually an accelerated growth rate from q3 2020 when the company was grew at 29 it's astounding think about a company this size moreover aws accounted for more than actually but 100 of amazon's operating profit last quarter so the aws cloud is obviously crucial as a funding vehicle and ecosystem accelerant for amazon and i just wanted to share some data points dave before we move on to these other scenarios yeah and just on that uh i think that is the fundamental point it's very easy to see aws on its own as a powerhouse but i think you know if you figure how much freedom aws money has given the retail business or the credit card business or the music businesses to launch themselves and to essentially make no money for very long periods of time uh you see that you know if you're a walmart trying to compete with amazon as a retailer well that money from aws is is an awful big problem and and so when they look at separation that's the sort of stuff people talk about right so i just want to i want to put that into context just in in terms of the the cloud business so this chart is one from our etr surveys that isolates the four hyperscale cloud providers and adds in oracle and ibm we both own public clouds but don't you know don't have nearly the the scale we don't have apple or facebook they have clouds as well and we can talk about that in a moment but the chart shows net score or spending momentum on the vertical axis and market share or pervasiveness in the survey on the horizontal axis it's it's really mentioned share not dollar market share but it's an indicator and the red line is an indicator of elevated spending momentum and you can see azure and aws they're up and to the right i mean amazon is 64 billion you know uh azure will claim larger because they're including their application business but just their their their i asked business obviously smaller than amazon's but you can see in the survey the respondents define cloud they include that sas business so they they both impressively have this high spending momentum on the vertical axis well above that 40 line despite their size google obviously well behind those to the left and then alibaba which has a small sample in the etr survey it's you know it's not as prominent in china but even though it's ias cloud businesses larger than google's by probably a couple billion dollars now the point is these four hyperscalers and there really are only four in my view anyway they have a presence that allows them to build new businesses and disrupt ecosystems and enact that dual disruption agenda should they choose to do so at least in the case of amazon oracle and ibm are not in a position to do that it's not part of their agenda they don't they don't have that scale but dave can you talk about your dual disruption scenario very clearly amazon fits in there and i would think alibaba as well but what about microsoft facebook apple google yeah i mean you know people often say what's the biggest difference between microsoft and amazon from from a cloud point of view and the answer is pretty clear that microsoft goes out of its way to assure its customers that it really doesn't have any interest in competing directly about them so you don't see microsoft going into the retail business or the banking business or the healthcare business all that seriously in contrast that's really what amazon is all about is taking its capabilities to essentially any industry it likes and therefore as one is as great as the service aws provides it's often being provided to people who amazon is actually competing with at least some degree or another and you know that's a huge part of microsoft's sales pitch and it's certainly a potential vulnerability down the road uh it's very hard in the end to be an essential supplier and a direct competitor at the same time but so far they've managed to do that yeah so we put together just another sort of aside here this little thought experiment to see what aws would look like as a separate entity and so it's a chart that looks at a number of tech companies and lays out their revenue run rate the growth rates gross margin probably should have done operating margin might have been more relevant but market cap and revenue multiple again given the size of aws at 64 billion run rate and accelerating growth trajectory it's just it's remarkable and so we we figured this out based on industry norms and today's valuations it's not inconceivable that aws could be you know in the trillionaire club or close to it so based on that discussion we had earlier amazon amazon's dual disruption agenda being funded by empowered by aws as we just discussed dave yeah and just keep in mind nothing that you or i are saying are predictions or saying that anything is going to happen they are possible scenarios of what might happen that seem to make some plausible sense so that when amazon is making the sort of profits that it's making aws naturally that's going to attract other companies because there's margin to to be had there and similarly you know look at uh you look at microsoft for all those years the profits it made in windows or in office software allowed it to do all kinds of other things and essentially that's what amazon is doing today but if a google or a microsoft could cut into those profits through some sort of aggressive pricing and perhaps we'll talk about that you know that would have a lot of impact on amazon as a whole all right so let's quickly go through the other description scenarios and maybe make some comments the next one sort of major companies increasingly choose to do their own cloud computing and or sell their products directly for competitive cost security or other reasons so dave i saw this and look at a company like walmart and others no way they're going to run their business on aws walmart as we know is building out its own cloud and maybe it doesn't have the size of a hyperscaler but it's very large it's got the technical chops it can most likely do it a lot cheaper than renting cloud space what was your thinking in this scenario yeah the broader thing here is essentially one of that computing paradigms have been proven to go in cycles you know a long time ago people shared computers and called timeshare and then people ran their own and now they're sharing again through the cloud and who knows it's possible that the cycle could shift again through some innovation and you know a lot of companies today look at the bills they're getting for cloud or for various sas services and some of them are pretty high and a lot of them will look at and say hey maybe we actually can do some of this stuff cheaper so the scenario is that essentially the the cycle shifts once again uh and it makes more sense to do stuff in-house again that's not a prediction but uh certainly something that's happened before and couldn't plausibly happen again yeah there's a lot of discussion about that in the industry of martine casado and sarah wong wrote that piece about the you know the trillion dollar basically sucking sound basically saying the the scenario was the the the premise rather was the that that sas companies their cost of goods sold are increasingly going to be you know chewed up by cloud costs and then of course mark andreessen says every company is going to be a sas company so as the sassification of business occurs that's something to consider okay next scenario is environmental policies raise costs change packaging delivery recycling rules and or consumer preferences can you comment dave on your thinking on this scenario yeah first i'll just back up a bit we're used to thinking of technology is the great disrupter and clearly that's still important but there are now other forces out there china which will talk about uh the environment uh various cultural forces and and here with the environment you see all kinds of things that could change that you know if you look at amazon and its model of very high levels of packaging lots of delivery vehicles and all the things it is doing are those necessarily the best environmentally and will there potentially be various taxes carbon metrics or things that might work against that model and tend to favor more traditional stores where people go to pick them up that seems to be a plausible scenario and i think everybody here knows that desire to do something