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

>>From the Cube Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from the cube and E T R. This is breaking analysis with Dave Valante. >>Making technology predictions in 2022 was tricky business, especially if you were projecting the performance of markets or identifying I P O prospects and making binary forecast on data AI and the macro spending climate and other related topics in enterprise tech 2022, of course was characterized by a seesaw economy where central banks were restructuring their balance sheets. The war on Ukraine fueled inflation supply chains were a mess. And the unintended consequences of of forced march to digital and the acceleration still being sorted out. Hello and welcome to this week's weekly on Cube Insights powered by E T R. In this breaking analysis, we continue our annual tradition of transparently grading last year's enterprise tech predictions. And you may or may not agree with our self grading system, but look, we're gonna give you the data and you can draw your own conclusions and tell you what, tell us what you think. >>All right, let's get right to it. So our first prediction was tech spending increases by 8% in 2022. And as we exited 2021 CIOs, they were optimistic about their digital transformation plans. You know, they rushed to make changes to their business and were eager to sharpen their focus and continue to iterate on their digital business models and plug the holes that they, the, in the learnings that they had. And so we predicted that 8% rise in enterprise tech spending, which looked pretty good until Ukraine and the Fed decided that, you know, had to rush and make up for lost time. We kind of nailed the momentum in the energy sector, but we can't give ourselves too much credit for that layup. And as of October, Gartner had it spending growing at just over 5%. I think it was 5.1%. So we're gonna take a C plus on this one and, and move on. >>Our next prediction was basically kind of a slow ground ball. The second base, if I have to be honest, but we felt it was important to highlight that security would remain front and center as the number one priority for organizations in 2022. As is our tradition, you know, we try to up the degree of difficulty by specifically identifying companies that are gonna benefit from these trends. So we highlighted some possible I P O candidates, which of course didn't pan out. S NQ was on our radar. The company had just had to do another raise and they recently took a valuation hit and it was a down round. They raised 196 million. So good chunk of cash, but, but not the i p O that we had predicted Aqua Securities focus on containers and cloud native. That was a trendy call and we thought maybe an M SS P or multiple managed security service providers like Arctic Wolf would I p o, but no way that was happening in the crummy market. >>Nonetheless, we think these types of companies, they're still faring well as the talent shortage in security remains really acute, particularly in the sort of mid-size and small businesses that often don't have a sock Lacework laid off 20% of its workforce in 2022. And CO C e o Dave Hatfield left the company. So that I p o didn't, didn't happen. It was probably too early for Lacework. Anyway, meanwhile you got Netscope, which we've cited as strong in the E T R data as particularly in the emerging technology survey. And then, you know, I lumia holding its own, you know, we never liked that 7 billion price tag that Okta paid for auth zero, but we loved the TAM expansion strategy to target developers beyond sort of Okta's enterprise strength. But we gotta take some points off of the failure thus far of, of Okta to really nail the integration and the go to market model with azero and build, you know, bring that into the, the, the core Okta. >>So the focus on endpoint security that was a winner in 2022 is CrowdStrike led that charge with others holding their own, not the least of which was Palo Alto Networks as it continued to expand beyond its core network security and firewall business, you know, through acquisition. So overall we're gonna give ourselves an A minus for this relatively easy call, but again, we had some specifics associated with it to make it a little tougher. And of course we're watching ve very closely this this coming year in 2023. The vendor consolidation trend. You know, according to a recent Palo Alto network survey with 1300 SecOps pros on average organizations have more than 30 tools to manage security tools. So this is a logical way to optimize cost consolidating vendors and consolidating redundant vendors. The E T R data shows that's clearly a trend that's on the upswing. >>Now moving on, a big theme of 2020 and 2021 of course was remote work and hybrid work and new ways to work and return to work. So we predicted in 2022 that hybrid work models would become the dominant protocol, which clearly is the case. We predicted that about 33% of the workforce would come back to the office in 2022 in September. The E T R data showed that figure was at 29%, but organizations expected that 32% would be in the office, you know, pretty much full-time by year end. That hasn't quite happened, but we were pretty close with the projection, so we're gonna take an A minus on this one. Now, supply chain disruption was another big theme that we felt would carry through 2022. And sure that sounds like another easy one, but as is our tradition, again we try to put some binary metrics around our predictions to put some meat in the bone, so to speak, and and allow us than you to say, okay, did it come true or not? >>So we had some data that we presented last year and supply chain issues impacting hardware spend. We said at the time, you can see this on the left hand side of this chart, the PC laptop demand would remain above pre covid levels, which would reverse a decade of year on year declines, which I think started in around 2011, 2012. Now, while demand is down this year pretty substantially relative to 2021, I D C has worldwide unit shipments for PCs at just over 300 million for 22. If you go back to 2019 and you're looking at around let's say 260 million units shipped globally, you know, roughly, so, you know, pretty good call there. Definitely much higher than pre covid levels. But so what you might be asking why the B, well, we projected that 30% of customers would replace security appliances with cloud-based services and that more than a third would replace their internal data center server and storage hardware with cloud services like 30 and 40% respectively. >>And we don't have explicit survey data on exactly these metrics, but anecdotally we see this happening in earnest. And we do have some data that we're showing here on cloud adoption from ET R'S October survey where the midpoint of workloads running in the cloud is around 34% and forecast, as you can see, to grow steadily over the next three years. So this, well look, this is not, we understand it's not a one-to-one correlation with our prediction, but it's a pretty good bet that we were right, but we gotta take some points off, we think for the lack of unequivocal proof. Cause again, we always strive to make our predictions in ways that can be measured as accurate or not. Is it binary? Did it happen, did it not? Kind of like an O K R and you know, we strive to provide data as proof and in this case it's a bit fuzzy. >>We have to admit that although we're pretty comfortable that the prediction was accurate. And look, when you make an hard forecast, sometimes you gotta pay the price. All right, next, we said in 2022 that the big four cloud players would generate 167 billion in IS and PaaS revenue combining for 38% market growth. And our current forecasts are shown here with a comparison to our January, 2022 figures. So coming into this year now where we are today, so currently we expect 162 billion in total revenue and a 33% growth rate. Still very healthy, but not on our mark. So we think a w s is gonna miss our predictions by about a billion dollars, not, you know, not bad for an 80 billion company. So they're not gonna hit that expectation though of getting really close to a hundred billion run rate. We thought they'd exit the year, you know, closer to, you know, 25 billion a quarter and we don't think they're gonna get there. >>Look, we pretty much nailed Azure even though our prediction W was was correct about g Google Cloud platform surpassing Alibaba, Alibaba, we way overestimated the performance of both of those companies. So we're gonna give ourselves a C plus here and we think, yeah, you might think it's a little bit harsh, we could argue for a B minus to the professor, but the misses on GCP and Alibaba we think warrant a a self penalty on this one. All right, let's move on to our prediction about Supercloud. We said it becomes a thing in 2022 and we think by many accounts it has, despite the naysayers, we're seeing clear evidence that the concept of a layer of value add that sits above and across clouds is taking shape. And on this slide we showed just some of the pickup in the industry. I mean one of the most interesting is CloudFlare, the biggest supercloud antagonist. >>Charles Fitzgerald even predicted that no vendor would ever use the term in their marketing. And that would be proof if that happened that Supercloud was a thing and he said it would never happen. Well CloudFlare has, and they launched their version of Supercloud at their developer week. Chris Miller of the register put out a Supercloud block diagram, something else that Charles Fitzgerald was, it was was pushing us for, which is rightly so, it was a good call on his part. And Chris Miller actually came up with one that's pretty good at David Linthicum also has produced a a a A block diagram, kind of similar, David uses the term metacloud and he uses the term supercloud kind of interchangeably to describe that trend. And so we we're aligned on that front. Brian Gracely has covered the concept on the popular cloud podcast. Berkeley launched the Sky computing initiative. >>You read through that white paper and many of the concepts highlighted in the Supercloud 3.0 community developed definition align with that. Walmart launched a platform with many of the supercloud salient attributes. So did Goldman Sachs, so did Capital One, so did nasdaq. So you know, sorry you can hate the term, but very clearly the evidence is gathering for the super cloud storm. We're gonna take an a plus on this one. Sorry, haters. Alright, let's talk about data mesh in our 21 predictions posts. We said that in the 2020s, 75% of large organizations are gonna re-architect their big data platforms. So kind of a decade long prediction. We don't like to do that always, but sometimes it's warranted. And because it was a longer term prediction, we, at the time in, in coming into 22 when we were evaluating our 21 predictions, we took a grade of incomplete because the sort of decade long or majority of the decade better part of the decade prediction. >>So last year, earlier this year, we said our number seven prediction was data mesh gains momentum in 22. But it's largely confined and narrow data problems with limited scope as you can see here with some of the key bullets. So there's a lot of discussion in the data community about data mesh and while there are an increasing number of examples, JP Morgan Chase, Intuit, H S P C, HelloFresh, and others that are completely rearchitecting parts of their data platform completely rearchitecting entire data platforms is non-trivial. There are organizational challenges, there're data, data ownership, debates, technical considerations, and in particular two of the four fundamental data mesh principles that the, the need for a self-service infrastructure and federated computational governance are challenging. Look, democratizing data and facilitating data sharing creates conflicts with regulatory requirements around data privacy. As such many organizations are being really selective with their data mesh implementations and hence our prediction of narrowing the scope of data mesh initiatives. >>I think that was right on J P M C is a good example of this, where you got a single group within a, within a division narrowly implementing the data mesh architecture. They're using a w s, they're using data lakes, they're using Amazon Glue, creating a catalog and a variety of other techniques to meet their objectives. They kind of automating data quality and it was pretty well thought out and interesting approach and I think it's gonna be made easier by some of the announcements that Amazon made at the recent, you know, reinvent, particularly trying to eliminate ET t l, better connections between Aurora and Redshift and, and, and better data sharing the data clean room. So a lot of that is gonna help. Of course, snowflake has been on this for a while now. Many other companies are facing, you know, limitations as we said here and this slide with their Hadoop data platforms. They need to do new, some new thinking around that to scale. HelloFresh is a really good example of this. Look, the bottom line is that organizations want to get more value from data and having a centralized, highly specialized teams that own the data problem, it's been a barrier and a blocker to success. The data mesh starts with organizational considerations as described in great detail by Ash Nair of Warner Brothers. So take a listen to this clip. >>Yeah, so when people think of Warner Brothers, you always think of like the movie studio, but we're more than that, right? I mean, you think of H B O, you think of t n t, you think of C N N. We have 30 plus brands in our portfolio and each have their own needs. So the, the idea of a data mesh really helps us because what we can do is we can federate access across the company so that, you know, CNN can work at their own pace. You know, when there's election season, they can ingest their own data and they don't have to, you know, bump up against, as an example, HBO if Game of Thrones is going on. >>So it's often the case that data mesh is in the eyes of the implementer. And while a company's implementation may not strictly adhere to Jamma Dani's vision of data mesh, and that's okay, the goal is to use data more effectively. And despite Gartner's attempts to deposition data mesh in favor of the somewhat confusing or frankly far more confusing data fabric concept that they stole from NetApp data mesh is taking hold in organizations globally today. So we're gonna take a B on this one. The prediction is shaping up the way we envision, but as we previously reported, it's gonna take some time. The better part of a decade in our view, new standards have to emerge to make this vision become reality and they'll come in the form of both open and de facto approaches. Okay, our eighth prediction last year focused on the face off between Snowflake and Databricks. >>And we realized this popular topic, and maybe one that's getting a little overplayed, but these are two companies that initially, you know, looked like they were shaping up as partners and they, by the way, they are still partnering in the field. But you go back a couple years ago, the idea of using an AW w s infrastructure, Databricks machine intelligence and applying that on top of Snowflake as a facile data warehouse, still very viable. But both of these companies, they have much larger ambitions. They got big total available markets to chase and large valuations that they have to justify. So what's happening is, as we've previously reported, each of these companies is moving toward the other firm's core domain and they're building out an ecosystem that'll be critical for their future. So as part of that effort, we said each is gonna become aggressive investors and maybe start doing some m and a and they have in various companies. >>And on this chart that we produced last year, we studied some of the companies that were targets and we've added some recent investments of both Snowflake and Databricks. As you can see, they've both, for example, invested in elation snowflake's, put money into Lacework, the Secur security firm, ThoughtSpot, which is trying to democratize data with ai. Collibra is a governance platform and you can see Databricks investments in data transformation with D B T labs, Matillion doing simplified business intelligence hunters. So that's, you know, they're security investment and so forth. So other than our thought that we'd see Databricks I p o last year, this prediction been pretty spot on. So we'll give ourselves an A on that one. Now observability has been a hot topic and we've been covering it for a while with our friends at E T R, particularly Eric Bradley. Our number nine prediction last year was basically that if you're not cloud native and observability, you are gonna be in big trouble. >>So everything guys gotta go cloud native. And that's clearly been the case. Splunk, the big player in the space has been transitioning to the cloud, hasn't always been pretty, as we reported, Datadog real momentum, the elk stack, that's open source model. You got new entrants that we've cited before, like observe, honeycomb, chaos search and others that we've, we've reported on, they're all born in the cloud. So we're gonna take another a on this one, admittedly, yeah, it's a re reasonably easy call, but you gotta have a few of those in the mix. Okay, our last prediction, our number 10 was around events. Something the cube knows a little bit about. We said that a new category of events would emerge as hybrid and that for the most part is happened. So that's gonna be the mainstay is what we said. That pure play virtual events are gonna give way to hi hybrid. >>And the narrative is that virtual only events are, you know, they're good for quick hits, but lousy replacements for in-person events. And you know that said, organizations of all shapes and sizes, they learn how to create better virtual content and support remote audiences during the pandemic. So when we set at pure play is gonna give way to hybrid, we said we, we i we implied or specific or specified that the physical event that v i p experience is going defined. That overall experience and those v i p events would create a little fomo, fear of, of missing out in a virtual component would overlay that serves an audience 10 x the size of the physical. We saw that really two really good examples. Red Hat Summit in Boston, small event, couple thousand people served tens of thousands, you know, online. Second was Google Cloud next v i p event in, in New York City. >>Everything else was, was, was, was virtual. You know, even examples of our prediction of metaverse like immersion have popped up and, and and, and you know, other companies are doing roadshow as we predicted like a lot of companies are doing it. You're seeing that as a major trend where organizations are going with their sales teams out into the regions and doing a little belly to belly action as opposed to the big giant event. That's a definitely a, a trend that we're seeing. So in reviewing this prediction, the grade we gave ourselves is, you know, maybe a bit unfair, it should be, you could argue for a higher grade, but the, but the organization still haven't figured it out. They have hybrid experiences but they generally do a really poor job of leveraging the afterglow and of event of an event. It still tends to be one and done, let's move on to the next event or the next city. >>Let the sales team pick up the pieces if they were paying attention. So because of that, we're only taking a B plus on this one. Okay, so that's the review of last year's predictions. You know, overall if you average out our grade on the 10 predictions that come out to a b plus, I dunno why we can't seem to get that elusive a, but we're gonna keep trying our friends at E T R and we are starting to look at the data for 2023 from the surveys and all the work that we've done on the cube and our, our analysis and we're gonna put together our predictions. We've had literally hundreds of inbounds from PR pros pitching us. We've got this huge thick folder that we've started to review with our yellow highlighter. And our plan is to review it this month, take a look at all the data, get some ideas from the inbounds and then the e t R of January surveys in the field. >>It's probably got a little over a thousand responses right now. You know, they'll get up to, you know, 1400 or so. And once we've digested all that, we're gonna go back and publish our predictions for 2023 sometime in January. So stay tuned for that. All right, we're gonna leave it there for today. You wanna thank Alex Myerson who's on production and he manages the podcast, Ken Schiffman as well out of our, our Boston studio. I gotta really heartfelt thank you to Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight and their team. They helped get the word out on social and in our newsletters. Rob Ho is our editor in chief over at Silicon Angle who does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these podcasts are available or all these episodes are available is podcasts. Wherever you listen, just all you do Search Breaking analysis podcast, really getting some great traction there. Appreciate you guys subscribing. I published each week on wikibon.com, silicon angle.com or you can email me directly at david dot valante silicon angle.com or dm me Dante, or you can comment on my LinkedIn post. And please check out ETR AI for the very best survey data in the enterprise tech business. Some awesome stuff in there. This is Dante for the Cube Insights powered by etr. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on breaking analysis.