in the in the climate environmental spaces is pretty strong and you know if you look at you know just throws aside the recycling industry itself has arguably been quite a failure in that much of what is so-called recycled is basically put in tankers and shipped to the third world which no longer wants it uh and so the backlog of packaging and concerns about packaging and uh what to do with all that you know those those issues are rising and and will be real and i i don't know whether amazon has a good answer to that they're you know they obviously are very aware of it they're working very hard to do everything they can in that space but their fundamental model of essentially packaging every good in its own little box or envelope or whatever is arguably not the greenest way of doing business got it thank you so okay so the next one is price in slash trade wars with the u.s and or china cloud and e-commerce giant so protectionism favors national players so we talking here about for example google bombing prices or alibaba or trade policy making it difficult for amazon to do business in certain parts of the world can you add some color on this one yeah all those things and i would just start with with china itself you know you could argue that covet has been the biggest disruptor of the last couple years but if you look out the next five or eight you had to look at all these things you'd probably say china the size of the chinese market the power of its vendors players like alibaba clearly can rival amazon in many different ways uh you know it's no secret that it'd be hard for amazon to they're not going to be a big success in china uh but you can see it in harder ways that you imagine across asia or other markets where alibaba is strong and you're in today's sort of environment where there's scarce goods and maybe certain products well maybe they go chinese may probably go to alibaba first and you want to buy that product well amazon doesn't have it but alibaba has it you know those sort of scenarios if you get into a sharp trade war with china or even if the current tensions continue it's quite easy to see how that could uh play some havoc with amazon's supply chains in many ways the whole amazon retail model is based on a steady flow of goods manufactured in china and that clearly is not as stable as it was right got it the next one actually caught my attention and this is a big part of the reason why we want to survey the community to see how plausible folks think this is in its its technology related scenario so that would potentially disrupt aws and by fault by default hit amazon so that's major computing innovations such as quantum edge machine machine would obsolete today's cloud architectures okay so so here what you're thinking just as aws changed the game in i.t some future innovations or new business models that we haven't conceived yet could disrupt the prevailing cloud computing model right yeah absolutely i mean you know again we'll go back to where we started that new technologies have always been the main disruptors and here we're looking at some potentially very powerful uh new technologies you know your guess is good in mind about what's gonna happen with quantum is clearly a very different way of computing quite possibly led by other vendors possibly even led by china which would be a huge issue you look at the cloud well cloud's not very good at sort of edge stuff or machine to a machine stuff or sort of near field things out cars in the highway talking to each other uh you know again amazon's totally aware of these things and they are working on it but they have a huge investment in other ways of doing things and historically that inertia that need to protect existing bases of activity and practices has made it difficult for a lot of companies to adjust to new things and so that could happen again uh and there's certainly a puzzle but yeah in all these cases so far amazon has been aware of it is trying to do it but you can still see the scenario playing out and in a truly disruptive technology it's not always possible for the incumbent to effectively cope with it okay the next scenario speaks to i think some of the work that you've done in automation and related areas software replaces centralized warehouses as delivery services are directly connected to suppliers and factories so dave this is like cut out the middle man right software and automation changes the nature of the route absolutely i mean you know in a world of ubiquitous delivery services and product standardization metrics and products being built and shipped from all over the world the concept of running them all through a centralized warehouse is at least at a minimum uh seems like something that might be uh obsoleted and replaced and you know imagine if google built a significant taxonomy of of core products that could be traced directly to where they are either manufactured supplied or brought into the country from whatever company that tries to sell them and the delivery service connected directly to that uh and so that model has always been out there i think at various times people have looked at it it hasn't happened so far and i think amazon itself is is is looking at this particularly as it gets more into food that the idea of shipping all fresh food any sort of centralized warehouse is a pretty bad idea uh and so you know that model of software essentially replacing giant automated warehouses uh is out there and and seems to me uh likely and i just say that you know alibaba for the record doesn't really use that warehouse model it uses a network of suppliers and does it that way and and there do seem to be uh some efficiencies that would likely come with that the next one is was really interesting from a historian's perspective and it's the penultimate uh scenario and that's the proverbial self-inflicted wound and you and i certainly remember ibm's you know fateful decision to outsource the microprocessor and operating system to intel and and and and and microsoft sorry ibm's decision to do that lotus you might recall it refused to allow 123 to run on windows back in the day novell buying word perfect jim barksdale a lot of young people the audience won't of course remember this but jim barksdale poo-pooing microsoft's decision to bundle internet explorer into the operating system all those were kind of self-inflicted or blind spots so this one is complacency arrogance blindness abuse of power loss of trust so much more than the examples i gave consumer and or employee backlash you're seeing some of that at facebook now and i guess this is taking their eye off the customer ball losing the day zero in amazon's case forgetting that customer obsession formula they're working backwards culture and i think this is a big reason why andy jassy was put in charge so this wouldn't happen but we've seen time and time again as the examples i just gave blind spots have absolutely killed companies haven't they dave absolutely he listed many of the most famous but perhaps my favorite of all was kennels and the founder of digital equipment corporation one of the great tech visionaries of his time who stated over and over again why would anybody want a home computer or eunuch's snake oil was his other beautiful all of those things and and so there's the blindness uh there's the area ibm who just came to the view that they and att both came to the view that they were invincible and nothing could ever crack their control of their customer base so we've seen all that i think uh more recently i think some of these things can actually go from the bottom up and you know what's happening to facebook today well they're being hurt by former employees speaking out uh you know this never really happened too much to in the ibm and t days but people calling into question amazon's work labor practices and such things is certainly a possible scenario and the whole sort of you know in the end you know people talk about a cultural backlash against technology i'm not sure i believe it'll happen but it certainly is possible that people will start to rebel against these firms you see it more likely with facebook is fairly well along there uh amazon's still popular but you know in the end and as you i think you said the the core thing that companies routinely fail on is they lose their customer