>>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 Ante. >>Have you ever been driving on the highway and traffic suddenly slows way down and then after a little while it picks up again and you're cruising along and you're thinking, Okay, hey, that was weird. But it's clear sailing now. Off we go, only to find out in a bit that the traffic is building up ahead again, forcing you to pump the brakes as the traffic pattern ebbs and flows well. Welcome to the Seesaw economy. The fed induced fire that prompted an unprecedented rally in tech is being purposefully extinguished now by that same fed. And virtually every sector of the tech industry is having to reset its expectations, including the cloud segment. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by etr. In this breaking analysis will review the implications of the earnings announcements from the big three cloud players, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google who announced this week. >>And we'll update you on our quarterly IAS forecast and share the latest from ETR with a focus on cloud computing. Now, before we get into the new data, we wanna review something we shared with you on October 14th, just a couple weeks back, this is sort of a, we told you it was coming slide. It's an XY graph that shows ET R'S proprietary net score methodology on the vertical axis. That's a measure of spending momentum, spending velocity, and an overlap or presence in the dataset that's on the X axis. That's really a measure of pervasiveness. In the survey, the table, you see that table insert there that shows Wiki Bond's Q2 estimates of IAS revenue for the big four hyperscalers with their year on year growth rates. Now we told you at the time, this is data from the July TW 22 ETR survey and the ETR hadn't released its October survey results at that time. >>This was just a couple weeks ago. And while we couldn't share the specific data from the October survey, we were able to get a glimpse and we depicted the slowdown that we saw in the October data with those dotted arrows kind of down into the right, we said at the time that we were seeing and across the board slowdown even for the big three cloud vendors. Now, fast forward to this past week and we saw earnings releases from Alphabet, Microsoft, and just last night Amazon. Now you may be thinking, okay, big deal. The ETR survey data didn't really tell us anything we didn't already know. But judging from the negative reaction in the stock market to these earnings announcements, the degree of softness surprised a lot of investors. Now, at the time we didn't update our forecast, it doesn't make sense for us to do that when we're that close to earning season. >>And now that all the big three ha with all the big four with the exception of Alibaba have announced we've, we've updated. And so here's that data. This chart lays out our view of the IS and PAs worldwide revenue. Basically it's cloud infrastructure with an attempt to exclude any SaaS revenue so we can make an apples to apples comparison across all the clouds. Now the reason that actual is in quotes is because Microsoft and Google don't report IAS revenue, but they do give us clues and kind of directional commentary, which we then triangulate with other data that we have from the channel and ETR surveys and just our own intelligence. Now the second column there after the vendor name shows our previous estimates for q3, and then next to that we show our actuals. Same with the growth rates. And then we round out the chart with that lighter blue color highlights, the full year estimates for revenue and growth. >>So the key takeaways are that we shaved about $4 billion in revenue and roughly 300 basis points of growth off of our full year estimates. AWS had a strong July but exited Q3 in the mid 20% growth rate year over year. So we're using that guidance, you know, for our Q4 estimates. Azure came in below our earlier estimates, but Google actually exceeded our expectations. Now the compression in the numbers is in our view of function of the macro demand climate, we've made every attempt to adjust for constant currency. So FX should not be a factor in this data, but it's sure you know that that ma the the, the currency effects are weighing on those companies income statements. And so look, this is the fundamental dynamic of a cloud model where you can dial down consumption when you need to and dial it up when you need to. >>Now you may be thinking that many big cloud customers have a committed level of spending in order to get better discounts. And that's true. But what's happening we think is they'll reallocate that spend toward, let's say for example, lower cost storage tiers or they may take advantage of better price performance processors like Graviton for example. That is a clear trend that we're seeing and smaller companies that were perhaps paying by the drink just on demand, they're moving to reserve instance models to lower their monthly bill. So instead of taking the easy way out and just spending more companies are reallocating their reserve capacity toward lower cost. So those sort of lower cost services, so they're spending time and effort optimizing to get more for, for less whereas, or get more for the same is really how we should, should, should phrase it. Whereas during the pandemic, many companies were, you know, they perhaps were not as focused on doing that because business was booming and they had a response. >>So they just, you know, spend more dial it up. So in general, as they say, customers are are doing more with, with the same. Now let's look at the growth dynamic and spend some time on that. I think this is important. This data shows worldwide quarterly revenue growth rates back to Q1 2019 for the big four. So a couple of interesting things. The data tells us during the pandemic, you saw both AWS and Azure, but the law of large numbers and actually accelerate growth. AWS especially saw progressively increasing growth rates throughout 2021 for each quarter. Now that trend, as you can see is reversed in 2022 for aws. Now we saw Azure come down a bit, but it's still in the low forties in terms of percentage growth. While Google actually saw an uptick in growth this last quarter for GCP by our estimates as GCP is becoming an increasingly large portion of Google's overall cloud business. >>Now, unfortunately Google Cloud continues to lose north of 850 million per quarter, whereas AWS and Azure are profitable cloud businesses even though Alibaba is suffering its woes from China. And we'll see how they come in when they report in mid-November. The overall hyperscale market grew at 32% in Q3 in terms of worldwide revenue. So the slowdown isn't due to the repatriation or competition from on-prem vendors in our view, it's a macro related trend. And cloud will continue to significantly outperform other sectors despite its massive size. You know, on the repatriation point, it just still doesn't show up in the data. The A 16 Z article from Sarah Wong and Martin Martin Kasa claiming that repatriation was inevitable as a means to lower cost of good sold for SaaS companies. You know, while that was thought provoking, it hasn't shown up in the numbers. And if you read the financial statements of both AWS and its partners like Snowflake and you dig into the, to the, to the quarterly reports, you'll see little notes and comments with their ongoing negotiations to lower cloud costs for customers. >>AWS and no doubt execs at Azure and GCP understand that the lifetime value of a customer is worth much more than near term gross margin. And you can expect the cloud vendors to strike a balance between profitability, near term profitability anyway and customer attention. Now, even though Google Cloud platform saw accelerated growth, we need to put that in context for you. So GCP, by our estimate, has now crossed over the $3 billion for quarter market actually did so last quarter, but its growth rate accelerated to 42% this quarter. And so that's a good sign in our view. But let's do a quick little comparison with when AWS and Azure crossed the $3 billion mark and compare their growth rates at the time. So if you go back to to Q2 2016, as we're showing in this chart, that's around the time that AWS hit 3 billion per quarter and at the same time was growing at 58%. >>Azure by our estimates crossed that mark in Q4 2018 and at that time was growing at 67%. Again, compare that to Google's 42%. So one would expect Google's growth rate would be higher than its competitors at this point in the MO in the maturity of its cloud, which it's, you know, it's really not when you compared to to Azure. I mean they're kind of con, you know, comparable now but today, but, but you'll go back, you know, to that $3 billion mark. But more so looking at history, you'd like to see its growth rate at this point of a maturity model at least over 50%, which we don't believe it is. And one other point on this topic, you know, my business friend Matt Baker from Dell often says it's not a zero sum game, meaning there's plenty of opportunity exists to build value on top of hyperscalers. >>And I would totally agree it's not a dollar for dollar swap if you can continue to innovate. But history will show that the first company in makes the most money. Number two can do really well and number three tends to break even. Now maybe cloud is different because you have Microsoft software estate and the power behind that and that's driving its IAS business and Google ads are funding technology buildouts for, for for Google and gcp. So you know, we'll see how that plays out. But right now by this one measurement, Google is four years behind Microsoft in six years behind aws. Now to the point that cloud will continue to outpace other markets, let's, let's break this down a bit in spending terms and see why this claim holds water. This is data from ET r's latest October survey that shows the granularity of its net score or spending velocity metric. >>The lime green is new adoptions, so they're adding the platform, the forest green is spending more 6% or more. The gray bars spending is flat plus or minus, you know, 5%. The pinkish colors represent spending less down 6% or worse. And the bright red shows defections or churn of the platform. You subtract the reds from the greens and you get what's called net score, which is that blue dot that you can see on each of the bars. So what you see in the table insert is that all three have net scores above 40%, which is a highly elevated measure. Microsoft's net scores above 60% AWS well into the fifties and GCP in the mid forties. So all good. Now what's happening with all three is more customers are keep keeping their spending flat. So a higher percentage of customers are saying, our spending is now flat than it was in previous quarters and that's what's accounting for the compression. >>But the churn of all three, even gcp, which we reported, you know, last quarter from last quarter survey was was five x. The other two is actually very low in the single digits. So that might have been an anomaly. So that's a very good sign in our view. You know, again, customers aren't repatriating in droves, it's just not a trend that we would bet on, maybe makes for a FUD or you know, good marketing head, but it's just not a big deal. And you can't help but be impressed with both Microsoft and AWS's performance in the survey. And as we mentioned before, these companies aren't going to give up customers to try and preserve a little bit of gross margin. They'll do what it takes to keep people on their platforms cuz they'll make up for it over time with added services and improved offerings. >>Now, once these companies acquire a customer, they'll be very aggressive about keeping them. So customers take note, you have negotiating leverage, so use it. Okay, let's look at another cut at the cloud market from the ETR data set. Here's the two dimensional view, again, it's back, it's one of our favorites. Net score or spending momentum plotted against presence. And the data set, that's the x axis net score on the, on the vertical axis, this is a view of et r's cloud computing sector sector. You can see we put that magic 40% dotted red line in the table showing and, and then that the table inserts shows how the data are plotted with net score against presence. I e n in the survey, notably only the big three are above the 40% line of the names that we're showing here. The oth there, there are others. >>I mean if you put Snowflake on there, it'd be higher than any of these names, but we'll dig into that name in a later breaking analysis episode. Now this is just another way of quantifying the dominance of AWS and Azure, not only relative to Google, but the other cloud platforms out there. So we've, we've taken the opportunity here to plot IBM and Oracle, which both own a public cloud. Their performance is largely a reflection of them migrating their install bases to their respective public clouds and or hybrid clouds. And you know, that's fine, they're in the game. That's a point that we've made, you know, a number of times they're able to make it through the cloud, not whole and they at least have one, but they simply don't have the business momentum of AWS and Azure, which is actually quite impressive because AWS and Azure are now as large or larger than IBM and Oracle. >>And to show this type of continued growth that that that Azure and AWS show at their size is quite remarkable and customers are starting to recognize the viability of on-prem hi, you know, hybrid clouds like HPE GreenLake and Dell's apex. You know, you may say, well that's not cloud, but if the customer thinks it is and it was reporting in the survey that it is, we're gonna continue to report this view. You know, I don't know what's happening with H P E, They had a big down tick this quarter and I, and I don't read too much into that because their end is still pretty small at 53. So big fluctuations are not uncommon with those types of smaller ends, but it's over 50. So, you know, we did notice a a a negative within a giant public and private sector, which is often a, a bellwether giant public private is big public companies and large private companies like, like a Mars for example. >>So it, you know, it looks like for HPE it could be an outlier. We saw within the Fortune 1000 HPE E'S cloud looked actually really good and it had good spending momentum in that sector. When you di dig into the industry data within ETR dataset, obviously we're not showing that here, but we'll continue to monitor that. Okay, so where's this Leave us. Well look, this is really a tactical story of currency and macro headwinds as you can see. You know, we've laid out some of the points on this slide. The action in the stock market today, which is Friday after some of the soft earnings reports is really robust. You know, we'll see how it ends up in the day. So maybe this is a sign that the worst is over, but we don't think so. The visibility from tech companies is murky right now as most are guiding down, which indicates that their conservative outlook last quarter was still too optimistic. >>But as it relates to cloud, that platform is not going anywhere anytime soon. Sure, there are potential disruptors on the horizon, especially at the edge, but we're still a long ways off from, from the possibility that a new economic model emerges from the edge to disrupt the cloud and the opportunities in the cloud remain strong. I mean, what other path is there? Really private cloud. It was kind of a bandaid until the on-prem guys could get their a as a service models rolled out, which is just now happening. The hybrid thing is real, but it's, you know, defensive for the incumbents until they can get their super cloud investments going. Super cloud implying, capturing value above the hyperscaler CapEx, you know, call it what you want multi what multi-cloud should have been, the metacloud, the Uber cloud, whatever you like. But there are opportunities to play offense and that's clearly happening in the cloud ecosystem with the likes of Snowflake, Mongo, Hashi Corp. >>Hammer Spaces is a startup in this area. Aviatrix, CrowdStrike, Zeke Scaler, Okta, many, many more. And even the projects we see coming out of enterprise players like Dell, like with Project Alpine and what Pure Storage is doing along with a number of other of the backup vendors. So Q4 should be really interesting, but the real story is the investments that that companies are making now to leverage the cloud for digital transformations will be paying off down the road. This is not 1999. We had, you know, May might have had some good ideas and admittedly at a lot of bad ones too, but you didn't have the infrastructure to service customers at a low enough cost like you do today. The cloud is that infrastructure and so far it's been transformative, but it's likely the best is yet to come. Okay, let's call this a rap. >>Many thanks to Alex Morrison who does production and manages the podcast. Also Can Schiffman is our newest edition to the Boston Studio. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight helped get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Ho is our editor in chief over@siliconangle.com, who does some wonderful editing for us. Thank you. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search breaking analysis podcast. I publish each week on wiki bond.com at silicon angle.com. And you can email me at David dot valante@siliconangle.com or DM me at Dante or comment on my LinkedIn posts. And please do checkout etr.ai. They got the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Valante for the Cube Insights powered by etr. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on breaking analysis.