focus and they get caught up in other things their financial numbers their their power inside their position of their company but they they lose track of staying close to the customer has need and terrific job of staying close to the customers over the years uh so if anyone you know was maybe less vulnerable that they they would be well along that that line but it can happen to anyone and new management is often you know one of the real tests and there's many examples of that through history when a new executive comes in will they have that same focus that same thing particularly you know as the first generation's employees get wealthy and retired in a new set of people come in you know you look at microsoft the new people who came in well they're not going to be multi-millionaires they may have missed the great runs they're there to work and and the culture of companies changes when you get to that state the m is not that there yet but you can envision that comings soon enough so you know cultural issues have always been a factor and it's hard to imagine there won't be some sort of factor going forward well and you know you talk about that the the succession of founders and ceos i mean that's what to me makes microsoft so astounding because during the bomber years it was unclear that they were ever going to become relevant again and so nadella has done a masterful job but of course they had the margins from the pc software business that allowed them to buy that time but look at intel and the troubles it's going through uh and so many other examples of companies that just sort of said all right well we're going to pack it in and either sell the company or which is again what i think makes think companies like oracle and dell which you know founder-led ceos not ceo in the case of oracle but still running the business uh so quite uh significant yeah yeah and you know we've talked a lot about things that might hurt answers but you gotta recognize how in many ways how amazing they are and most tech companies a lot of them anyways have essentially been one trick ponies i mean google still makes overwhelming amount of its money selling ads and the things it's tried to do in cars and healthcare and various things you know they've often struggled you know apple still makes the core of its money around it's it's cell phone platform amazon's one of the few that continually generates entirely new huge businesses and and you have to give them an enormous amount of credit for that you know microsoft uh was a they failed repeatedly over and over again with internet stuff and phone stuff and all these things and it really wasn't until you know satya came in and really focused on their customers and their need for enterprise services that he that he really got the company on the right track so you know amazon has always been good listeners customers and if they continue to do so it bodes well but history says other stuff comes along okay and the last scenario is open-ended dave included uh you know what did we miss is there another scenario that we haven't put forth that you could feel it could be disruptive to amazon right i mean you've got to have the at least what'd we miss yeah i mean you know these are things that me and you and i just sort of made up the top of our head these are things we see that that might happen but you know in your huge audience of people in this community every day i'm sure there are other people out there who have thoughts of what might shake things up or even doing things that might shake things up already uh and you know one of the things you do for you guys is get this sort of material out there and and see what ideas surface so hopefully people will uh participate in this and we'll see what comes out of it all right so what happens from here is we're going to publish the the link to the survey in this video description and in our posts we ask you to take the survey please tell your friends we're going to publish the results as always we do in an open and free david michelle thanks so much for putting your brain power on this and collaborating with us i'm really excited to see the results and and and run through the other giants with you as well once we see what this survey says yeah thanks david great and yeah if we can make this one work be fun to do it for for google and microsoft and facebook and apple and see where it all goes thanks a lot all right okay that's it for today remember these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen just search breaking analysis podcast i publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com etr.plus is where all the cool survey data lives they just dropped their october survey with some great findings so do check that out you can reach me on twitter at d velante he's at d michelle or comment on my linkedin post or email me at david.vellante at siliconangle.com this is dave vellante for dave michelle thanks for watching thecube insights powered by etr be well and we'll see you next time

from the cube studios in palo alto in boston bringing you data-driven insights from the cube and etr this is breaking analysis with dave vellante cloud repatriation is a term often used by technology companies the ones that don't operate a public cloud the marketing narrative most typically implies that customers have moved work to the public cloud and for a variety of reasons expense performance security etc are disillusioned with the cloud and as a result are repatriating workloads back to their safe comfy and cost-effective on-premises data center while we have no doubt this does sometimes happen the data suggests that this is a single digit de minimis phenomenon hello and welcome to this week's wikibon cube insights powered by etr some have written about the repatriation myth but in this breaking analysis we'll share hard data that we feel debunks the narrative and is currently being promoted by some we'll also take this opportunity to do our quarterly cloud revenue update and share with you our latest figures for the big four cloud vendors let's start by acknowledging that the definition of cloud is absolutely evolving and in this sense much of the vendor marketing is valid no longer is cloud just a distant set of remote services that lives up there in the cloud the cloud is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous sensing thinking acting set of resources that touches nearly every aspect of our lives the cloud is coming on prem and work is being done to connect clouds to each other and the cloud is extending to the near and far edge there's little question about that today's cloud is not just compute storage connectivity and spare capacity but increasingly it's a variety of services to analyze data and predict slash anticipate changes monitor and interpret streams of information apply machine intelligence to data to optimize business outcomes it's tooling to share data protect data visualize data and bring data to life supporting a whole new set of innovative applications notice there's a theme there data increasingly the cloud is where the high value data lives from a variety of sources and it's where organizations go to mine it because the cloud vendors have the best platforms for data and this is part of why the repatriation narrative is somewhat dubious actually a lot dubious because the volume of data in the cloud is growing at rates much faster than data on prem at least by a couple thousand basis points by our estimates annually so cloud data is where the action is and we'll talk about the edge in a moment but a new era of application development is emerging with containers at the center the concept of write wants run anywhere allows developers to take advantage of systems that run on-prem say a transaction system and tap data from multiple sources in various locations there might be multiple clouds or at the edge or wherever and combine that with immense cheap processing power that we've discussed extensively in previous breaking analysis episodes and you see this new breed of apps emerging that's powered by ai those are hitting the market so this is not a zero-sum game the cloud vendors have given the world an infrastructure gift by spending like crazy on capex more than a hundred billion last year on capex for example for the big four and in our view the players that don't own a cloud should stop being so defensive about it they should thank the hyperscalers and lay out a vision as to how they'll create a new abstraction layer on top of the public cloud and you know that's what they're doing and they'll certainly claim to be actively working on this vision but consider the pace of play between the hyperscalers and their traditional on-prem providers we believe the innovation gap is actually widening meaning the public cloud players are accelerating their innovation lead and will 100 compete for hybrid applications they have the resources the developer affinity they're doing custom silicon and have the expertise there and the tam expansion goals that loom large so while it's not a zero-sum game and hybrid is definitely real we think the cloud vendors continue to gain share most rapidly unless the hybrid crowd can move faster now of course there's the edge and that is a wild card but it seems that again the cloud players are very well positioned to innovate with custom silicon programmable infrastructure capex build-outs at the edge and new thinking around system architectures but let's get back to the core story here and take a look at cloud adoptions you hear many marketing messages that call into question the public cloud at its recent think conference ibm ceo arvind krishna said that only about 25 of workloads had moved into the public cloud and he made the statement that you know this might surprise you implying you might think it should be much higher than that well we're not surprised by that figure especially especially if you narrow it to mission critical work which ibm does in its annual report actually we think that's probably high for mission critical work moving to the cloud we think it's a lot lower than that but regardless we think there are other ways to measure cloud adoption and this chart here from david michelle's book c seeing digital shows the adoption rates for major technological innovations over the past century and the number of years how many years it took to get to 50 percent household adoption electricity took a long time as did telephones had that infrastructure that last mile build out radios and tvs were much faster given the lower infrastructure requirements pcs actually took a long time and the web around nine years from when the mosaic browser was introduced we took a stab at estimating the pace of adoption of public cloud and and within a decade it reached 50 percent adoption in top enterprises and today that figures easily north of 90 so as we said at the top cloud adoption is actually quite strong and that adoption is driving massive growth for the public cloud now we've updated our quarterly cloud figures and want to share them with you here are our latest estimates for the big four cloud players with only alibaba left to report now remember only aws and alibaba report clean or relatively clean i ass figures so we use survey data and financial analysis to estimate the actual numbers for microsoft in google it's a subset of what they report in q121 we estimate that the big 4is and pas revenue approached 27 billion that's q121 that figure represents about 40 growth relative to q1 2020. so our trailing 12-month calculation puts us at 94 billion so we're now on roughly 108 billion dollar run rate as you may recall we've predicted that figure will surpass 115 billion by year end when it's all said and done aws it remains the leader amongst the big four with just over half of the market that's down from around 63 percent for the full year of 2018. unquestionably as we've reported microsoft they're everywhere they're ubiquitous in the market and they continue to perform very well but anecdotally customers and partners in our community continue to report to us that the quality of the aws cloud is noticeably better in terms of reliability and overall security etc but it doesn't seem to change the trajectory of the share movements as microsoft's software dominance makes doing business with azure really easy now as of this recording alibaba has yet to report but we'll update these figures once their earnings are released let's dig into the growth rates associated with these revenue figures and make some specific comments there this chart here shows the growth trajectory for each of the big four google trails the pack in revenue but it's growing faster than the others from of course a smaller base google is being very aggressive on pricing and customer acquisition to that we say good google needs to grow faster in our view and they most certainly can afford to be aggressive as we said combined the big four are growing revenue at 40 on a trailing 12-month basis and that compares with low single-digit growth for on-prem infrastructure and we just don't see this picture changing in the near to midterm like storage growth revenue from the big public cloud players is expected to outpace spending on traditional on on-prem platforms by at least 2 000 basis points for the foreseeable future now interestingly while aws is growing more slowly than the others from a much larger 54 billion run rate we actually saw sequential quarterly growth from aws and q1 which breaks a two-year trend from where aws's q1 growth rate dropped sequentially from q4 interesting now of course at aws we're watching the changing of the guards andy jassy becoming ceo of amazon adam silipsky boomeranging back to aws from a very successful stint at tableau and max peterson taking over for for aws public sector replacing teresa carlson who is now president and heading up go to market at splunk so lots of changes and we think this is actually a real positive for aws as it promotes from within we like that it taps previous amazon dna from tableau salesforce and it promotes the head of aws to run all of amazon a signal to us that amazon will dig its heels in and further resist calls to split aws from the mothership so let's dig in a little bit more to this repatriation mythbuster theme the revenue numbers don't tell the entire story so it's worth drilling down a bit more let's look at the demand side of the equation and pull in some etr survey data now to set this up we want to explain the fundamental method used by etr around its net score metric net score measures spending momentum and measures five factors as shown in this wheel chart that shows the breakdown of spending for the aws cloud it shows the percentage of customers within the platform that are either one adopting the platform new that's the lime green in this wheel chart two increasing spending by more than five percent that's the forest green three flat spending between plus or minus five percent that's the gray and four decreasing spend by six percent or more that's the pink and finally five replacing the platform that's the bright red now dare i say that the bright red is a proxy for or at least an indicator of repatriation sure why not let's say that now net score is derived by subtracting the reds from the greens anything above 40 percent we consider to be elevated aws is at 57 so very high not much sign of leaving the cloud nest there but we know it's nuanced and you can make an argument for corner cases of repatriation but come on the numbers just don't bear out that narrative let's compare aws with some of the other vendors to test this theory theory a bit more this chart lines up net score granularity for aws microsoft and google it compares that to ibm and oracle now other than aws and google these figures include the entire portfolio for each company but humor me and let's make an assumption that cloud defections are lower than the overall portfolio average because cloud has more momentum it's getting more spend spending so just stare at the red bars for a moment the three cloud players show one two and three percent replacement rates respectively but ibm and oracle while still in the single digits which is good show noticeably higher replacement rates and meaningfully lower new adoptions in the lime green as well the spend more category in the forest green is much higher within the cloud companies and the spend less in the pink is notably lower and you can see the sample sizes on the right-hand side of the chart we're talking about many hundreds over 1300 in the case of microsoft and if we look if we put hpe or dell in the charts it would say