>> From every ISV to solve the problems. You want there to be tools in place that you can use, either open source tools or whatever it is that help you build it. And slowly over time, that building will become easier and easier. So my question to you was, where do you see you playing? Do you see yourself playing to ISVs as a set of tools, which will make their life a lot easier and provide that work? >> Absolutely. >> If they don't have, so they don't have to do it. Or you're providing this for the end users? Or both? >> So it's a progression. If you go to the ISVs first, you're doomed to starved before you have time for that other option. >> Yeah. >> Right? So it's a question of phase, the phasing of it. And also if you go directly to end users, you can demonstrate the power of it and get the attention of the ISVs. I believe that the ISVs, especially those with the biggest footprints and the most, you know, coveted estates, they have already made massive investments at trying to solve decentralization of their software stack. And I believe that they have used it as a hook to try to move to a software as a service model and rope people into leasing their infrastructure. So if you look at the clouds that have been propped up by Autodesk or by Adobe, or you name the company, they are building proprietary makeshift solutions for decentralizing or hybrid clouding. Or maybe they're not even doing that at all and all they're is saying hey, if you want to get location agnosticness, then what you should just, is just move into our cloud. >> Right. >> And then they try to solve on the background how to decentralize it between different regions so they can have decent offerings in each region. But those who are more advanced have already made larger investments and will be more averse to, you know, throwing that stuff away, all of their makeshift machinery away, and using a platform that gives them high performance parallel, low level file system access, while at the same time having metadata-driven, you know, policy-based, intent-based orchestration to manage the diffusion of data across a decentralized infrastructure. They are not going to be as open because they've made such an investment and they're going to look at how do they monetize it. So what we have found with like the movie studios who are using us already, many of the app they're using, many of those software offerings, the ISVs have their own cloud that offers that software for the cloud. But what we got when I asked about this, 'cause I was dealt specifically into this question because I'm very interested to know how we're going to make that leap from end user upstream into the ISVs where I believe we need to, and they said, look, we cannot use these software ISV-specific SAS clouds for two reasons. Number one is we lose control of the data. We're giving it to them. That's security and other issues. And here you're talking about we're doing work for Disney, we're doing work for Netflix, and they're not going to let us put our data on those software clouds, on those SAS clouds. Secondly, in any reasonable pipeline, the data is shared by many different applications. We need to be agnostic as to the application. 'Cause the inputs to one application, you know, the output for one application provides the input to the next, and it's not necessarily from the same vendor. So they need to have a data platform that lets them, you know, go from one software stack, and you know, to run it on another. Because they might do the rendering with this and yet, they do the editing with that, and you know, et cetera, et cetera. So I think the further you go up the stack in the structured data and dedicated applications for specific functions in specific verticals, the further up the stack you go, the harder it is to justify a SAS offering where you're basically telling the end users you need to park all your data with us and then you can run your application in our cloud and get this. That ultimately is a dead end path versus having the data be open and available to many applications across this supercloud layer. >> Okay, so-- >> Is that making any sense? >> Yes, so if I could just ask a clarifying question. So, if I had to take Snowflake as an example, I think they're doing exactly what you're saying is a dead end, put everything into our proprietary system and then we'll figure out how to distribute it. >> Yeah. >> And and I think if you're familiar with Zhamak Dehghaniis' data mesh concept. Are you? >> A little bit, yeah. >> But in her model, Snowflake, a Snowflake warehouse is just a node on the mesh and that mesh is-- >> That's right. >> Ultimately the supercloud and you're an enabler of that is what I'm hearing. >> That's right. What they're doing up at the structured level and what they're talking about at the structured level we're doing at the underlying, unstructured level, which by the way has implications for how you implement those distributed database things. In other words, implementing a Snowflake on top of Hammerspace would have made building stuff like in the first place easier. It would allow you to easily shift and run the database engine anywhere. You still have to solve how to shard and distribute at the transaction layer above, so I'm not saying we're a substitute for what you need to do at the app layer. By the way, there is another example of that and that's Microsoft Office, right? It's one thing to share that, to have a file share where you can share all the docs. It's something else to have Word and PowerPoint, Excel know how to allow people to be simultaneously editing the same doc. That's always going to happen in the app layer. But not all applications need that level of, you know, in-app decentralization. You know, many of them, many workflows are pipelined, especially the ones that are very data intensive where you're doing drug discovery or you're doing rendering, or you're doing machine learning training. These things are human in the loop with large stages of processing across tens of thousands of cores. And I think that kind of data processing pipeline is what we're focusing on first. Not so much the Microsoft Office or the Snowflake, you know, parking a relational database because that takes a lot of application layer stuff and that's what they're good at. >> Right. >> But I think... >> Go ahead, sorry. >> Later entrance in these markets will find Hammerspace as a way to accelerate their work so they can focus more narrowly on just the stuff that's app-specific, higher level sharing in the app. >> Yes, Snowflake founders-- >> I think it might be worth mentioning also, just keep this confidential guys, but one of our customers is Blue Origin. And one of the things that we have found is kind of the point of what you're talking about with our customers. They're needing to build this and since it's not commercially available or they don't know where to look for it to be commercially available, they're all building themselves. So this layer is needed. And Blue is just one of the examples of quite a few we're now talking to. And like manufacturing, HPC, research where they're out trying to solve this problem with their own scripting tools and things like that. And I just, I don't know if there's anything you want to add, David, but you know, but there's definitely a demand here and customers are trying to figure out how to solve it beyond what Hammerspace is doing. Like the need is so great that they're just putting developers on trying to do it themselves. >> Well, and you know, Snowflake founders, they didn't have a Hammerspace to lean on. But, one of the things that's interesting about supercloud is we feel as though industry clouds will emerge, that as part of company's digital transformations, they will, you know, every company's a software company, they'll begin to build their own clouds and they will be able to use a Hammerspace to do that. >> A super pass layer. >> Yes. It's really, I don't know if David's speaking, I don't want to speak over him, but we can't hear you. May be going through a bad... >> Well, a regional, regional talks that make that possible. And so they're doing these render farms and editing farms, and it's a cloud-specific to the types of workflows in the median entertainment world. Or clouds specifically to workflows in the chip design world or in the drug and bio and life sciences exploration world. There are large organizations that are kind of a blend of end users, like the Broad, which has their own kind of cloud where they're asking collaborators to come in and work with them. So it starts to even blur who's an end user versus an ISV. >> Yes. >> Right? When you start talking about the massive data is the main gravity is to having lots of people participate. >> Yep, and that's where the value is. And that's where the value is. And this is a megatrend that we see. And so it's really important for us to get to the point of what is and what is not a supercloud and, you know, that's where we're trying to evolve. >> Let's talk about this for a second 'cause I want to, I want to challenge you on something and it's something that I got challenged on and it has led me to thinking differently than I did at first, which Molly can attest to. Okay? So, we have been looking for a way to talk about the concept of cloud of utility computing, run anything anywhere that isn't addressed in today's realization of cloud. 'Cause today's cloud is not run anything anywhere, it's quite the opposite. You park your data in AWS and that's where you run stuff. And you pretty much have to. Same with with Azure. They're using data gravity to keep you captive there, just like the old infrastructure guys did. But now it's even worse because it's coupled back with the software to some degree, as well. And you have to use their storage, networking, and compute. It's not, I mean it fell back to the mainframe era. Anyhow, so I love the concept of supercloud. By the way, I was going to suggest that a better term might be hyper cloud since hyper speaks to the multidimensionality of it and the ability to be in a, you know, be in a different dimension, a different plane of existence kind of thing like hyperspace. But super and hyper are somewhat synonyms. I mean, you have hyper cars and you have super cars and blah, blah, blah. I happen to like hyper maybe also because it ties into the whole Hammerspace notion of a hyper-dimensional, you know, reality, having your data centers connected by a wormhole that is Hammerspace. But regardless, what I got challenged on is calling it something different at all versus simply saying, this is what cloud has always meant to be. This is the true cloud, this is real cloud, this is cloud. And I think back to what happened, you'll remember, at Fusion IO we talked about IO memory and we did that because people had a conceptualization of what an SSD was. And an SSD back then was low capacity, low endurance, made to go military, aerospace where things needed to be rugged but was completely useless in the data center. And we needed people to imagine this thing as being able to displace entire SAND, with the kind of capacity density, performance density, endurance. And so we talked IO memory, we could have said enterprise SSD, and that's what the industry now refers to for that concept. What will people be saying five and 10 years from now? Will they simply say, well this is cloud as it was always meant to be where you are truly able to run anything anywhere and have not only the same APIs, but you're same data available with high performance access, all forms of access, block file and object everywhere. So yeah. And I wonder, and this is just me throwing it out there, I wonder if, well, there's trade offs, right? Giving it a new moniker, supercloud, versus simply talking about how cloud is always intended to be and what it was meant to be, you know, the real cloud or true cloud, there are trade-offs. By putting a name on it and branding it, that lets people talk about it and understand they're talking about something different. But it also is that an affront to people who thought that that's what they already had. >> What's different, what's new? Yes, and so we've given a lot of thought to this. >> Right, it's like you. >> And it's because we've been asked that why does the industry need a new term, and we've tried to address some of that. But some of the inside baseball that we haven't shared is, you remember the Web 2.0, back then? >> Yep. >> Web 2.0 was the same thing. And I remember Tim Burners Lee saying, "Why do we need Web 2.0? "This is what the Web was always supposed to be." But the truth is-- >> I know, that was another perfect-- >> But the truth is it wasn't, number one. Number two, everybody hated the Web 2.0 term. John Furrier was actually in the middle of it all. And then it created this groundswell. So one of the things we wrote about is that supercloud is an evocative term that catalyzes debate and conversation, which is what we like, of course. And maybe that's self-serving. But yeah, HyperCloud, Metacloud, super, meaning, it's funny because super came from Latin supra, above, it was never the superlative. But the superlative was a convenient byproduct that caused a lot of friction and flack, which again, in the media business is like a perfect storm brewing. >> The bad thing to have to, and I think you do need to shake people out of their, the complacency of the limitations that they're used to. And I'll tell you what, the fact that you even have the terms hybrid cloud, multi-cloud, private cloud, edge computing, those are all just referring to the different boundaries that isolate the silo that is the current limited cloud. >> Right. >> So if I heard correctly, what just, in terms of us defining what is and what isn't in supercloud, you would say traditional applications which have to run in a certain place, in a certain cloud can't run anywhere else, would be the stuff that you would not put in as being addressed by supercloud. And over time, you would want to be able to run the data where you want to and in any of those concepts. >> Or even modern apps, right? Or even modern apps that are siloed in SAS within an individual cloud, right? >> So yeah, I guess it's twofold. Number one, if you're going at the high application layers, there's lots of ways that you can give the appearance of anything running anywhere. The ISV, the SAS vendor can engineer stuff to have the ability to serve with low enough latency to different geographies, right? So if you go too high up the stack, it kind of loses its meaning because there's lots of different ways to make due and give the appearance of omni-presence of the service. Okay? As you come down more towards the platform layer, it gets harder and harder to mask the fact that supercloud is something entirely different than just a good regionally-distributed SAS service. So I don't think you, I don't think you can distinguish supercloud if you go too high up the stack because it's just SAS, it's just a good SAS service where the SAS vendor has done the hard work to give you low latency access from different geographic regions. >> Yeah, so this is one of the hardest things, David. >> Common among them. >> Yeah, this is really an important point. This is one of the things I've had the most trouble with is why is this not just SAS? >> So you dilute your message when you go up to the SAS layer. If you were to focus most of this around the super pass layer, the how can you host applications and run them anywhere and not host this, not run a service, not have a service available everywhere. So how can you take any application, even applications that are written, you know, in a traditional legacy data center fashion and be able to run them anywhere and have them have their binaries and their datasets and the runtime environment and the infrastructure to start them and stop them? You know, the jobs, the, what the Kubernetes, the job scheduler? What we're really talking about here, what I think we're really talking about here is building the operating system for a decentralized cloud. What is the operating system, the operating environment for a decentralized cloud? Where you can, and that the main two functions of an operating system or an operating environment are the process scheduler, the thing that's scheduling what is running where and when and so forth, and the file system, right? The thing that's supplying a common view and access to data. So when we talk about this, I think that the strongest argument for supercloud is made when you go down to the platform layer and talk of it, talk about it as an operating environment on which you can run all forms of applications. >> Would you exclude--? >> Not a specific application that's been engineered as a SAS. (audio distortion) >> He'll come back. >> Are you there? >> Yeah, yeah, you just cut out for a minute. >> I lost your last statement when you broke up. >> We heard you, you said that not the specific application. So would you exclude Snowflake from supercloud? >> Frankly, I would. I would. Because, well, and this is kind of hard to do because Snowflake doesn't like to, Frank doesn't like to talk about Snowflake as a SAS service. It has a negative connotation. >> But it is. >> I know, we all know it is. We all know it is and because it is, yes, I would exclude them. >> I think I actually have him on camera. >> There's nothing in common. >> I think I have him on camera or maybe Benoit as saying, "Well, we are a SAS." I think it's Slootman. I think I said to Slootman, "I know you don't like to say you're a SAS." And I think he said, "Well, we are a SAS." >> Because again, if you go to the top of the application stack, there's any number of ways you can give it location agnostic function or you know, regional, local stuff. It's like let's solve the location problem by having me be your one location. How can it be decentralized if you're centralizing on (audio distortion)? >> Well, it's more decentralized than if it's all in one cloud. So let me actually, so the spectrum. So again, in the spirit of what is and what isn't, I think it's safe to say Hammerspace is supercloud. I think there's no debate there, right? Certainly among this crowd. And I think we can all agree that Dell, Dell Storage is not supercloud. Where it gets fuzzy is this Snowflake example or even, how about a, how about a Cohesity that instantiates its stack in different cloud regions in different clouds, and synchronizes, however magic sauce it does that. Is that a supercloud? I mean, so I'm cautious about having too strict of a definition 'cause then only-- >> Fair enough, fair enough. >> But I could use your help and thoughts on that. >> So I think we're talking about two different spectrums here. One is the spectrum of platform to application-specific. As you go up the application stack and it becomes this specific thing. Or you go up to the more and more structured where it's serving a specific application function where it's more of a SAS thing. I think it's harder to call a SAS service a supercloud. And I would argue that the reason there, and what you're lacking in the definition is to talk about it as general purpose. Okay? Now, that said, a data warehouse is general purpose at the structured data level. So you could make the argument for why Snowflake is a supercloud by saying that it is a general purpose platform for doing lots of different things. It's just one at a higher level up at the structured data level. So one spectrum is the high level going from platform to, you know, unstructured data to structured data to very application-specific, right? Like a specific, you know, CAD/CAM mechanical design cloud, like an Autodesk would want to give you their cloud for running, you know, and sharing CAD/CAM designs, doing your CAD/CAM anywhere stuff. Well, the other spectrum is how well does the purported supercloud technology actually live up to allowing you to run anything anywhere with not just the same APIs but with the local presence of data with the exact same runtime environment everywhere, and to be able to correctly manage how to get that runtime environment anywhere. So a Cohesity has some means of running things in different places and some means of coordinating what's where and of serving diff, you know, things in different places. I would argue that it is a very poor approximation of what Hammerspace does in providing the exact same file system with local high performance access everywhere with metadata ability to control where the data is actually instantiated so that you don't have to wait for it to get orchestrated. But even then when you do have to wait for it, it happens automatically and so it's still only a matter of, well, how quick is it? And on the other end of the spectrum is you could look at NetApp with Flexcache and say, "Is that supercloud?" And I would argue, well kind of because it allows you to run things in different places because it's a cache. But you know, it really isn't because it presumes some central silo from which you're cacheing stuff. So, you know, is it or isn't it? Well, it's on a spectrum of exactly how fully is it decoupling a runtime environment from specific locality? And I think a cache doesn't, it stretches a specific silo and makes it have some semblance of similar access in other places. But there's still a very big difference to the central silo, right? You can't turn off that central silo, for example. >> So it comes down to how specific you make the definition. And this is where it gets kind of really interesting. It's like cloud. Does IBM have a cloud? >> Exactly. >> I would say yes. Does it have the kind of quality that you would expect from a hyper-scale cloud? No. Or see if you could say the same thing about-- >> But that's a problem with choosing a name. That's the problem with choosing a name supercloud versus talking about the concept of cloud and how true up you are to that concept. >> For sure. >> Right? Because without getting a name, you don't have to draw, yeah. >> I'd like to explore one particular or bring them together. You made a very interesting observation that from a enterprise point of view, they want to safeguard their store, their data, and they want to make sure that they can have that data running in their own workflows, as well as, as other service providers providing services to them for that data. So, and in in particular, if you go back to, you go back to Snowflake. If Snowflake could provide the ability for you to have your data where you wanted, you were in charge of that, would that make Snowflake a supercloud? >> I'll tell you, in my mind, they would be closer to my conceptualization of supercloud if you can instantiate Snowflake as software on your own infrastructure, and pump your own data to Snowflake that's instantiated on your own infrastructure. The fact that it has to be on their infrastructure or that it's on their, that it's on their account in the cloud, that you're giving them the data and they're, that fundamentally goes against it to me. If they, you know, they would be a pure, a pure plate if they were a software defined thing where you could instantiate Snowflake machinery on the infrastructure of your choice and then put your data into that machinery and get all the benefits of Snowflake. >> So did you see--? >> In other words, if they were not a SAS service, but offered all of the similar benefits of being, you know, if it were a service that you could run on your own infrastructure. >> So did you see what they announced, that--? >> I hope that's making sense. >> It does, did you see what they announced at Dell? They basically announced the ability to take non-native Snowflake data, read it in from an object store on-prem, like a Dell object store. They do the same thing with Pure, read it in, running it in the cloud, and then push it back out. And I was saying to Dell, look, that's fine. Okay, that's interesting. You're taking a materialized view or an extended table, whatever you're doing, wouldn't it be more interesting if you could actually run the query locally with your compute? That would be an extension that would actually get my attention and extend that. >> That is what I'm talking about. That's what I'm talking about. And that's why I'm saying I think Hammerspace is more progressive on that front because with our technology, anybody who can instantiate a service, can make a service. And so I, so MSPs can use Hammerspace as a way to build a super pass layer and host their clients on their infrastructure in a cloud-like fashion. And their clients can have their own private data centers and the MSP or the public clouds, and Hammerspace can be instantiated, get this, by different parties in these different pieces of infrastructure and yet linked together to make a common file system across all of it. >> But this is data mesh. If I were HPE and Dell it's exactly what I'd be doing. I'd be working with Hammerspace to create my own data. I'd work with Databricks, Snowflake, and any other-- >> Data mesh is a good way to put it. Data mesh is a good way to put it. And this is at the lowest level of, you know, the underlying file system that's mountable by the operating system, consumed as a real file system. You can't get lower level than that. That's why this is the foundation for all of the other apps and structured data systems because you need to have a data mesh that can at least mesh the binary blob. >> Okay. >> That hold the binaries and that hold the datasets that those applications are running. >> So David, in the third week of January, we're doing supercloud 2 and I'm trying to convince John Furrier to make it a data slash data mesh edition. I'm slowly getting him to the knothole. I would very much, I mean you're in the Bay Area, I'd very much like you to be one of the headlines. As Zhamak Dehghaniis going to speak, she's the creator of Data Mesh, >> Sure. >> I'd love to have you come into our studio as well, for the live session. If you can't make it, we can pre-record. But you're right there, so I'll get you the dates. >> We'd love to, yeah. No, you can count on it. No, definitely. And you know, we don't typically talk about what we do as Data Mesh. We've been, you know, using global data environment. But, you know, under the covers, that's what the thing is. And so yeah, I think we can frame the discussion like that to line up with other, you know, with the other discussions. >> Yeah, and Data Mesh, of course, is one of those evocative names, but she has come up with some very well defined principles around decentralized data, data as products, self-serve infrastructure, automated governance, and and so forth, which I think your vision plugs right into. And she's brilliant. You'll love meeting her. >> Well, you know, and I think.. Oh, go ahead. Go ahead, Peter. >> Just like to work one other interface which I think is important. How do you see yourself and the open source? You talked about having an operating system. Obviously, Linux is the operating system at one level. How are you imagining that you would interface with cost community as part of this development? >> Well, it's funny you ask 'cause my CTO is the kernel maintainer of the storage networking stack. So how the Linux operating system perceives and consumes networked data at the file system level, the network file system stack is his purview. He owns that, he wrote most of it over the last decade that he's been the maintainer, but he's the gatekeeper of what goes in. And we have leveraged his abilities to enhance Linux to be able to use this decentralized data, in particular with decoupling the control plane driven by metadata from the data access path and the many storage systems on which the data gets accessed. So this factoring, this splitting of control plane from data path, metadata from data, was absolutely necessary to create a data mesh like we're talking about. And to be able to build this supercloud concept. And the highways on which the data runs and the client which knows how to talk to it is all open source. And we have, we've driven the NFS 4.2 spec. The newest NFS spec came from my team. And it was specifically the enhancements needed to be able to build a spanning file system, a data mesh at a file system level. Now that said, our file system itself and our server, our file server, our data orchestration, our data management stuff, that's all closed source, proprietary Hammerspace tech. But the highways on which the mesh connects are actually all open source and the client that knows how to consume it. So we would, honestly, I would welcome competitors using those same highways. They would be at a major disadvantage because we kind of built them, but it would still be very validating and I think only increase the potential adoption rate by more than whatever they might take of the market. So it'd actually be good to split the market with somebody else to come in and share those now super highways for how to mesh data at the file system level, you know, in here. So yeah, hopefully that answered your question. Does that answer the question about how we embrace the open source? >> Right, and there was one other, just that my last one is how do you enable something to run in every environment? And if we take the edge, for example, as being, as an environment which is much very, very compute heavy, but having a lot less capability, how do you do a hold? >> Perfect question. Perfect question. What we do today is a software appliance. We are using a Linux RHEL 8, RHEL 8 equivalent or a CentOS 8, or it's, you know, they're all roughly equivalent. But we have bundled and a software appliance which can be instantiated on bare metal hardware on any type of VM system from VMware to all of the different hypervisors in the Linux world, to even Nutanix and such. So it can run in any virtualized environment and it can run on any cloud instance, server instance in the cloud. And we have it packaged and deployable from the marketplaces within the different clouds. So you can literally spin it up at the click of an API in the cloud on instances in the cloud. So with all of these together, you can basically instantiate a Hammerspace set of machinery that can offer up this file system mesh. like we've been using the terminology we've been using now, anywhere. So it's like being able to take and spin up Snowflake and then just be able to install and run some VMs anywhere you want and boom, now you have a Snowflake service. And by the way, it is so complete that some of our customers, I would argue many aren't even using public clouds at all, they're using this just to run their own data centers in a cloud-like fashion, you know, where they have a data service that can span it all. >> Yeah and to Molly's first point, we would consider that, you know, cloud. Let me put you on the spot. If you had to describe conceptually without a chalkboard what an architectural diagram would look like for supercloud, what would you say? >> I would say it's to have the same runtime environment within every data center and defining that runtime environment as what it takes to schedule the execution of applications, so job scheduling, runtime stuff, and here we're talking Kubernetes, Slurm, other things that do job scheduling. We're talking about having a common way to, you know, instantiate compute resources. So a global compute environment, having a common compute environment where you can instantiate things that need computing. Okay? So that's the first part. And then the second is the data platform where you can have file block and object volumes, and have them available with the same APIs in each of these distributed data centers and have the exact same data omnipresent with the ability to control where the data is from one moment to the next, local, where all the data is instantiate. So my definition would be a common runtime environment that's bifurcate-- >> Oh. (attendees chuckling) We just lost them at the money slide. >> That's part of the magic makes people listen. We keep someone on pin and needles waiting. (attendees chuckling) >> That's good. >> Are you back, David? >> I'm on the edge of my seat. Common runtime environment. It was like... >> And just wait, there's more. >> But see, I'm maybe hyper-focused on the lower level of what it takes to host and run applications. And that's the stuff to schedule what resources they need to run and to get them going and to get them connected through to their persistence, you know, and their data. And to have that data available in all forms and have it be the same data everywhere. On top of that, you could then instantiate applications of different types, including relational databases, and data warehouses and such. And then you could say, now I've got, you know, now I've got these more application-level or structured data-level things. I tend to focus less on that structured data level and the application level and am more focused on what it takes to host any of them generically on that super pass layer. And I'll admit, I'm maybe hyper-focused on the pass layer and I think it's valid to include, you know, higher levels up the stack like the structured data level. But as soon as you go all the way up to like, you know, a very specific SAS service, I don't know that you would call that supercloud. >> Well, and that's the question, is there value? And Marianna Tessel from Intuit said, you know, we looked at it, we did it, and it just, it was actually negative value for us because connecting to all these separate clouds was a real pain in the neck. Didn't bring us any additional-- >> Well that's 'cause they don't have this pass layer underneath it so they can't even shop around, which actually makes it hard to stand up your own SAS service. And ultimately they end up having to build their own infrastructure. Like, you know, I think there's been examples like Netflix moving away from the cloud to their own infrastructure. Basically, if you're going to rent it for more than a few months, it makes sense to build it yourself, if it's at any kind of scale. >> Yeah, for certain components of that cloud. But if the Goldman Sachs came to you, David, and said, "Hey, we want to collaborate and we want to build "out a cloud and essentially build our SAS system "and we want to do that with Hammerspace, "and we want to tap the physical infrastructure "of not only our data centers but all the clouds," then that essentially would be a SAS, would it not? And wouldn't that be a Super SAS or a supercloud? >> Well, you know, what they may be using to build their service is a supercloud, but their service at the end of the day is just a SAS service with global reach. Right? >> Yeah. >> You know, look at, oh shoot. What's the name of the company that does? It has a cloud for doing bookkeeping and accounting. I forget their name, net something. NetSuite. >> NetSuite. NetSuite, yeah, Oracle. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Oracle acquired them, right? Is NetSuite a supercloud or is it just a SAS service? You know? I think under the covers you might ask are they using supercloud under the covers so that they can run their SAS service anywhere and be able to shop the venue, get elasticity, get all the benefits of cloud in the, to the benefit of their service that they're offering? But you know, folks who consume the service, they don't care because to them they're just connecting to some endpoint somewhere and they don't have to care. So the further up the stack you go, the more location-agnostic it is inherently anyway. >> And I think it's, paths is really the critical layer. We thought about IAS Plus and we thought about SAS Minus, you know, Heroku and hence, that's why we kind of got caught up and included it. But SAS, I admit, is the hardest one to crack. And so maybe we exclude that as a deployment model. >> That's right, and maybe coming down a level to saying but you can have a structured data supercloud, so you could still include, say, Snowflake. Because what Snowflake is doing is more general purpose. So it's about how general purpose it is. Is it hosting lots of other applications or is it the end application? Right? >> Yeah. >> So I would argue general purpose nature forces you to go further towards platform down-stack. And you really need that general purpose or else there is no real distinguishing. So if you want defensible turf to say supercloud is something different, I think it's important to not try to wrap your arms around SAS in the general sense. >> Yeah, and we've kind of not really gone, leaned hard into SAS, we've just included it as a deployment model, which, given the constraints that you just described for structured data would apply if it's general purpose. So David, super helpful. >> Had it sign. Define the SAS as including the hybrid model hold SAS. >> Yep. >> Okay, so with your permission, I'm going to add you to the list of contributors to the definition. I'm going to add-- >> Absolutely. >> I'm going to add this in. I'll share with Molly. >> Absolutely. >> We'll get on the calendar for the date. >> If Molly can share some specific language that we've been putting in that kind of goes to stuff we've been talking about, so. >> Oh, great. >> I think we can, we can share some written kind of concrete recommendations around this stuff, around the general purpose, nature, the common data thing and yeah. >> Okay. >> Really look forward to it and would be glad to be part of this thing. You said it's in February? >> It's in January, I'll let Molly know. >> Oh, January. >> What the date is. >> Excellent. >> Yeah, third week of January. Third week of January on a Tuesday, whatever that is. So yeah, we would welcome you in. But like I said, if it doesn't work for your schedule, we can prerecord something. But it would be awesome to have you in studio. >> I'm sure with this much notice we'll be able to get something. Let's make sure we have the dates communicated to Molly and she'll get my admin to set it up outside so that we have it. >> I'll get those today to you, Molly. Thank you. >> By the way, I am so, so pleased with being able to work with you guys on this. I think the industry needs it very bad. They need something to break them out of the box of their own mental constraints of what the cloud is versus what it's supposed to be. And obviously, the more we get people to question their reality and what is real, what are we really capable of today that then the more business that we're going to get. So we're excited to lend the hand behind this notion of supercloud and a super pass layer in whatever way we can. >> Awesome. >> Can I ask you whether your platforms include ARM as well as X86? >> So we have not done an ARM port yet. It has been entertained and won't be much of a stretch. >> Yeah, it's just a matter of time. >> Actually, entertained doing it on behalf of NVIDIA, but it will absolutely happen because ARM in the data center I think is a foregone conclusion. Well, it's already there in some cases, but not quite at volume. So definitely will be the case. And I'll tell you where this gets really interesting, discussion for another time, is back to my old friend, the SSD, and having SSDs that have enough brains on them to be part of that fabric. Directly. >> Interesting. Interesting. >> Very interesting. >> Directly attached to ethernet and able to create a data mesh global file system, that's going to be really fascinating. Got to run now. >> All right, hey, thanks you guys. Thanks David, thanks Molly. Great to catch up. Bye-bye. >> Bye >> Talk to you soon.

>>Welcome back everyone to the cubes coverage here live in San Francisco for VMware Explorer. Formerly got it. World. We've been to every world since 2010. Now is VMware Explorer. I'm John furier host with Dave ante with Dave lium here. He's the chief cloud strategy officer at Deloitte. Welcome to the cube. Thanks for coming on. Appreciate your time. >>Thanks for having me. It's >>Epic keynote today on stage all seven minutes of your great seven minutes >>Performance discussion. Yes. Very, very, very, very quick to the order. I brought everybody up to speed and left. >>Well, Dave's great to have you on the cube one. We follow your work. We've been following for a long time. Thank you. A lot of web services, a lot of SOA, kind of in your background, kind of the old web services, AI, you know, samples, RSS, web services, all that good stuff. Now it's, it's now we're in kind of web services on steroids. Cloud came it's here. We're NextGen. You wrote a great story on Metacloud. You've been following the Supercloud with Dave. Does VMware have it right? >>Yeah, they do. Because I'll tell you what the market is turning toward. Anything that sit above and between the clouds. So things that don't exist in the hyperscaler, things that provide common services above the cloud providers are where the growth's gonna happen. We haven't really solved that problem yet. And so there's lots of operational aspects, security aspects, and the ability to have some sort of a brokering service that'll scale. So multi-cloud, which is their strategy here is not about cloud it's about things that exist in between cloud and making those things work. So getting to another layer of abstraction and automation to finally allow us to make use out of all these hyperscaler services that we're signing on today. Dave, >>Remember the old days back in the eighties, when we were young bucks coming into the business, the interoperability wave was coming. Remember that? Oh yeah, I got a deck mini computer. I got an IBM was gonna solve that unex. And then, you know, this other thing over here and lands and all and everything started getting into this whole, okay. Networking. Wasn't just coax. You started to see segment segments. Interoperability was a huge, what 10 year run. It feels like that's kind of like the vibe going on here. >>Yeah. We're not focused on having these things interop operate onto themselves. So what we're doing is putting a layer of things which allows them to interop operate. That's a different, that's a different problem to solve. And it's also solvable. We were talking about getting all these very distinct proprietary systems to communicate one to another and interate one to another. And that never really happened. Right? Cause you gotta get them to agree on interfaces and protocols. But if you put a layer above it, they can talk down to whatever native interfaces that are there and deal with the differences between the heterogeneity and abstract yourself in the complexity. And that's, that's kind of the different that works. The ability to kind of get everybody, you know, clunk their heads together and make them work together. That doesn't seem to scale couple >>And, and people gotta be motivated for that. Not many people might not >>Has me money. In other words has to be a business for them in doing so. >>A couple things I wanna follow up on from work, you know, this morning they used the term cloud chaos. When you talk to customers, you know, when they have multiple clouds, do they, are they saying to you, Hey, we have cloud chaos are, do they have cloud chaos? And they don't know it or do they not have cloud chaos? What's the mix. >>Yeah. I don't think the word chaos is used that much, but they do tell me they're hitting a complexity wall, which you do here out there as a term. So in other words, they're getting to a point where they can't scale operations to deal with a complexity and heterogeneity that they're, that they're bringing into the organization because using multiple clouds. So that is chaotic. So I guess that, you know, it is another way to name complexity. So there's so many services are moving from a thousand cloud services, under management to 3000 cloud services under management. They don't have the operational team, the skill, skill levels to do it. They don't have the tooling to do it. That's a wall. And you have to be able to figure out how to get beyond that wall to make those things work. So >>When, when we had our conversation about Metacloud and Supercloud, we we've, I think very much aligned in our thinking. And so now you've got this situation where you've got these abstraction layers, but, and there, but my question is, are we gonna have multiple abstraction layers? And will they talk to each other or are standards emerging? Will they be able to, >>No, we can't have multiple abstraction layers else. We just, we don't solve the problem. We go from complexity of exists at the native cloud levels to complexity of exists, that this thing we're dealing with to deal with complexity. So if you do that, we're screwing up. We have to go back and fix it. So ultimately this is about having common services, common security, layers, common operational layers, and things like that that are really reduced redundancy within the system. So instead of having a, you know, five different security layers and five different cloud providers, we're layering one and providing management and orchestration capabilities to make that happen. If we don't do that, we're not succeeding. >>What do you think about the marketplace? I know there's a lot of things going on that are happening around this. Wanna get your thoughts on obviously the industry dynamics, vendors preserving their future. And then you've got customers who have been leveraging the CapEx, goodness of say Amazon and then have to solve their whole distributed environment problem. So when you look at this, is it really solving? Is it is the order of operations first common layer abstraction because you know, it seems like the vendor, I won't say desperation move, but like their first move is we're gonna be the control plane or, you know, I think Cisco has a vision in their mind that no, no we're gonna have that management plane. I've heard a lot of people talking about, we're gonna be the management interface into something. How do you see that playing out? Because the order of operations to do the abstraction