several hundred responses many hundreds it would look similar to ibm and oracle where you have higher reds a bigger fat middle of gray and lower greens it's just the way it is it shouldn't surprise anyone and it's you know these are respectable but it's just what happens with mature companies so if customers are repatriating there's little evidence here we believe what's really happening is that vendor marketing people are talking to customers who are purposefully spinning up test and dev work in the cloud with the intent of running a workload or portions of that workload on prem and when they move into production they're counting that as repatriation and they're taking liberties with the data to flood the market okay well that's fair game and all's fair in tech marketing but that's not repatriation that's experimentation or sandboxing or testing and deving it's not i'm leaving the cloud because it's too expensive or less secure or doesn't perform for me we're not saying that those things don't happen but it's certainly not visible in the numbers as a meaningful trend that should factor into buying decisions now we perfectly recognize that organizations can't just refactor their entire applications application portfolios into the cloud and migrate and we also recognize that lift and shift without a change in operating model is not the best strategy in real migrations they take a long time six months to two years i used to have these conversations all the time with my colleague stu miniman and i spoke to him recently about these trends and i wanted to see if six months at red hat and ibm had changed his thinking on all this and the answer was a clear no but he did throw a little red hat kool-aid at me saying saying that the way they think about the cloud blueprint is from a developer perspective start by containerizing apps and then the devs don't need to think about where the apps live whether they're in the cloud whether they're on prem where they're at the edge and red hat the story is brings a consistency of operations for developers and operators and admins and the security team etc or any plat on any platform but i don't have to lock in to a platform and bring that everywhere with me i can work with anyone's platform so that's a very strong story there and it's how arvin krishna plans to win what he calls the architectural battle for hybrid cloud okay so let's take a take a look at how the big cloud vendors stack up with the not so big cloud platforms and all those in between this chart shows one of our favorite views plotting net score or spending velocity on the vertical axis and market share or pervasiveness in the data set on the horizontal axis the red shaded area is what we call the hybrid zone and the dotted red lines that's where the elite live anything above 40 percent net score on the on on the vertical axis we consider elevated anything to the right of 20 on the horizontal axis implies a strong market presence and by those kpis it's really a two horse race between aws and microsoft now as we suggested google still has a lot of work to do and if they're out buying market share that's a start now you see alibaba shown in the upper left hand corner high spending momentum but from a small sample size as etr's china respondent level is obviously much lower than it is in the u.s and europe and the rest of apac now that shaded res red zone is interesting and gives credence to the other big non-cloud owning vendor narrative that is out there that is the world is hybrid and it's true over the past several quarters we've seen this hybrid zone performing well prominent examples include vmware cloud on aws vmware cloud which would include vcf vmware cloud foundation dell's cloud which is heavily based on vmware and red hat open shift which perhaps is the most interesting given its ubiquity as we were talking about before and you can see it's very highly elevated on the net score axis right there with all the public cloud guys red hat is essentially the switzerland of cloud which in our view puts it in a very strong position and then there's a pack of companies hovering around the 20 vertical axis level that are hybrid that by the way you see openstack there that's from a large telco presence in the data set but any rate you see hpe oracle and ibm ibm's position in the cloud just tells you how important red hat is to ibm and without that acquisition you know ibm would be far less interesting in this picture oracle is oracle and actually has one of the strongest hybrid stories in the industry within its own little or not so little world of the red stack hpe is also interesting and we'll see how the big green lake ii as a service pricing push will impact its momentum in the cloud category remember the definition of cloud here is whatever the customer says it is so if a cio says we're buying cloud from hpe or ibm or cisco or dell or whomever we take her or his word for it and that's how it works cloud is in the eye of the buyer so you have the cloud expanding into the domain of on-premises and the on-prem guys finally getting their proverbial acts together with hybrid that they've been talking about since 2009 but it looks like it's finally becoming real and look it's true you're not going to migrate everything into the cloud but the cloud folks are in a very strong position they are on the growth flywheel as we've shown they each have adjacent businesses that are data based disruptive and dominant whether it's in retail or search or a huge software estate they are winning the data wars as well that seems to be pretty clear to us and they have a leg up in ai and i want to look at that can we all agree that ai is important i think we can machine intelligence is being infused into every application and today much of the ai work is being done in the cloud as modeling but in the future we see ai moving to the edge in real time and real-time inferencing is a dominant workload but today again 90 of it is building models and analyzing data a lot of that work happens in the cloud so who has the momentum in ai let's take a look here's that same xy graph with the net score against market share and look who has the dominant mind share and position and spending momentum microsoft aws and google you can see in the table insert in the lower right hand side they're the only three in the data set of 1 500 responses that have more than 100 n aws and microsoft have around 200 or even more in the case of microsoft and their net scores are all elevated above the 60 percent level remember that 40 percent that red line indicates the elevation mark the high elevation mark so the hyperscalers have both the market presence and the spend momentum so we think the rich get richer now they're not alone there are several companies above the 40 line databricks is bringing ai and data science to the world of data lakes with its managed services and it's executing very well salesforce is infusing infusing ai into its platform via einstein you got sap on there anaconda is kind of the gold standard that platform for data science and you can see c3 dot ai is tom siebel's company going after enterprise ai and data robot which like c3 ai is a small sample in the data set but they're highly elevated and they're simplifying machine learning now there's ibm watson it's actually doing okay i mean sure we'd like to see it higher given that ginny rometty essentially bet ibm's future on watson but it has a decent presence in the market and a respectable net score and ibm owns a cloud so okay at least it's a player not the dominance that many had hoped for when watson beat ken jennings in jeopardy back 10 years ago but it's okay and then is oracle they're now getting into the act like it always does they want they watched they waited they invested they spent money on r d and then boom they dove into the market and made a lot of noise and acted like they invented the concept oracle is infusing ai into its database with autonomous database and autonomous data warehouse and look that's what oracle does it takes best of breed industry concepts and technologies to make its products better you got to give oracle credit it invests in real tech and it runs the most mission critical apps in the world you can hate them if you want but they smoke everybody in that game all right let's take a look at another