is to get consensus, right, right. First not competition. Right. So how do you see that? What's your reaction to that? And what's your observation. >>I think it's gonna be tough for the people who are supplying the underlying services to also be the orchestration and abstraction layers, because they're, they're kind of conflicted in making that happen. In other words, it's not in their best interest to make all these things work and interoperate one to another, but it's their best interest to provide, provide a service that everybody's going to leverage. So I see the layers here. I'm certainly the hyperscalers are gonna play in those layers and then they're welcome to play in those layers. They may come up with a solution that everybody picks, but ultimately it's about independence and your ability to have an objective way of, of allowing all these things to communicate together and driving this, driving this stuff together, to reduce the complexity again, to reduce. >>So a network box, for instance, maybe have hooks into it, but not try to dominate it >>Or that's right. Yeah, that's right. I think if you're trying to own everything and I get that a lot when I write about Supercloud and, and Metacloud they go, well, we're the Metacloud, we're the Supercloud you can't be other ones. That's a huge problem to solve. I know you don't have a solution for that. Okay. It's gonna be many different products to make that happen. And the reality is people who actually make that work are gonna have to be interdependent independent of the various underlying services. They're gonna, they can support them, but they really can't be them. They have to be an interate interop. They have to interoperate with those services. >>Do you, do you see like a w three C model, like the worldwide web consortium, remember that came out around 96, came to the us and MIT and then helped for some of those early standards in, in, in the internet, not DNS, but like the web, but DNS was already there and internet was already there, but like the web standards HTML kind of had, I think wasn't really hardcore get you in the headlock, but at least it was some sort of group that said, Hey, intellectually be honest, you see that happening in this area. >>I hope not. And here's >>Why not. >>Yeah. >>Here's, here's why the reality is is that when these consortiums come into play, it freezes the market. Everybody waits for the consortium to come up with some sort of a solution that's gonna save the world. And that solution never comes because you can't get these organizations through committee to figure out some sort of a technology stack that's gonna be working. So I'd rather see the market figure that out. Not a consortium when >>I, you mean the ecosystem, not some burning Bush. >>Yeah. Not some burning Bush. And it just hasn't worked. I mean, if it worked, it'd be great. And >>We had a, an event on August 9th, it was super cloud 22 and we had a security securing the super cloud panel. And one of my was a great conversation as you remember, John, but it was kind of depressing in that, like we're never gonna solve this problem. So what are you seeing in the security front? You know, it seems to like that's a main blocker to the Metacloud the Supercloud >>Yeah. The reality is you can't build all the security services in, in the Metacloud. You have to basically leverage the security services on the native cloud and leverage them as they exist. So this idea that we're gonna replace all of these security services with one layer of abstraction, that's gonna provide the services. So you don't need these underlying security systems that won't work. You have to leverage the native security systems, native governance, native operating interfaces, native APIs of all the various native clouds using the terms that they're looking to leverage. And that's the mistake. I think people are going to make, you don't need to replace something that's working. You just may need to make it easier to >>Use. Let's ask Dave about the, sort of the discussion that was on Twitter this morning. So when VMware announced their, you know, cross cloud services and, and the whole new Tansu one, three, and, and, and, and aria, there was a little chatter on Twitter basically saying, yeah, but VMware they'll never win the developers. And John came and said, well, hi, hang on. You know, if, if you've got open tools and you're embracing those, it's really about the ops and having standards on the op side. And so my question to you is, does VMware, that's >>Not exactly what I said, but close enough, >>Sorry. I mean, I'm paraphrasing. You can fine tune it, but, but does VMware have to win the developers or are they focused on kind of the right areas that whole, you know, op side of DevOps >>Focused on the op side, cuz that's the harder problem to solve. Developers are gonna use whatever tools they need to use to build these applications and roll them out. And they're gonna change all the time. In other words, they're gonna change the tools and technologies to do it in the supply chain. The ops problem is the harder problem to solve the ability to get these things working together and, and running at a certain point of reliability where the failure's not gonna be there. And I think that's gonna be the harder issue and doing that without complexity. >>Yeah. That's the multi-cloud challenge right there. I agree. The question I want to also pivot on that is, is that as we look at some of the reporting we've done and interviews, data and security really are hard areas. People are tune tuning up DevOps in the developer S booming, everyone's going fast, fast and loose. Shifting left, all that stuff's happening. Open source, booming Toga party. Everyone's partying ops is struggling to level up. So I guess the question is what's the order of operations from a customer. So a lot of customers have lifted and shift. The, some are going all in on say, AWS, yeah, I got a little hedge with Azure, but I'm not gonna do a full development team. As you talk to customers, cuz they're the ones deploying the clouds that want to get there, right? What's the order of operations to do it properly in your mind. And what's your advice as you look at as a strategy to, to do it, right? I mean, is there a playbook or some sort of situational, you know, sequence, >>Yes. One that works consistently is number one, you think about operations up front and if you can't solve operations, you have no business rolling out other applications and other databases that quite frankly can't be operated and that's how people are getting into trouble. So in other words, if you get into these very complex architectures, which is what a multicloud is, complex distributed system. Yeah. And you don't have an understanding of how you're gonna operationalize that system at scale, then you have no business in building the system. You have no business of going in a multicloud because you are going to run into that wall and it's gonna lead to a, an outage it's gonna lead to a breach or something that's gonna be company killing. >>So a lot of that's cultural, right. Having, having the cultural fortitude to say, we're gonna start there. We're gonna enforce these standards. >>That's what John CLE said. Yeah. CLE is famous line. >>Yeah, you're right. You're right. So, so, so what happens if the, if that as a consultant, if you, you probably have to insist on that first, right? Or, I mean, I don't know, you probably still do the engagement, but you, you're gonna be careful about promising an outcome aren't you, >>You're gonna have to insist on the fact they're gonna have to do some advanced planning and come up with a very rigorous way in which they're gonna roll it out. And the reality is if they're not doing that, then the advice would be you're gonna fail. So it's not a matter of when it's, when it's gonna happen. We're gonna, but at some point you're gonna fail either. Number one, you're gonna actually fail in some sort of a big disastrous event or more likely or not. You're gonna end up building something that's gonna cost you $10 million more a month to run and it's gonna be underoptimized. And is >>That effective when you, when you say that to a client or they say, okay, but, or do they say yes, you're >>Right. I view my role as a, someone like a doctor and a lawyer. You may not want to hear what I'm telling you. But the thing is, if I don't tell you the truth and I'm not doing my job as a trusted advisor. And so they'll never get anything but that from us, you know, as a firm and the reality is they can make their own decisions and will have to help them, whatever path they want to go. But we're making the warnings in place to make. >>And, and also also situationally it's IQ driven. Are they ready? What's their makeup. Are they have the kind of talent to execute. And there's a lot of unbeliev me. I totally think agree with on the op side, I think that's right on the money. The question I want to ask you is, okay, assume that someone has the right makeup of team. They got some badass people in there, coding away, DevOps, SREs, you name it. Everyone lined up platform teams, as they said today on stage, all that stuff. What's the CXO conversation at the boardroom that you, you have around business strategy. Cuz if you assume that cloud is here and you do things right and you get the right advisors in the next step is what does it transform my business into? Because you're talking about a fully digitalized business that converges it's not just, it helps you run an app back office with some terminal it's full blown business edge app business model innovation is it that the company becomes a cloud on their own and they have scale. And they're the super cloud of their category servicing a power law of second place, third place, SMB market. So I mean, Goldman Sachs could be the service provider cloud for financial services maybe. Or is that the dream? What, what's the dream for the, the, the CXO staff take us through the, >>What they're trying to do is get a level of automation with every able to leverage best breed technology to be as innovative as they possibly can. Using an architecture that's near a hundred percent optimized. It'll never be a hundred percent optimized. Therefore it's able to run, bring the best value to the business for the least amount of money. That's the big thing. If they want to become a cloud, that's, that's not a, not necessarily a good idea. If they're finance company be a finance company, just build these innovations around how to make a finance company be innovative and different for them. So they can be a disruptor without being disrupted. I see where see a lot of companies right now, they're gonna be exposed in the next 10 years because a lot of these smaller companies are able to weaponize technology to bring them to the next level, digital transformations, whatever, to create a business value. That's gonna be more compelling than the existing player >>Because they're on the CapEx back of Amazon or some technical innovation. Is that what the smaller guys, what's the, what's the lever that beats the >>It's the ability to use whatever technology you need to solve your issues. So in other words, I can use anything that exists on the cloud because it's part of the multi-cloud I'm I able to find the services that I need, the best AI system, the best database systems, the fastest transaction processing system, and assemble these syncs together to solve more innovative problems in my competitor. If I'm able to do that, I'm gonna win the game. So >>It's a buffet of technology. Pick your yes, your meal, come on, >>Case spray something, this operations, first thing in my head, remember Alan NA, when he came in the Cub and he said, listen, if you're gonna do cloud, you better change the operating model or you you're gonna make, you know, you'll drop millions to the bottom line. He was at CIO of Phillips at the time. You're not gonna drop billions. And it's all about, you know, the zeros, right? So do you find yourself in a lot of cases, sort of helping people rearchitect their operating model as a function of, of, of what cloud can, can enable? >>Yeah. Every, every engagement that we go into has operating model change op model changes, and typically it's gonna be major surgery. And so it's re reevaluating the skill sets, reevaluating, the operating model, reevaluating the culture. In fact, we have a team of people who come in and that's all they focus on. And so it used to be just kind of an afterthought. We'd put this together, oh, by the way, I think you need to do this and this and this. And here's what we recommend you do. But people who can go in and get cultural changes going get the operating models systems, going to get to the folks where they're gonna be successful with it. Reality. If you don't do that, you're gonna fail because you're not gonna have the ability to adapt to a cloud-based a cloud-based infrastructure. You can leverage this scale. >>David's like a masterclass here on the cube at VMware explore. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for spending the valuable time. Just what's going on in your world right now, take a quick minute to plug what's going on with you. What are you working on? What are you excited about? What what's happening, >>Loving life. I'm just running around doing, doing things like this, doing a lot of speaking, you know, still have the blog on in info world and have that for the last 12 years and just loving the fact that we're innovating and changing the world. And I'm trying to help as many people as I can, as quickly as I can. What's >>The coolest thing you've seen this year in terms of cloud kind of either weirdness coolness or something that made you fall outta your chair. Wow. That >>Was cool. I think the AI capabilities and application of AI, I'm just seeing use cases in there that we never would've thought about the ability to identify patterns that we couldn't identify in the past and do so for, for the good, I've been an AI analyst. It was my first job outta college and I'm 60 years old. So it's, it's matured enough where it actually impresses me. And so we're seeing applications >>Right now. That's NLP anymore. Is it? >>No, no, not list. That's what I was doing, but it's, we're able to take this technology to the next level and do, do a lot of good with it. And I think that's what just kind of blows me on the wall. >>Ah, I wish we had 20 more minutes, >>You know, one, one more masterclass sound bite. So we all kind of have kids in college, David and I both do young ones in college. If you're coming outta college, CS degree or any kind of smart degree, and you have the plethora of now what's coming tools and unlimited ways to kind of clean canvas up application, start something. What would you do if you were like 22? Right now, >>I would focus on being a multi-cloud architect. And I would learn a little about everything. Learn a little about at the various cloud providers. And I would focus on building complex distributed systems and architecting those systems. I would learn about how all these things kind of kind of run together. Don't learn a particular technology because that technology will ultimately go away. It'll be displaced by something else, learn holistically what the technologies is able to do and become the orchestrator of that technology. It's a harder problem to solve, but you'll get paid more for it. And it'll be more fun job. >>Just thinking big picture, big >>Picture, how everything comes together. True architecture >>Problems. All right, Dave is on the queue masterclass here on the cube. Bucha for Dave ante Explorer, 2022. Live back with our next segment. After this short break.

(bright music) >> "Supermetafragilisticexpialadotious." What's in a name? In an homage to the inimitable Charles Fitzgerald, we've chosen this title for today's session because of all the buzz surrounding "supercloud," a term that we introduced last year to signify a major architectural trend and shift that's occurring in the technology industry. Since that time, we've published numerous videos and articles on the topic, and on August 9th, kicked off "Supercloud22," an open industry event designed to advance the supercloud conversation, gathering input from more than 30 experienced technologists and business leaders in "The Cube" and broader technology community. We're talking about individuals like Benoit Dageville, Kit Colbert, Ali Ghodsi, Mohit Aron, David McJannet, and dozens of other experts. And today, we're pleased to welcome David Linthicum, who's a Chief Strategy Officer of Cloud Services at Deloitte Consulting. David is a technology visionary, a technical CTO. He's an author and a frequently sought after keynote speaker at high profile conferences like "VMware Explore" next week. David Linthicum, welcome back to "The Cube." Good to see you again. >> Oh, it's great to be here. Thanks for the invitation. Thanks for having me. >> Yeah, you're very welcome. Okay, so this topic of supercloud, what you call metacloud, has created a lot of interest. VMware calls it cross-cloud services, Snowflake calls it their data cloud, there's a lot of different names, but recently, you published a piece in "InfoWorld" where you said the following. "I really don't care what we call it, "and I really don't care if I put "my own buzzword into the mix. "However, this does not change the fact "that metacloud is perhaps the most important "architectural evolution occurring right now, "and we need to get this right out of the gate. "If we do that, who cares what it's named?" So very cool. And you also mentioned in a recent article that you don't like to put out new terms out in the wild without defining them. So what is a metacloud, or what we call supercloud? What's your definition? >> Yeah, and again, I don't care what people call it. The reality is it's the ability to have a layer of cross-cloud services. It sits above existing public cloud providers. So the idea here is that instead of building different security systems, different governance systems, different operational systems in each specific cloud provider, using whatever native features they provide, we're trying to do that in a cross-cloud way. So in other words, we're pushing out data integration, security, all these other things that we have to take care of as part of deploying a particular cloud provider. And in a multicloud scenario, we're building those in and between the clouds. And so we've been tracking this for about five years. We understood that multicloud is not necessarily about the particular public cloud providers, it's about things that you build in and between the clouds. >> Got it, okay. So I want to come back to that, to the definition, but I want to tie us to the so-called multicloud. You guys did a survey recently. We've said that multicloud was mostly a symptom of multi-vendor, Shadow Cloud, M&A, and only recently has become a strategic imperative. Now, Deloitte published a survey recently entitled "Closing the Cloud Strategy, Technology, Innovation Gap," and I'd like to explore that a little bit. And so in that survey, you showed data. What I liked about it is you went beyond what we all know, right? The old, "Our research shows that on average, "X number of clouds are used at an individual company." I mean, you had that too, but you really went deeper. You identified why companies are using multiple clouds, and you developed different categories of practitioners across 500 survey respondents. But the reasons were very clear for "why multicloud," as this becomes more strategic. Service choice scale, negotiating leverage, improved business resiliency, minimizing lock-in, interoperability of data, et cetera. So my question to you, David, is what's the problem supercloud or metacloud solves, and what's different from multicloud? >> That's a great question. The reality is that if we're... Well, supercloud or metacloud, whatever, is really something that exists above a multicloud, but I kind of view them as the same thing. It's an architectural pattern. We can name it anything. But the reality is that if we're moving to these multicloud environments, we're doing so to leverage best of breed things. In other words, best of breed technology to provide the innovators within the company to take the business to the next level, and we determine that in the survey. And so if we're looking at what a multicloud provides, it's the ability to provide different choices of different services or piece parts that allows us to build anything that we need to do. And so what we found in the survey and what we found in just practice in dealing with our clients is that ultimately, the value of cloud computing is going to be the innovation aspects. In other words, the ability to take the company to the next level from being more innovative and more disruptive in the marketplace that they're in. And the only way to do that, instead of basically leveraging the services of a particular walled garden of a single public cloud provider, is to cast a wider net and get out and leverage all kinds of services to make these happen. So if you think about that, that's basically how multicloud has evolved. In other words, it wasn't planned. They didn't say, "We're going to go do a multicloud." It was different developers and innovators in the company that went off and leveraged these cloud services, sometimes with the consent of IT leadership, sometimes not. And now we have these multitudes of different services that we're leveraging. And so many of these enterprises are going from 1000 to, say, 3000 services under management. That creates a complexity problem. We have a problem of heterogeneity, different platforms, different tools, different services, different AI technology, database technology, things like that. So the metacloud, or the supercloud, or whatever you want to call it, is the ability to deal with that complexity on the complexity's terms. And so instead of building all these various things that we have to do individually in each of the cloud providers, we're trying to do so within a cross-cloud service layer. We're trying to create this layer of technology, which removes us from dealing with the complexity of the underlying multicloud services and makes it manageable. Because right now, I think we're getting to a point of complexity we just can't operate it at the budgetary limits that we are right now. We can't keep the number of skills around, the number of operators around, to keep these things going. We're going to have to get creative in terms of how we manage these things, how we manage a multicloud. And that's where the supercloud, metacloud, whatever they want to call it, comes that. >> Yeah, and as John Furrier likes to say, in IT, we tend to solve complexity with more complexity, and that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about simplifying, and you talked about the abstraction layer, and then it sounds like I'm inferring more. There's