view of the cloud players and see how they stack up and where the big spenders live in the all-important fortune 500 this chart shows net score over time within the fortune 500 aws is particularly interesting because its net score overall is in the high 50s but in this large big spender category aws net score jumps noticeably to nearly 70 percent so there's a strong indication that aws the largest player also has momentum not just with small companies and startups but where it really counts from a revenue perspective in the largest companies so we think that's a very positive sign for aws all right let's wrap the realities of cloud repatriation are clear corner cases exist but it's not a trend to take to the bank although many public cloud users may think about repatriation most will not act on it those that do are the exception not the rule and the etr data shows that test and dev in the clouds is part of the cloud operating model even if the app will ultimately live on prem that's not repatriation that's just smart development practice and not every workload is will or should live in the cloud hybrid is real we agree and the big cloud players know it and they're positioning to bring their stacks on prem and to the edge and despite the risk of a lock-in and higher potential monthly bills and concerns over control the hyperscalers are well com positioned to compete in hybrid to win hybrid the legacy vendors must embrace the cloud and build on top of those giants and add value where the clouds aren't going to or can't or won't they got to find places where they can move faster than the hyperscalers and so far they haven't shown a clear propensity to do that hey that's how we see it what do you think okay well remember these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen you do a search breaking analysis podcast and please subscribe to the series check out etr's website at dot plus we also publish a full report every week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com a lot of ways to get in touch you can email me at david.velante at siliconangle.com or dm me at dvalante on twitter comment on our linkedin post i always appreciate that this is dave vellante for the cube insights powered by etr have a great week everybody stay safe be well and we'll see you next time you

(electronic music) >> Narrator: From the SiliconANGLE Media office in Boston Massachusetts, it's the CUBE. Now here are your hosts, Dave Vellante and Stu Miniman. >> Cloud is dead, it's all going to the edge. Or is it? Hi everybody, this is Dave Vellante and I'm here with Stu Miniman. Stu, where does this come from, this narrative that the cloud is over? >> Well Dave, you know, clouds had a good run, right? It's been over a decade. You know, Amazon's dominance in the marketplace but Peter Levine from Andreessen Horowitz did an article where he said, cloud is dead, the edge is killing the dead. The Edge is killing the cloud and really we're talking about IoT and IoT's huge opportunity. Wikibon, Dave we've been tracking for many years. We did you know the original forecast for the Industrial Internet and obviously there's going to be lots more devices at the edge so huge opportunity, huge growth, intelligence all over the place. But in our viewpoint Dave, it doesn't mean that cloud goes away. You know, we've been talking about distributed architectures now for a long time. The cloud is really at the core of this building services that surround the globe, live in just hundreds of places for all these companies so it's nuanced. And just as the cloud didn't overnight kill the data center and lots of discussion as to what lives in the data center, the edge does not kill the cloud and it's really, we're seeing some major transitions pull and push from some of these technologies. A lot of challenges and lots to dig into. >> So I've read Peter Levine's piece, I thought was very thought-provoking and quite well done. And of course, he's coming at that from the standpoint of a venture capitalist, all right. Do I want to start you know, do I want to pour money into the trend that is now the mainstream? Or do I want to get ahead of it? So I think that's what that was all about but here's my question Stu is, in your opinion will the activity that occurs at the edge, will it actually drive more demand from the cloud? So today we're seeing the infrastructure, the service business is growing at what? Thirty five percent? Forty percent? >> Sure, sure. Amazon's growing at the you know, 35 to 40 percent. Google, Microsoft are growing double that right now but overall you're right. >> Yeah, okay and so, and then of course the enterprise players are flat if they're lucky. So my question is will the edge actually be a tailwind for the cloud, in your opinion? >> Yeah, so first on your comment there from an investment standpoint, totally can understand why edge is greenfield opportunity. Lots of different places that I can place bets and probably can win as opposed to if I think that today I'm going to compete against the hyperscale cloud guys. You know, they're pouring 10 billion dollars a year into their infrastructure. They have huge massive employment so the bar to entry is a lot higher. I'm sorry, the second piece was? >> So will the edge drive more demand for the cloud? >> Yeah, absolutely. I think it does Dave because you know, let's take something like autonomous vehicles. Something that we talk about. I need intelligence of the edge. I can't wait for some instruction to go back to the cloud before my Tesla plows into an individual. I need to know that it's there but the models themselves, really I've got all the compute in the cloud. This is where I'm going to train all of my models but I need to be able to update and push those to the edge. If I think about a lot of the industrial applications. Flying a plane is, you know, things need to happen locally but all the anomalies and new things that we run into there's certain pieces that need to be updated to the cloud. So you know, it's kind of a multi-layer. If we look at how much data will there be at the edge, well there's probably going to be more data at the edge than there will be in the central cloud. But how much activity, how much compute do I need, how much things do I need to actually work on. The cloud is probably going to be that central computer still and it's not just a computer, as I said, a distributed architecture. That's where, you know. When we've looked at big data in the early days Dave, when we can put those data lines in the cloud. I've got thousands or millions of compute cycles that I can throw at this at such a lower price and use that there as opposed to at the edge especially. What kind of connectivity do I have? Am i isolated from those other pieces? If you go back to my premise of we're building distributed architectures, the edge is still very early. How do I make sure I secure that? Do I have the network? There's lots of things that I'm going to build in a tiny little component and have that be there. And there's lots of hardware innovation going on at that edge too. >> Okay, so let's talk about how this plays out a little bit and you're talking about a distributed model and it's really to me a distributed data model. The research analysts at Wikibon have envisioned this three-tier data model where you've got data at the edge, which you may or may not persist. You've got some kind of consolidation or aggregation layer where it's you know, it's kind of between the edge and the deep data center and then you've got the cloud. Now that cloud can be an on-prem cloud or it could be the public cloud. So that data model, how do you see that playing out with regard to the adoption of cloud, the morphing of cloud and the edge and the traditional data center? >> Yeah we've been talking about intelligent devices at the edge for a couple decades now. I mean, I remember I built a house in like 1999 and the smart home was already something that people were talking about then. Today, great, I've got you know. I've got my Nest if I have, I probably have smart assistants. There's a lot of things I love-- >> Alexa. >> Saw on Twitter today, somebody's talking like I'm waiting for my light bulbs to update their firmware from the latest push so, some of its coming but it's just this slow gradual adoption. So there's the consumer piece and then there's the business aspect. So, you know, we are still really really early in some of these exciting edge uses. Talk about the enterprise. They're all working on their strategy for how devices and how they're going to work through IoT but you know this is not something that's going to happen overnight. It's they're figuring out their partnerships, they're figuring out where they work, and that three-tiered model that you talked about. My cloud provider, absolutely hugely important for how I do that and I really see it Dave, not as an or but it's an and. So I need to understand where I collect my data, where it's at certain aspects are going to live, and the public cloud players are spending a lot of time working on on that intelligence, the intelligence layer. >> And Stu, I should mention, so far we're talking about really, the infrastructure as a service layer comprises database and middleware. We haven't really addressed the the SAS space and we're not going to go deep into that but just to say. I mean look, packaged software as we knew it is dead, right? SAS is where all the action is. It's the highest growth area, it's the highest value area, so we'll cover that in another segment. So we're really talking about that, the stack up to the middleware, the database, and obviously the infrastructures as a service. So when you think about the players here, let's start with AWS. You've been to I think, every AWS re:Invent maybe, with the exception of one. You've seen the evolution. I was just down in D.C. the other day and they have this chart on the wall, which is their releases, their functional releases by year. It's just, it's overwhelming what they've done. So they're obviously the leader. I saw a recent Gartner Magic Quadrant. It looked like, I tweeted it, it looked like Ronnie Turcotte looking back on Secretariat from the Belmont and whatever it was. 1978, I think it was. (laughs) 31 lengths. I mean, massive domination in the infrastructure as a service space. What do you see going on? >> Yeah so, Dave, absolutely. Today the cloud is, it's Amazon's market out there. Interestingly if you say, okay what's some of the biggest threats in the infrastructure as a service? Well, maybe China, Dave. You know, Alibaba was one that you look at there. But huge opportunity for what's happened at the edge. If you talk about intelligence, you talk about AI, talk about machine learning. Google is actually the company that most people will talk about it, can kind of have a leadership. Heck, I've even seen discussion that maybe we need antitrust to look at Google because they're going to lock things up. You know, they have Android, they have Google Home, they have all these various pieces. But we know Dave, they are far behind Amazon in the public cloud market and Amazon has done a lot, especially over the last two years. You're right, I've been to every Amazon re:Invent except for the first one and the last two years, really seen a maturation of that growth. Not just you know, devices and partnerships there but how do they bring their intelligence and push that out to the edge so things like their serverless technology, which is Lambda. They have Lambda Greengrass that can put to the edge. The serverless is pervading all of their solutions. They've got like the Aurora database-- >> And serverless is profound, not just that from the standpoint of application development but just an entire new business model is emerging on top of serverless and Lambda really started all that but but carry on. >> Yeah and when you look in and you say okay, what better use case than IoT for, well I need infrastructure but I only need it when I need it and I want to call it for when it's there. So that kind of model where I should be able to build by the microsecond and only use what I need. That's something that Amazon is at the forefront, clear leadership position there and they should be able to plug in and if they can extend that out to the edge, starting new partnerships. Like the VMware partnerships, interesting. Red Hat's another partnership they have with OpenShift to be able to get that out to more environments and Amazon has a tremendous ecosystem out there and absolutely is on their radar as to how their-- >> They're crushing it So we were at Google Next last year. Big push, verbally anyway, to the enterprise. They've been making some progress, they're hiring a lot of people out of formerly Cisco, EMC, folks that understand the enterprise but beyond sort of the AI and sort of data analytics, what kind of progress has Google made relative to the leader? >> So in general, enterprise infrastructure service, they haven't made as much progress as most of us watching would expect them to make. But Dave, you mentioned something, data. I mean, at the center of everything we're talking about is the data. So in some ways is Google you know, come on Google, they're smarter than the rest of us. They're skating to where the puck is Dave and infrastructure services, last decades argument if it's the data and the intelligence, Google's got just brilliant people. They're working at the some of these amazing environments. You look at things like Google's Spanner. This is distributed architecture. Say how do I plug in all of these devices and help the work in a distributed gradual work well. You know, heck, I'd be reading the whitepapers that Google's doing in understanding that they might be really well positioned in this 3D chess match that were playing. >> Your eyes might bleed. (laughs) I've read the Google Spanner, I was very excited about it. Understood, you know, a little bit of it. Okay, let's talk about Microsoft. They're really of the big cloud guys. They're really the one that has a partnership strategy to do both on-prem and public cloud. What are your thoughts on that now that sort of Azure stack is starting to roll out with some key partners? >> Yeah absolutely, it's the one that you know. Dave, if you use your analogy looking back, it's like well the next one, it's gaining a little bit, gaining a little bit but still far back. There is Microsoft. Where Microsoft has done best of course is their portfolio of business applications that they have. That they've really turned the green light on for enterprises to adopt SAS with Office 365. Azure stack, it's early days still but companies that use Microsoft, they trust Microsoft. Microsoft's done phenomenal working with developers over the last couple of years. Very prominent like the Kubernetes shows that I've been attending recently. They've absolutely got a play for serverless that we were talking about. I'm not as up to speed as to where Microsoft sits for kind of the IoT edge discussions. >> But you know they're playing there. >> Yeah, absolutely. I mean, Microsoft does identity better than anyone. Active Directory is still the standard in enterprises today. So you know, I worry that Microsoft could be caught in the middle. If Google's making the play for what's next, Microsoft is still chasing a little bit what Amazon's already winning. >> Okay and then we don't have enough time to really talk about China, you mentioned it before. Alibaba's you know, legit. Tencent, Baidu obviously with their captive market in China, they're going to do a lot of business and they're going to move a lot of compute and storage and networking but maybe address that in another segment. I want to talk about the traditional enterprise players. Dell EMC, IBM, HPE, Cisco, where do they stand? We talk a lot at Wikibond about true private cloud. The notion that you can't just stick all your data into the public cloud. Andy Jassy may disagree with that but there are practical realities and certainly when you talk to CIOs they they underscore that. But that notion of true private cloud hasn't allowed these companies to really grow. Now of course IBM and Oracle, I didn't mention Oracle, have a different strategy and Oracle's strategy is even more different. So let's sort of run through them. Let's take the arms dealers. Dell EMC, HPE, Cisco, maybe you put Lenovo in there. What's their cloud strategy? >> Well first of all Dave I think most of them, they went through a number of bumps along the road trying to figure out what their cloud strategy is. Most of them, especially let's take, if you take the compute or server side of the