value that's added on top of that. And then you also said the hyperscalers are in a walled garden. So I've been asked, why aren't the hyperscalers superclouds? And I've said, essentially, they want to put your data into their cloud and keep it there. Now, that doesn't mean they won't eventually get into that. We've seen examples a little bit, Outposts, Anthos, Azure Arc, but the hyperscalers really aren't building superclouds or metaclouds, at least today, are they? >> No, they're not. And I always have the predictions for every major cloud conference that this is the conference that the hyperscaler is going to figure out some sort of a multicloud across-cloud strategy. In other words, building services that are able to operate across clouds. That really has never happened. It has happened in dribs and drabs, and you just mentioned a few examples of that, but the ability to own the space, to understand that we're not going to be the center of the universe in how people are going to leverage it, is going to be multiple things, including legacy systems and other cloud providers, and even industry clouds that are emerging these days, and SaaS providers, and all these things. So we're going to assist you in dealing with complexity, and we're going to provide the core services of being there. That hasn't happened yet. And they may be worried about conflicting their market, and the messaging is a bit different, even actively pushing back on the concept of multicloud, but the reality is the market's going to take them there. So in other words, if enough of their customers are asking for this and asking that they take the lead in building these cross-cloud technologies, even if they're participating in the stack and not being the stack, it's too compelling of a market that it's not going to drag a lot of the existing public cloud providers there. >> Well, it's going to be interesting to see how that plays out, David, because I never say never when it comes to a company like AWS, and we've seen how fast they move. And at the same time, they don't want to be commoditized. There's the layer underneath all this infrastructure, and they got this ecosystem that's adding all this tremendous value. But I want to ask you, what are the essential elements of supercloud, coming back to the definition, if you will, and what's different about metacloud, as you call it, from plain old SaaS or PaaS? What are the key elements there? >> Well, the key elements would be holistic management of all of the IT infrastructure. So even though it's sitting above a multicloud, I view metacloud, supercloud as the ability to also manage your existing legacy systems, your existing security stack, your existing network operations, basically everything that exists under the purview of IT. If you think about it, we're moving our infrastructure into the clouds, and we're probably going to hit a saturation point of about 70%. And really, if the supercloud, metacloud, which is going to be expensive to build for most of the enterprises, it needs to support these things holistically. So it needs to have all the services, that is going to be shareable across the different providers, and also existing legacy systems, and also edge computing, and IoT, and all these very diverse systems that we're building there right now. So if complexity is a core challenge to operate these things at scale and the ability to secure these things at scale, we have to have commonality in terms of security architecture and technology, commonality in terms of our directory services, commonality in terms of network operations, commonality in term of cloud operations, commonality in terms of FinOps. All these things should exist in some holistic cross-cloud layer that sits above all this complexity. And you pointed out something very profound. In other words, that is going to mean that we're hiding a lot of the existing cloud providers in terms of their interfaces and dashboards and things like that that we're dealing with today, their APIs. But the reality is that if we're able to manage these things at scale, the public cloud providers are going to benefit greatly from that. They're going to sell more services because people are going to find they're able to leverage them easier. And so in other words, if we're removing the complexity wall, which many in the industry are calling it right now, then suddenly we're moving from, say, the 25 to 30% migrated in the cloud, which most enterprises are today, to 50, 60, 70%. And we're able to do this at scale, and we're doing it at scale because we're providing some architectural optimization through the supercloud, metacloud layer. >> Okay, thanks for that. David, I just want to tap your CTO brain for a minute. At "Supercloud22," we came up with these three deployment models. Kit Colbert put forth the idea that one model would be your control planes running in one cloud, let's say AWS, but it interacts with and can manage and deploy on other clouds, the Kubernetes Cluster Management System. The second one, Mohit Aron from Cohesity laid out, where you instantiate the stack on different clouds and different cloud regions, and then you create a layer, a common interface across those. And then Snowflake was the third deployment model where it's a single global instance, it's one instantiation, and basically building out their own cloud across these regions. Help us parse through that. Do those seem like reasonable deployment models to you? Do you have any thoughts on that? >> Yeah, I mean, that's a distributed computing trick we've been doing, which is, in essence, an agent of the supercloud that's carrying out some of the cloud native functions on that particular cloud, but is, in essence, a slave to the metacloud, or the supercloud, whatever, that's able to run across the various cloud providers. In other words, when it wants to access a service, it may not go directly to that service. It goes directly to the control plane, and that control plane is responsible... Very much like Kubernetes and Docker works, that control plane is responsible for reaching out and leveraging those native services. I think that that's thinking that's a step in the right direction. I think these things unto themselves, at least initially, are going to be a very complex array of technology. Even though we're trying to remove complexity, the supercloud unto itself, in terms of the ability to build this thing that's able to operate at scale across-cloud, is going to be a collection of many different technologies that are interfacing with the public cloud providers in different ways. And so we can start putting these meta architectures together, and I certainly have written and spoke about this for years, but initially, this is going to be something that may escape the detail or the holistic nature of these meta architectures that people are floating around right now. >> Yeah, so I want to stay on this, because anytime I get a CTO brain, I like to... I'm not an engineer, but I've been around a long time, so I know a lot of buzzwords and have absorbed a lot over the years, but so you take those, the second two models, the Mohit instantiate on each cloud and each cloud region versus the Snowflake approach. I asked Benoit Dageville, "Does that mean if I'm in "an AWS east region and I want to do a query on Azure West, "I can do that without moving data?" And he said, "Yes and no." And the answer was really, "No, we actually take a subset of that data," so there's the latency problem. From those deployment model standpoints, what are the trade-offs that you see in terms of instantiating the stack on each individual cloud versus that single instance? Is there a benefit of the single instance for governance and security and simplicity, but a trade-off on latency, or am I overthinking this? >> Yeah, you hit it on the nose. The reality is that the trade-off is going to be latency and performance. If we get wiggy with the distributed nature, like the distributed data example you just provided, we have to basically separate the queries and communicate with the databases on each instance, and then reassemble the result set that goes back to the people who are recording it. And so we can do caching systems and things like that. But the reality is, if it's distributed system, we're going to have latency and bandwidth issues that are going to be limiting us. And also security issues, because if we're removing lots of information over the open internet, or even private circuits, that those are going to be attack vectors that hackers can leverage. You have to keep that in mind. We're trying to reduce those attack vectors. So it would be, in many instances, and I think we have to think about this, that we're going to keep the data in the same physical region for just that. So in other words, it's going to provide the best performance and also the most simplistic access to dealing with security. And so we're not, in essence, thinking about where the data's going, how it's moving across things, things like that. So the challenge is going to be is when you're dealing with a supercloud or metacloud is, when do you make those decisions? And I think, in many instances, even though we're leveraging multiple databases across multiple regions and multiple public cloud providers, and that's the idea of it, we're still going to localize the data for performance reasons. I mean, I just wrote a blog in "InfoWorld" a couple of months ago and talked about, people who are trying to distribute data across different public cloud providers for different reasons, distribute an application development system, things like that, you can do it. With enough time and money, you can do anything. I think the challenge is going to be operating that thing, and also providing a viable business return based on the application. And so why it may look like a good science experiment, and it's cool unto itself as an architect, the reality is the more pragmatic approach is going to be a leavitt in a single region on a single cloud. >> Very interesting. The other reason I like to talk to companies like Deloitte and experienced people like you is 'cause I can get... You're agnostic, right? I mean, you're technology agnostic, vendor agnostic. So I want to come back with another question, which is, how do you deal with what I call the lowest common denominator problem? What I mean by that is if one cloud has, let's say, a superior service... Let's take an example of Nitro and Graviton. AWS seems to be ahead on that, but let's say some other cloud isn't quite quite there yet, and you're building a supercloud or a metacloud. How do you rationalize that? Does it have to be like a caravan in the army where you slow down so all the slowest trucks can keep up, or are the ways to adjudicate that that are advantageous to hide that deficiency? >> Yeah, and that's a great thing about leveraging a supercloud or a metacloud is we're putting that management in a single layer. So as far as a user or even a developer on those systems, they shouldn't worry about the performance that may come back, because we're dealing with the... You hit the nail on the head with that one. The slowest component is the one that dictates performance. And so we have to have some sort of a performance management layer. We're also making dynamic decisions to move data, to move processing, from one server to the other to try to minimize the amount of latency that's coming from a single component. So the great thing about that is we're putting that volatility into a single domain, and it's making architectural decisions in terms of where something will run and where it's getting its data from, things are stored, things like that, based on the performance feedback that's coming back from the various cloud services that are under management. And so if you're running across clouds, it becomes even more interesting, because ultimately, you're going to make some architectural choices on the fly in terms of where that stuff runs based on the active dynamic performance that that public cloud provider is providing. So in other words, we may find that it automatically shut down a database service, say MySQL, on one cloud instance, and moved it to a MySQL instance on another public cloud provider because there was some sort of a performance issue that it couldn't work around. And by the way, it does so dynamically. Away from you making that decision, it's making that decision on your behalf. Again, this is a matter of abstraction, removing complexity, and dealing with complexity through abstraction and automation, and this is... That would be an example of fixing something with automation, self-healing. >> When you meet with some of the public cloud providers and they talk about on-prem private cloud, the general narrative from the hyperscalers is, "Well, that's not a cloud." Should on-prem be inclusive of supercloud, metacloud? >> Absolutely, I mean, and they're selling private cloud instances with the edge cloud that they're selling. The reality is that we're going to have to keep a certain amount of our infrastructure, including private clouds, on premise. It's something that's shrinking as a market share, and it's going to be tougher and tougher to justify as the public cloud providers become better and better at what they do, but we certainly have edge clouds now, and hyperscalers have examples of that where they run a instance of their public cloud infrastructure on premise on physical hardware and software. And the reality is, too, we have data centers and we have systems that just won't go away for another 20 or 30 years. They're just too sticky. They're uneconomically viable to move into the cloud. That's the core thing. It's not that we can't do it. The fact of the matter is we shouldn't do it, because there's not going to be an economic... There's not going to be an economic incentive of making that happen. So if we're going to create this meta layer or this infrastructure which is going to run across clouds, and everybody agrees on, that's what the supercloud is, we have to include the on-premise systems, including private clouds, including legacy systems. And by the way, include the rising number of IoT systems that are out there, and edge-based systems out there. So we're managing it using the same infrastructure into cloud services. So they have metadata systems and they have specialized services, and service finance and retail and things like doing risk analytics. So it gets them further down that path, but not necessarily giving them a SaaS application where they're forced into all of the business processes. We're giving you piece parts. So we'll give you 1000 different parts that are related to the finance industry. You can assemble anything you need, but the thing is, it's not going to be like building it from scratch. We're going to give you risk analytics, we're giving you the financial analytics, all these things that you can leverage within your applications how you want to leverage them. We'll maintain them. So in other words, you don't have to maintain 'em just like a cloud service. And suddenly, we can build applications in a couple of weeks that used to take a couple of months, in some cases, a couple of years. So that seems to be a large take of it moving forward. So get it up in the supercloud. Those become just other services that are under managed... That are under management on the supercloud, the metacloud. So we're able to take those services, abstract them, assemble them, use them in different applications. And the ability to manage where those services are originated versus where they're consumed is going to be managed by the supercloud layer, which, you're dealing with the governance, the service governance, the security systems, the directory systems, identity access management, things like that. They're going to get you further along down the pike, and that comes back as real value. If I'm able to build something in two weeks that used to take me two months, and I'm able to give my creators in the organization the ability to move faster, that's a real advantage. And suddenly, we are going to be valued by our digital footprint, our ability to do things in a creative and innovative way. And so organizations are able to move that fast, leveraging cloud computing for what it should be leveraged, as a true force multiplier for the business. They're going to win the game. They're going to get the most value. They're going to be around in 20 years, the others won't. >> David Linthicum, always love talking. You have a dangerous combination of business and technology expertise. Let's tease. "VMware Explore" next week, you're giving a keynote, if they're going to be there. Which day are you? >> Tuesday. Tuesday, 11 o'clock. >> All right, that's a big day. Tuesday, 11 o'clock. And David, please do stop by "The Cube." We're in Moscone West. Love to get you on and continue this conversation. I got 100 more questions for you. Really appreciate your time. >> I always love talking to people at "The Cube." Thank you very much. >> All right, and thanks for watching our ongoing coverage of "Supercloud22" on "The Cube," your leader in enterprise tech and emerging tech coverage. (bright 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. >> 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)

(upbeat music) >> Welcome back to theCUBE. We're covering Red Hat Summit 2022. We're going to wrap up now, Dave Vellante, Paul Gillin. We want to introduce you to Stephanie Chan, who's our new correspondent. Stephanie, one of your first events, your very first CUBE event. So welcome. >> Thank you. >> Up from NYC. Smaller event, but intimate. You got a chance to meet some folks last night at some of the after parties. What are your overall impressions? What'd you learn this week? >> So this has been my first in-person event in over two years. And even though, like you said, is on the smaller scale, roughly around 1000 attendees, versus it's usual eight to 10,000 attendees. There's so much energy, and excitement, and openness in these events and sessions. Even before and after the sessions people have been mingling and socializing and hanging out. So, I think a lot of people appreciate these in-person events and are really excited to be here. >> Cool. So, you also sat in some of the keynotes, right? Pretty technical, right? Which is kind of new to sort of your genre, right? I mean, I know you got a financial background but, so what'd you think of the keynotes? What'd you think of the format, the theater in the round? Any impressions of that? >> So, I think there's three things that are really consistent in these Red Hat Summit keynotes. There's always a history lesson. There's always, you know, emphasis in the culture of openness. And, there's also inspirational stories about how people utilize open source. And I found a lot of those examples really compelling and interesting. For instance, people use open source in (indistinct), and even in space. So I really enjoyed, you know, learning about all these different people and stories. What about you guys? What do you think were the big takeaways and the best stories that came out of the keynotes? >> Paul, want to start? >> Clearly the Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 is a major rollout. They do that only about every three years. So that's a big deal to this audience. I think what they did in the area of security, with rolling out sigstore, which is a major new, I think an important new project that was sort of incubated at Red Hat. And they're trying to put in to create an open source ecosystem around that now. And the alliances. I'm usually not that much on partnerships, but the Accenture and the Microsoft partnerships do seem to be significant to the company. And, finally, the GM partnership which I think was maybe kind of the bombshell that they sort of rushed in at the last minute. But I think has the biggest potential impact on Red Hat and its partner ecosystem that is really going to anchor their edge architecture going forward. So I didn't see it so much on the product front, but the sense of Red Hat spreading its wings, and partnering with more companies, and seeing its itself as really the center of an ecosystem indicates that they are, you know, they're in a very solid position in their business. >> Yeah, and also like the pandemic has really forced us into this new normal, right? So customer demand is changing. There has been the shift to remote. There's always going to be a new normal according to Paul, and open source carries us through that. So how do you guys think Red Hat has helped its portfolio through this new normal and the shift? >> I mean, when you think of Red Hat, you think of Linux. I mean, that's where it all started. You think OpenShift which is the application development platforms. Linux is the OS. OpenShift is the application development platform for Kubernetes. And then of course, Ansible is the automation framework. And I agree with you, ecosystem is really the other piece of this. So, I mean, I think you take those three pieces and extend that into the open source community. There's a lot of innovation that's going around each of those, but ecosystems are the key. We heard from Stefanie Chiras, that fundamental, I mean, you can't do this without those gap fillers and those partnerships. And then another thing that's notable here is, you know, this was, I mean, IBM was just another brand, right? I mean, if anything it was probably a sub-brand, I mean, you didn't hear much about IBM. You certainly had no IBM presence, even though they're right across the street running Think. No Arvind present, no keynote from Arvind, no, you know, Big Blue washing. And so, I think that's a testament to Arvind himself. We heard that from Paul Cormier, he said, hey, this guy's been great, he's left us alone. And he's allowed us to continue innovating. It's good news. IBM has not polluted Red Hat. >> Yes, I think that the Red Hat was, I said at the opening, I think Red Hat is kind of the tail wagging the dog right now. And their position seems very solid in the market. Clearly the market has come to them in terms of their evangelism of open source. They've remained true to their business model. And I think that gives them credibility that, you know, a lot of other open source companies have lacked. They have stuck with the plan for over 20 years now and have really not changed it, and it's paying off. I think they're emerging as a company that you can trust to do business with. >> Now I want to throw in something else here. I thought the conversation with IDC analyst, Jim Mercer, was interesting when he said that they surveyed customers and they wanted to get the security from their platform vendor, versus having to buy these bespoke tools. And it makes a lot of sense to me. I don't think that's going to happen, right? Because you're going to have an identity specialist. You're going to have an endpoint specialist. You're going to have a threat detection specialist. And they're going to be best of breed, you know, Red Hat's never going to be all of those things. What they can do is partner with those companies through APIs, through open source integrations, they can add them in as part of the ecosystem and maybe be the steward of that. Maybe that's the answer. They're never going to be the best at all those different security disciplines. There's no way in the world, Red Hat, that's going to happen. But they could be the integration point. And that would be, that would be a simplifying layer to the equation. >> And I think it's smart. You know, they're not pretending to be an identity in access management or an anti-malware company, or even a zero trust company. They are sticking to their knitting, which is operating system and developers. Evangelizing DevSecOps, which is a good thing. And, that's what they're going to do. You know, you have to admire this company. It has never gotten outside of its swim lane. I think it's understood well really what it wants to be good at. And, you know, in the software business knowing what not to do is more important than knowing what to do. Is companies that fail are usually the ones that get overextended, this company has never overextended itself. >> What else do you want to know? >> And a term that kept popping up was multicloud, or otherwise known as metacloud. We know what the cloud is, but- >> Oh, supercloud, metacloud. >> Supercloud, yeah, here we go. We know what the cloud is but, what does metacloud mean to you guys? And why has it been so popular in these conversations? >> I'm going to boot this to Dave, because he's the expert on this. >> Well, expert or not, but I mean, again, we've coined this term supercloud. And the idea behind the supercloud or what Ashesh called metacloud, I like his name, cause it allows Web 3.0 to come into the equation. But the idea is that instead of building on each individual cloud and have compatibility with that cloud, you build a layer across clouds. So you do the hard work as a platform supplier to hide the underlying primitives and APIs from the end customer, or the end developer, they can then add value on top of that. And that abstraction layer spans on-prem, clouds, across clouds, ultimately out to the edge. And it's new, a new value layer that builds on top of the hyperscale infrastructure, or existing data center infrastructure, or emerging edge infrastructure. And the reason why that is important is because it's so damn complicated, number one. Number two, every company's becoming a software company, a technology company. They're bringing their services through digital transformation to their customers. And you've got to have a cloud to do that. You're not going to build your own data center. That's like Charles Wang says, not Charles Wang. (Paul laughing) Charles Phillips. We were just talking about CA. Charles Phillips. Friends don't let friends build data centers. So that supercloud concept, or what Ashesh calls metacloud, is this new layer that's going to be powered by ecosystems and platform companies. And I think it's real. I think it's- >> And OpenShift, OpenShift is a great, you know, key card for them or leverage for them because it is perhaps the best known Kubernetes platform. And you can see here they're really doubling down on adding features to OpenShift, security features, scalability. And they see it as potentially this metacloud, this supercloud abstraction layer. >> And what we said is, in order to have a supercloud you got to have a superpaz layer and OpenShift is that superpaz layer. >> So you had conversations with a lot of people within the past two days. Some people include companies, from Verizon, Intel, Accenture. Which conversation stood out to you the most? >> Which, I'm sorry. >> Which conversation stood out to you the most? (Paul sighs) >> The conversation with Stu Miniman was pretty interesting because we talked about culture. And really, he has a lot of credibility in that area because he's not a Red Hat. You know, he hasn't been a Red Hat forever, he's fairly new to the company. And got a sense from him that the culture there really is what they say it is. It's a culture of openness and that's, you know, that's as important as technology for a company's success. >> I mean, this was really good content. I mean, there were a lot, I mean Stefanie's awesome. Stefanie Chiras, we're talking about the ecosystem. Chris Wright, you know, digging into some of the CTO stuff. Ashesh, who coined metacloud, I love that. The whole in vehicle operating system conversation was great. The security discussion that we just had. You know, the conversations with Accenture were super thoughtful. Of course, Paul Cormier was a highlight. I think that one's going to be a well viewed interview, for sure. And, you know, I think that the customer conversations are great. Red Hat did a really good job of carrying the keynote conversations, which were abbreviated this year, to theCUBE. >> Right. >> I give 'em a lot of kudos for that. And because, theCUBE, it allows us to double click, go deeper, peel the onion a little bit, you know, all the buzz words, and cliches. But it's true. You get to clarify some of the things you heard, which were, you know, the keynotes were, were scripted, but tight. And so we had some good follow up questions. I thought it was super useful. I know I'm leaving somebody out, but- >> We're also able to interview representatives from Intel and Nvidia, which at a software conference you don't typically do. I mean, there's the assimilation, the combination of hardware and software. It's very clear that, and this came out in the keynote, that Red Hat sees hardware as matter. It matters. It's important again. And it's going to be a source of innovation in the future. That came through clearly. >> Yeah. The hardware matters theme, you know, the old days you would have an operating system and the hardware were intrinsically linked. MVS in the mainframe, VAX, VMS in the digital mini computers. DG had its own operating system. Wang had his own operating system. Prime with Prime OS. You remember these days? >> Oh my God. >> Right? (Paul laughs) And then of course Microsoft. >> And then x86, everything got abstracted. >> Right. >> Everything became x86 and now it's all atomizing again. >> Although WinTel, right? I mean, MS-DOS and Windows were intrinsically linked for many, many years with Intel x86. And it wasn't until, you know, well, and then, you know, Sun Solaris, but it wasn't until Linux kind of blew that apart. And the internet is built on the lamp stack. And of course, Linux is the fundamental foundation for Red Hat. So my point is, that the operating system and the hardware have always been very closely tied together. Whether it's security, or IO, or registries and memory management, everything controlled by the OS are very close to the hardware. And so that's why I think you've got an affinity in Red Hat to hardware. >> But Linux is breaking that bond, don't you think? >> Yes, but it still has to understand the underlying hardware. >> Right. >> You heard today, how taking advantage of Nvidia, and the AI capabilities. You're seeing that with ARM, you're seeing that with Intel. How you can optimize the operating system to take advantage of new generations of CPU, and NPU, and CPU, and PU, XPU, you know, across the board. >> Yep. >> Well, I really enjoyed this conference and it really stressed how important open source is to a lot of different industries. >> Great. Well, thanks for coming on. Paul, thank you. Great co-hosting with you. And thank you. >> Always, Dave. >> For watching theCUBE. We'll be on the road, next week we're at KubeCon in Valencia, Spain. We're at VeeamON. We got a ton of stuff going on. Check out thecube.net. Check out siliconangle.com for all the news. Wikibon.com. We publish there weekly, our breaking analysis series. Thanks for watching everybody. Dave Vellante, for Paul Gillin, and Stephanie Chan. Thanks to the crew. Shout out, Andrew, Alex, Sonya. Amazing job, Sonya. Steven, thanks you guys for coming out here. Mark, good job corresponding. Go to SiliconANGLE, Mark's written some great stuff. And thank you for watching. We'll see you next time. (calm music)

(upbeat music) >> Welcome back to the Seaport in Boston. This is day two of theCUBES's coverage of Red Hat Summit 2022 different format this year for Red Hat Summit. You know we are used to the eight to 9,000 people big conferences, but this is definitely and a lot of developers this is definitely a smaller, more intimate, more abbreviated keynotes which I love that new style they've really catering to the virtual audience as well as the physical audience, a lot of good stuff going on last night in the Seaport, which a lot of fun Stephanie Chiras is here is the Senior Vice President of Partner Ecosystem Success at Red Hat. >> Yeah. >> On the move again, Stephanie love to see you. >> yeah. Thank you. It's great to be here with you and now in a little different bit of a role. >> Yeah, I'm happy that we're actually in Boston and we can meet face to face. >> Yes. >> We don't have to get in a plane, but you know we'll be on a lot of planes in the next few months. >> Yeah. >> But look, a new role for you in ecosystems. You are interviewing all the partners, which is very cool. So you get a big observation space as my friend Jeff Jonas would like to say. And so, but I'd like to observe the partner ecosystem in this new era is different. >> It's very different. >> I mean just press release is going back it's really deep engineering and really interesting flywheel approaches. How is the cloud and the hybrid cloud ecosystem and partner ecosystem different today? >> I think there's a couple of things, I think first of all cloud accelerating all the innovation, the whole cloud motion pulls in a cloud partner in addition to many of the other partners that you need to deploy a solution. So this makes almost every deployment a multi-partner deployment. So that creates the need not just for one on one partnerships between companies and vendors but really for a multi-partner experience. Right, how does an ISV work with a distributor work with a cloud vendor? How do you pull all of that together and I think at Red Hat, our view of being a platform company, we want to be able to span that and bring all of those folks together. So I see this transition going from a world of partnerships into a world of a networked ecosystem. And the real benefit is when you can pull together one ecosystem with another ecosystem, build that up and it really becomes an ecosystem of ecosystems. >> Well and I'm a fan, you're a multi tool star, so it may kind of makes you dangerous because you can talk tech in your technical roles. You've been a GM so you understand the business and that's really what it takes in the part of ecosystem. It can't be just technology and just engineering integration, it's got to be a business model associated with that. Talk about those two dimensions. >> And I think what we're seeing in the ecosystem is there are partners that you build with there are partners you service with, there are partners you sell with some do all three, some do two out of three. How do you work those relationships at the end of the day every partner in the ecosystem wants to bring their value to the customer. And their real goal is how do you merge those values together and I think as you know, right, I come from the technology and the product space. I love moving into this space where you look for those value and that synergy of value to bring better technology, a better procurement experience is often really important and simplicity of deployment to customers, but partners span everything we do. We develop with them, we build with them, we deploy with them, we service with them and all has to come together. >> So how do you make this simple for customers? I mean you're describing an increasingly complex environment. How do you simplify this? >> So a couple of things one, spot onto your point Paul, I think customer expectations now are more aggressive than they've ever been that the ecosystem has done pre-work before they show up. The customer doesn't want to be the one who's pulling together this from one vendor, this from another vendor and stitching it together themselves. So there's a number of things I think we've stepped in to try and do digital engagement for certification and deployment, the creation of operators on OpenShift is one way that technology from partners can be done and enabled more easily and quickly with Red Hat platforms. I think in addition, you've seen. >> Can you go a little deeper on that? >> Sure. >> Explain that a little bit more what does that mean? Yeah, First off, we have a digital experience where partners can come in, they can certify and test their applications to run it on Red Hat platforms themselves. So it's a bit of a come one, come all. We also have an engineering team and a developer team to work side by side with them to build those into solutions. We've done things again to supplement that with capabilities of what we call validated patterns things we've done in the market with customers, with partners, we pull together a validated pattern, we put it onto GitHub so anyone can get access to it. It becomes kind of a recipe for deployment that's available for partners to come in and augment on top of that or customers can come in and pull it up GitHub and build off of it. So I feel like there's different layers in the sort of build model that we work with partners and you want to be able to on-ramp any partner wherever they want to influence their value. It could be at the base certification level, it could be even with RHEL 9 was a good one, right. RHEL 9 was the first version of RHEL that we deployed based upon the CentOS Stream model. CentOS Stream is an upstream version of RHEL very tightly tied into the development model but it allowed partners to engage with that code prior to deployment everything from hardware partners to ISV partners, it becomes a much more open way for them to collaborate with us, so there's so much we can do. >> What's the pitch to partners. I mean I know hybrid cloud is fundamental to your value proposition. I mean most people want hybrid cloud even though the cloud guys might not admit it, right, but so what's the pitch, how do you approach partners there's got to be a common theme there pitch me. >> I think one of the things when it comes to the Red Hat ecosystem is the ecosystem itself has to bring value. Yes, we at Red Hat want to bring value, we want to come in and make it easy and simple for you to access our technology when want to make it easy and simple to engage side by side in front of a customer. But at the end of the day the value of the Red Hat ecosystem is not only Red Hat, it's our partnerships with others. It's our partnerships with the hyperscalers, it's our partnerships with ISVs, it's our work in open source communities. So it's not about Red Hat being this sort of epicenter of the ecosystem. The value comes from the collective ecosystem as it stands, and I think we've made a number of changes here at the beginning of the year in order to create a end to end team within Red Hat that does everything from the build to the sell with all the way from end to end. And I think that's bringing a new layer of simplicity for our engagement with their partners, and it's allowing us to stitch together and introduce partners to partners. >> But you are a dot connector in a sense. >> Absolutely. >> And you can't do it all, I mean nobody can. >> Yeah. But especially Red Hat your strategy is not to do it all by design, so where's the big white spaces where you feel as though your strengths need to be complimented by the partners? >> Oh, I think you caught it spot on. We don't think we can do it all, we're a platform company, we know the value of hybrid cloud is all about bringing a flexibility of an ecosystem together. I think the places where we're really doubling down on is simplicity. So the Ansible announcement that we did right with Ansible automation platform on Azure. With that announcement, it brings in certified collections of ecosystem partners on that deployment. We do the work with Azure in order to do that deployment of Ansible automation platform, and then it comes with a set of certified collections that have been done with other partners. And I think those are the pieces where we can really double down on bringing simplicity. Right, so if I look at areas of focus, that's a great space, and I think it is all about connecting the dots, right, it's about connecting our work with Azure with our work with other ISV partners to pull that together and show up to a customer with something that's fast time to value. >> With so many partners to manage, how do you make sure you're not playing favorites. I guess how do you treat all partners equally or do you even try? >> We absolutely try. I think any partnership is a relationship, right, so it is what Red Hat brings to the table, it's also what the partner brings to the table. Our goal is to understand what the value is the partner wants to deliver to the customer. We focus on that and bringing that to the forefront of what we deploy. We absolutely in a hybrid world it's about choice and flexibility. Certainly there are partners and we made some announcements of course, this week, right yesterday and today with some we're continued to deepen our partnerships with those folks who are doubling down with us where their strategy is very well aligned with us. But our goal is to bring a broad ecosystem that offers customers choice. That's what hybrid cloud's all about. >> I remember years ago, your colleague Bob Pitino, I went down and met him in his office and he schooled me, he was awesome and we did a white board on alternative processors. >> Yeah. >> You guys were doing combat duty in the power division at the time. But basically he helped me understand the trend that is absolutely come true which is alternative processors. It's not just about the CPU anymore, it's about all the CPU and GPU and NPU and accelerators and all these other connected parts. You guys obviously are in the middle of that, you've got relationships with ARM, NVIDIA, Intel, we saw on stage today. Explain the importance and the trends that you see of these alternative processors and accelerators and what that means for customers in terms of the applications that they're now going to be able to tap. >> Yeah, so you know I love this topic when it comes. So one of the spaces is edge, right, we talked about edge today. Edge to me is the epitome of kind of a white space and an opportunity where ecosystem is essential. Edge is pulling together unique hardware capabilities from an accelerator all the way out to new network capabilities and then to AI applications. I mean the number of ISVs building AI applications is just expanding. So it's really that top to bottom ecosystem story, and our work with the telco comes in, our work with the ARM partners, the NVIDIA of the world, the accelerators of the world comes in edge. And then you pull it up to the applications as well. And then to touch in, we're seeing edge be deployed a lot in industries and industry verticals, right. A lot of edge deployments are tailored for a retail market or for a financial services sector. Again, for us, we rely very much on the ecosystem to go into industry verticals where platform companies. So our goal is to find those key partners in those industry verticals who speak the speak, talk the language, and we partner with them in order to support them and so this whole edge space pulls all of that together I think even out to the go to market with industry alignment. >> It's interesting to partner, so we're talking about Silicon, we could talk about that all day long. >> Yes. >> And then it spans and that we had Accenture on we had Raj yesterday. And it was interesting 'cause you think Accenture's like deep vertical industry expertise which it is but Raj's role is really cross industry, and then to tap into that industry expertise you guys had an announcement yesterday with those guys and obviously the GSIs are a key player. >> Absolutely. >> We saw a bunch of 'em last night out and about. >> Yeah. >> So talk about the importance of those relationships. >> I think we are in the announcement with Accenture is a great one, right. We're really doubling down because customers are looking to them, they're looking to the Accentures of the world to help them move into this hybrid world. It's not simple, it's not simple to deploy and get that value of the flexibility. So Accenture has built a number of tools in order to help customers on that journey which we talked about yesterday it really is a continuum of how customers adopt for their cloud space. And so us partnering with them offers a platform underneath, give them technology capabilities and Accenture is able to help customers and guide them along that journey and add a new layer of simplicity. So I think the GSI are critical in this space. >> Yeah. >> You talked about the number of companies developing AI, new AI tools right now. And it seems like there's just the pace of innovation is amazing, the number of startups is unprecedented. How do you decide who makes it into your partner system? What bars do they have to jump over to become a Red Hat partner? >> I think our whole partner structure is layered out quite honestly a bit in tiering, depending upon how much the partner is moving forward with Red Hat, how strategically we aligned our et cetera. But there is definitely a tier that is a come one come all, get your technology to work with Red Hat. We do that digitally now in the world of digital it's much easier to do that to give accessibility but there is definitely a tier that is a come one come all and participate. And then above that, it comes into tierings. How deeply do we go to do joint building to do co-creation and how do we sort of partner even on things like we have ARO and ROSA as you know which is OpenShift built with AWS with Azure those provide very deep technical engagements to bring that level of simplicity, but I would say it spans all the layers, right. We do have a dedicated engineering team to work with the ecosystem partners. We have a dedicated digital team to reach out and proactively right, invite folks to participate and encourage them through the thing and through the whole path. And we've done some things on enablement, we just made early March, we made enablement free for all our partners in order to learn more and get more skilled in Red Hat. Skills and skill creation is just critical for partners, and we want to start there right. >> So we started this conversation with how cloud ecosystems are different. And I think AWS as the mother of all ecosystems, so does Microsoft too but they've had it for a while. And I got felt like last decade partners were kind of afraid, all right, we're going to partner with a cloud vendor, but they're going to eat our lunch. I noticed last year at Reinvent that whole dynamic is changing and I think the industry's realizing this is not a zero sum game. That there's just so much opportunity especially when you start thinking about the edge. So you guys use the term hybrid, right, and John and I wrote a piece prior to Reinvent last year, we said there's something new brewing, we've got on-prem connecting to the clouds, it's going across clouds. People call that multi-cloud, but multi-cloud has been like multi-vendor. It really hasn't been a sort of strategy or a technical layer. And now you're talking the edge and we see the hyperscaler spending a hundred billion dollars a year on infrastructure. And now we see companies like yours and your ecosystem building on top of that. They're not afraid of it anymore, they're actually looking at it as a gift and so we coined this term called Supercloud which is a abstraction layer, and it rises above highs all the complexity of the underlying primitives and APIs and people kind of wince at the term Ashesh called it Metacloud which I like it's kind of fun. But do you feel like that's happening in the ecosystem? Is that a real trend or is that just my imagination? >> I think it's definitely a real trend and it's coming from customers, right, that's what customers want. So customers want the ability to choose are they going to self-manage their applications within a public cloud. There's much more than just technology in the public cloud too right. There's a procurement experience that they provide a simplicity of our relationship. They may choose one of the hyperscalers. They pick a procurement experience, they deepen that relationship, they leverage the services. And I think now what you're seeing is customers are demanding it. They want to be a part of that, they want to run on multiple clouds. And now we're looking at cloud services you've seen our strategy double down on cloud services. I think that kind of comes back together to a customer wants simplicity. They expect the ecosystem to work together behind the scenes. That's what capabilities like ARO are or OpenShift on Azure and OpenShift on AWS. That's what we can provide. We have an SRV team, we jointly support it with those partners behind the scenes but as you said, it's no longer that fear, right. We've rolled up our sleeves together specifically because we wanted to show up to the customer as one. >> Yeah, and by the way, it's not just traditional technology vendors, it's insurance companies, it's banks, it's manufacturers who are building out these so-called super clouds. And to have a super cloud, you got to have a super PaaS and OpenShift is the supers of all PaaS So Stephanie cheers, thanks so much for coming back to theCUBE, >> Oh it's my pleasure. it great to see you again. >> Thank you for the time. >> All right, and thank you for watching keep it right there this is day two of Red Hat Summit 2022 from the Seaport in Boston. You're watching theCUBE. (upbeat music)