business, they are suppliers to all the service providers trying to get into the hyperscalers. Most of them have, they all have some partnership with Microsoft. There's a Assure stack and they're saying, okay hey, if I want an HPE server in my own data center and in Azure, Microsoft's going to be happy to provide that for you. But David, it's not really competing against infrastructure as a service and the bigger question is as that market has kind of flattened out and we kind of understand it, where is the opportunity for them in IoT. We saw, you know Dave. Last five years or so, can I have a consumer business and an enterprise business in the same? HPE tore those two apart. Michael Dell has kept them together. IBM spun off to Lenovo everything that was on the more consumer side of the business. Where will they play or will companies like Google, like Apple, the ones that you know, Dave. They are spending huge amounts of money in chips. Look at Google and what they're doing with TP use. Look at Apple, I believe it was, there was an Israeli company that they bought and they're making chips there. There's a different need at the edge and sure, company like Dell can create that but will they have the margin, will they have the software, will they have the ecosystem to be able to compete there? Cisco, I haven't seen on the compute side, them going down that path but I was at Cisco Live and a big talk there. I really like the opening keynote and we had a sit down on the CUBE with the executive, it said really if I look out to like 2030. If Cisco still successful and we're thinking about them, we don't think of them as a network company anymore. They are a software company and therefore, things like collaboration, things like how it's kind of a new version of networking that's not on ports and boxes. But really as I think about my data, think about my privacy and security, Cisco absolutely has a play there. They've done some very large acquisitions in that space and they've got some deep expertise there. >> But again, Dell, HPE, Cisco, predominantly arms dealers. Obviously don't have, HPE at one point had a public cloud, they've pulled back. HP's cloud play really is cloud technology partners that they acquire. That at least gives them a revenue stream into the cloud. Now maybe-- >> But it's a consultancy. >> It's a consultancy, maybe it's a one-way trip to the cloud but I will say this about CTP. What it does is it gives HPE a footprint in that business and to the extent that they're a trusted service provider for companies trying to move into the cloud. They can maybe be in the catbird seat for the on-prem business but again, largely an arms dealer. it's going to be a lower margin business certainly than IBM and Oracle, which have applications. They own their own public cloud with the Oracle public cloud and IBM cloud, formerly SoftLayer, which was a two billion dollar acquisition several years ago. So those companies from a participation standpoint, even a tiny market share is compared to Amazon, Google, and Microsoft. They're at least in that cloud game and they're somewhat insulated from that disruption because of their software business and their large install base. Okay, I want to sort of end with, sort of where we started. You know, the Peter Levine comment, cloud is dead, it's all going to the edge. I actually think the cloud era, it's kind of, it's here, we're kind of. It's kind of playing out as many of us had expected over the last five years. You know what blew me away? Is Alexa, who would have thought that Amazon would be a leader in this sort of natural language processing marketplace, right? You would have thought it would come from, certainly Google with all the the search capability. You would have thought Apple with Siri, you know compared to Alexa. So my point is Amazon is able to do that because it's got a data model. It's a data company, all these companies, including Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook. The largest market cap companies in the world, they have data at the core. Data is foundational for those companies and that's why they are in such a good position to disrupt. So cloud, SAS, mobile, social, big data, to me still these are kind of the last 10 years. The next 10 years are going to be about AI, machine intelligence, deep learning, machine learning, cognitive. We're trying to even get the names right but it starts with the data. So let me put forth the premise and get your commentary. and tie it back in the cloud. So the innovation, in the next 10 years is going to come from data and to the extent that your data is not in silos, you're going to be in a much better position than if it is. Number two is your application of artificial intelligence, you know whatever term you want to use, machine intelligence, etc. Data plus AI, plus I'll bring it back to cloud, cloud economics. If you don't have those cloud economics then you're going to be at a disadvantage of innovation. So let's talk about what we mean by cloud economics. You're talking about the API economy, talking about global scale, always on. Very importantly something we've talked about for years, virtually zero marginal costs at volume, which you're never going to get on-prem because this creates a network effect. And the other thing it does from an innovation context, it attracts startups. Or startups saying, hey I want to build on-prem. No, they don't want to build in the cloud. So it's data plus artificial intelligence plus cloud economics that's going to drive innovation in the next ten years. What are your thoughts? >> Yeah Dave, absolutely. Something I've been saying for the last couple of years, we watched kind of the the customer flywheel that the public clouds have. Data is that next flywheel so companies that can capture that. You mentioned Amazon and Alexa, one of the reasons that Amazon can basically sell that as a loss is lots of those people, they're all Amazon Prime customers and they're ordering more things from Amazon and they're getting so much data that drive all of those other services. Where is Amazon going to threaten in the future? Everywhere. It is basically what they see. The thing we didn't discuss there Dave, you know I love your premise there, is it's technology plus people. What's going to happen with jobs? You and I did the sessions with Andy McAfee and Eril Brynjolfsson, it's racing with the machine. Where is, we know that people plus machines always beat so we spent the last five years talking about data scientist, the growth of developers and developers and the new king makers. So you know what are those new jobs, what are those new roles that are going to help build the solutions where people plus machine will win and what does that kind of next generation of workforce going to look like? >> Well I want to add to that Stu, I'm glad you brought that up. So a friend of mine David Michelle is just about to publish a new book called Seeing Digital. And in that book, I got an advance copy, in there he talks about companies that have data at their core and with human expertise around the data but if you think about the vast majority of companies, it's human expertise and the data is kind of bolted on. And the data lives in silos. Those companies are in a much more vulnerable position in terms of being disrupted, than the ones that have a data model that everybody has access to with human expertise around it. And so when you think about digital disruption, no industry is safe in my opinion, and every industry has kind of its unique attributes. You know, obviously publishing and books and music have disrupted very quickly. Insurance hasn't been disrupted, banking hasn't been disrupted, although blockchain it's probably going to affect that. So again, coming back to this tail-end premise is the next 10 years is going to be about that digital disruption. And it's real, it's not just a bunch of buzzwords, a cloud is obviously a key component, if not the key component of the underlying infrastructure with a lot of activity in terms of business models being built on top. All right Stu, thank you for your perspectives. Thanks for covering this. We will be looking for this video, the outputs, the clips from that. Thanks for watching everybody. This is Dave Vellante with Stu Miniman, we'll see you next time. (electronic music)