>>To the Seaport in Boston, Massachusetts, everybody's buzzing. The Bruins are playing tonight. They tied it up. The Celtics tied it up last night. We're excited. We don't talk about the red Sox. Red Sox are getting struggles, but you know, we have good distractions. Paul goer is here. He's the president and chief executive officer at red hat and also a Boston fan of great to see, of course, you too. >>Nice to see you guys, you know, it's been a, it's been a while. >><laugh> yeah, we saw you, you know, online and virtually for a couple of years there, but, uh, you know, we've been doing red hat summit for a long, long time. Yeah, of course we were talking earlier. It's just much more intimate, kind of a VIP event, a few more suit jackets here. You know, I got my tie on, so I don't get too much grief. I usually get grief when I wear a tie of red hat summit, but it's a different format this year. Compressed keynotes. Your keynote was great. The new normal, sometimes we call it the new abnormal <laugh>, uh, but you know, how do you feel? >>I, I, I, I feel great. First of all, you know, combination today, virtual audience in, in house audience here today. I think we're gonna see a lot of that in the future. I mean, we designed the event around that and I, I think it, I think it played pretty well. Kudos, kudos to our team. You're right. It's, it's, it's a bit more intimate even the way it was set up, but those are the conversations we like having with our customers and our partners, much more partner centric, uh, as well right now, as well. >>You know, we were talking about, you know, hybrid cloud. It was kind of, you know, it was a good marketing term. And, but now it's, it's, it's become the real thing. I've said many times the, the definition of cloud is changing. It's expanding it's no, the cloud is no longer this remote set of services, you know, somewhere up in the cloud, it's on prem connecting to a cloud across clouds, out to the edge and you need capabilities that work everywhere. And that's what red hat did. The market's just swimming toward you. >>Yeah. I mean, you look at it, you know, I was, uh, you know, if you look at it, you know, the clouds are powerful unto themselves, right? The clouds are powerful unto themselves. They're all different. Right? And that that's, I mean, hardware vendors were, were similar, but different, same thing. You need that connective tissue across, across the whole thing. I mean, as I said, in my keynote today, I remember talking to some of our CIOs and customers 10 years ago and they said, we're going 90% of our apps tomorrow to one cloud. And we knew that wasn't practical because of course the clouds are built from Linux. So we knew it was underneath the hood and, and what's happened. It's taken some time, but as they started to get into that, they started to see, well, maybe one cloud's more suited for one application than the other, these apps. You may have to keep on premise, but you know, what really exploded at the, the, the hybrid thing, the edge. Now they're putting things at the edge, the GM announcement tell you, I know you're gonna talk to Francis. Yeah, yeah. Later. I mean, that's, that's a mini data center in, in every cloud, but that's still under the purview of the CIO, you know? So, so, so that's what hybrid's all about is tying all those pieces together, cuz it got more powerful, but it also more complex. >>You mentioned being the connective tissue, but we don't hear as much talk about multi-cloud seems to me, as we used to this conference has been all about hybrid cloud. You don't really talk about multi-cloud. How important is that to the red hat strategy, being that consistent layer? >>It's probably my mistake or our mistake because multi's more prevalent and more important than just hybrid alone. I mean, hybrid hybrid started from on-premise to one part to any one particular cloud. That was the, the first thought of hybrid. But as I said, as, as, as um, some of the cloud providers became so big, um, every, every CIO I talked to, whether they know whether they know it or not most do are in a multi environment for a whole bunch of reasons, right. You know, one cloud provider might be better in a different part of the world. And another one cloud provider might have a better service than another. Some just don't like to be stuck to one it's it's really hybrid multi. We should, we should train ourselves to every time we say hybrid, say multi, because that's really, that's really what it is. It, I think that happened overnight with, with Microsoft, you know, with Microsoft they've, they've, they've really grown over the last few years, so has Amazon for that matter. But Microsoft really coming up is what really made it a, a high, a multi world. >>Microsoft's remarkable what, what they're doing. But I, I, I have a different thinking on this. I, I heard Chuck Whitten last week at, at the Dell conference he used, he said used the phrase a multicloud, uh, by default versus multi-cloud by design. And I thought that was pretty interesting because I've said that multi-cloud is largely multi-vendor, you know? And so hybrid has implications, right? We, we bring and a shesh came up with a new term today. Metacloud I use Supercloud I like Metacloud better because something's happening, Paul. It feels like there's this layer abstraction layer that the underlying complexity is hidden. Think about OpenShift. Yeah. I could buy, I could get OpenShift for free. Yeah. I mean, I could, and I could cobble together and stitch together at 13, 15 dozens of different services and replicate, but I don't, I don't want that complexity. I want you to hide that complexity. I want, I'd rather spend money on your R and D than my engineering. So something's changing. It feels like >>You buy that. I totally buy that. I mean, you know, I, I, I'm gonna try to not make this sound like a marketing thing because it's not, not fair enough. Right. I mean, I'm engineer at heart, you know that, so, >>Okay. >>I really look to what we're trying to do is we're building a hybrid multi cloud. I mean that we, I look at us as a cloud provider spanning the hybrid multi all the way out to the edge world, but we don't have the data centers in the back. Like the cloud providers do in and by that is you're seeing our products being consumed more like cloud services because that's what our customers are demanding. Our, our products now can be bought out of the various marketplaces, et cetera. You're seeing different business models from us. So, uh, you're seeing, uh, committed spend, for example, like the cloud providers where a customer will buy so much up front and sort of just work it down. You're seeing different models on how they're consumed, consumption, based pricing. These, these are all things that came from the cloud providers and customers buying like that. >>They now want that across their entire environment. They don't wanna buy differently on premise or in one cloud and they don't wanna develop differently. They don't wanna operate differently. They don't wanna have to secure it differently. Security's the biggest thing with, with our, with our customers, because hybrid's powerful, but you no longer have the, you know, your security per perimeter, no longer the walls of your data center. You know, you're, you're responsible as a CIO. You're responsible for every app. Yeah. No matter where it's running, if that's the break in point, you're responsible for that. So that's why we've done things like, you know, we cried stack rocks. We've, we've built it into the container Kubernetes platform that spans those various footprints because you no longer can just do perimeter security because the perimeter is, is very, very, very large right now >>Diffuse. One of the thing on the multi-cloud hyper skills, I, I, red hat's never been defensive about public cloud. You, I think you look at the a hundred billion dollars a year in CapEx spend that's a gift to the industry. Not only the entire it industry, but, but the financial services companies and healthcare companies, they can build their own hybrid clouds. Metacloud super clouds taking advantage of that, but they still need that connective tissue. And that's where >>We products come in. We welcome our customers to go to, to the public cloud. Um, uh, look, it's it's. I said a long time ago, we said a long time it was gonna be a hybrid. Well, I should have said multi anybody said hybrid, then it's gonna be a hybrid world. It is. And it doesn't matter if it's a 20, 80, 80, 20, 40, 60, 60, 40. It's not gonna be a hundred percent anywhere. Yeah. And, and so in that, in that definition, it's a hybrid multi world. >>I wanna change the tune a little bit because I've been covering IBM for 40 years and seen a lot of acquisitions and see how they work. And usually it follows the same path. There's a commitment to leaving the acquire company alone. And then over time that fades, the company just becomes absorbed. Same thing with red hat. It seems like they're very much committed to, to, to leaving you alone. At least they said that upon the acquisition, have they followed through on that promise? >>I have to tell you IBM has followed through on every commitment they've made, made to us. I mean, I, I owe it, I owe a lot of it to Arvin. Um, he was the architect of the deal, right. Um, we've known each other for a long time. Um, he's a great guy. Um, he, uh, he, he believes in it. It's not, he's not just doing it that way because he thinks, um, something bad will happen if he doesn't, he's doing it that way. Cuz he believes in that our ecosystem is what made us. I mean, I mean, even here it's about the partners in the ecosystem. If you look at what made REL people think what made red hat as a company was support, right. Support's really important. Small piece of the value proposition life cycle supports certainly their life cycle a 10 year life cycle just came out of a, a, a customer conference asking about the life cycle and could we extend it to 15 years? You know? Um, the ecosystem is probably the most important part of, of, of, of the, of the overall value proposition. And Arvin knows in IBM knows that, you know, we have to be neutral to be able to do everything the same for all of our ecosystem partners. Some that are IBM's competitors, even. So, >>So we were noticing this morning, I mean, aside from a brief mention of power PC and the IBM logo during, at one point, there was no mention of IBM during the keynote sessions this morning. Is that intentional? Or is that just >>No, no, it it's, it's not intentional. I mean, I think that's part of, we have our strategy to drive and we're, we're driving our, our strategy. We, we, we IBM great partner. We look at them as a partner just as we do our, our many other partners and we won't, you know, we wouldn't, we wouldn't do something with our products, um, for I with IBM that we wouldn't offer to our, our entire ecosystem. >>But there is a difference now, right? I don't know these numbers. Exactly. You would know though, but, but pre 2019 acquisition red hat was just, I think north of 3 billion in revenue growing at maybe 12% a year. Something like that, AR I mean, we hear on the earnings calls, 21% growth. I think he's publicly said you're north of 5 billion or now I don't know how much of that consulting gets thrown in. IBM likes to, you know, IBM math, but still it's a much bigger business. And, and I wonder if you could share with us, obviously you can't dig into the numbers, but have you hired more people? I would imagine. I mean, sure. Like what's been different from that standpoint in terms of the accelerant to your >>Business. Yeah. We've been on the same hiring cycle percentage wise as, as we, we always were. I mean, I think the best way to characterize the relationship and where they've helped is, um, Arvin, Arvin will say, IBM can be opinionated on red hat, but not the other way around <laugh>. So, so what that, what that means is they had a lot of, they had, they had a container based Linux platform. Yeah, right, right. They, they had all their, they were their way of moving to the cloud was that when we came in, they actually stopped that. And they standardized on OpenShift across all of their products. We're now the vehicle that brings the blue software products to the hybrid cloud. We are that vehicle that does it. So I think that's, that's how, that's how they, they look about it. I mean, I know, I mean in IBM consulting, I know, I know they have a great relationship with Microsoft of course. >>Right. And so, so that's, that's how to really look at it. They they're opinionated on us where we not the other way around, but that, but they're a great partner. And even if we're at two separate companies, we'd do be doing all the same things we're doing with them. Now, what they do do for us can do for us is they open a lot of doors in many cases. I mean, IBM's been around for over a hundred years. So in many cases, they're in, in, in the C-suite, we, we may be in the C suite, but we may be one layer down, one, two layers down or something. They, they can, they help us get access. And I think that's been a, a part of the growth as well as is them talking into their, into, into their >>Constituents. Their consulting's one of the FA if not the fastest growing part of their business. So that's kind of the tip of the spear for application modernization, but enough on IBM you said something in your keynote. That was really interesting to me. You said, you, you, you didn't use the word hardware Renaissance, but that my interpretation was you're expecting the next, you know, several years to be a hardware Renaissance. We, we certainly have done relationships with arm. You mentioned Nvidia and Intel. Of course, you've had relationships with Intel for a long time. And we're seeing just the spate of new hardware developments, you know, does hardware matter? I'll ask you, >>Oh, oh, I mean the edge, as I said, you're gonna see hardware innovation out in the edge, software innovation as well. You know, the interesting part about the edge is that, you know, obviously remade red hat. What we did with REL was we did a lot of engineering work to make every hardware architecture when, when it was, when, when the world was just standalone servers, we made every hardware architecture just work out of the box. Right? And we did that in such, because with an open source development model. So embedded in our psyche, in our development processes is working upstream, bringing it downstream 10 years, support all of that kind of thing. So we lit up all that hardware. Now we go out to the edge, it's a whole new, different set of hardware innovation out at the edge. We know how to do that. >>We know how to, we know how to make hardware, innovation safe for the customer. And so we're bringing full circle and you have containers embedded in, in Linux and REL right now as well. So we're actually with the edge, bringing it all full circle back to what we've been doing for 20 plus years. Um, on, on the hardware side, even as a big part of the world, goes to containers and hybrid in, in multi-cloud. So that's why we're so excited about, about, about the edge, you know, opportunity here. That's, that's a big part of where hybrid's going. >>And when you guys talk about edge, I mean, I, I know a lot of companies will talk about edge in the context of your retail location. Okay. That's fine. That's cool. That's edge or telco that that's edge. But when you talk about, um, an in vehicle operating system, right. You know, that's to me the far edge, and that's where it gets really interesting, massive volumes, different architectures, both hardware and software. And a lot of the data may stay. Maybe it doesn't even get persisted. May maybe some comes back to the club, but that's a new >>Ballgame. Well, think about it, right? I mean, you, if you listen, I think you, right. My talk this morning, how many changes are made in the Linux kernel? Right? You're running in a car now, right? From a safety perspective. You wanna update that? I mean, look, Francis talked about it. You'll talk to Francis later as well. I mean, you know, how many, how many in, in your iPhone world Francis talked about this this morning, you know, they can, they can bring you a whole new world with software updates, the same in the car, but you have to do it in such a way that you still stay with the safety protocols. You're able to back things out, things like that. So it's open source, but getting raw upstream, open source and managing itself yourself, I just, I'm sorry. It takes a lot of experience to be able to be able to do those kinds of things. So it's secure, that's insecure. And that's what that's, what's exciting about it. You look at E the telco world look where the telco world came from in the telco world. It was a hardware stack from the hardware firmware operating system, every service, whether it was 9 1, 1 or 4, 1, 1 was its own stack. Yep. In the 4g, 3g, >>4g >>Virtualized. Now, now it's all software. Yeah. Now it's all software all the way out to the cell tower. So now, so, so now you see vendors out there, right? As an application, as a container based application, running out, running in the base of a cell tower, >>Cell tower is gonna be a little mini data >>Center. Yeah, exactly. Because we're in our time here asking quickly, because you've been at red hat a long time. You, you, you, uh, architected a lot of the reason they're successful is, is your responsibility. A lot of companies have tried to duplicate the red hat model, the, the service and support model. Nobody has succeeded. Do you think anybody ever will or will red hat continue to be a unicorn in that respect? >>No, I, I, I think, I think it will. I think open source is making it into all different parts of technology. Now I have to tell you the, the reason why we were able to do it is we stayed. We stayed true to our roots. We made a decision a long time ago that we weren't gonna put a line, say everything below the line was open and above the line was closed. Sometimes it's hard sometimes to get a differentiation with the competition, it can be hard, but we've stayed true to that. And I, to this day, I think that's the thing that's made us is never a confusion on if it's open or not. So that forces us to build our business models around that as well. But >>Do you have a differentiated strategy? Talk about that. What's your what's your differentiation >>Are, are, well, I mean, with the cloud, a differentiation is that common cloud platform across I differentiate strategy from an open source perspective is to, to sort make open source consumable. And, and it's even more important now because as Linux Linux is the base of everything, there's not enough skills out there. So even, even a container platform like open source op like OpenShift, could you build your own? Certainly. Could you keep it updated? Could you keep it updated without breaking all the applications on top? Do you have an ecosystem around it? It's all of those things. It was, it was the support, the, the, the hardening the 10 year to predictability the ecosystem. That was, that was, that is the secret. I mean, we even put the secret out as open. >>Yeah, <laugh> right. Free, like a puppy, as they say. All right, Paul, thanks so much for coming back in the cubes. Great to see you face to face. Nice to see you guys get it. All right. Keep it right there. Dave Valante for Paul Gill, you're watching the cubes coverage of red hat summit, 2022 from Boston. Be right back.

>> Announcer: From around the globe. It's the cube with coverage of Kubecon and cloud nativecon North America, 2020 virtual brought to you by Red hat, the cloud native computing foundation and ecosystem partners. >> Welcome to theCUBE, >> Coverage of Kubecon cloud nativecon 2020. It's virtual this year, though, theCUBE is virtual. This is theCUBE virtual I'm John Furrier your host. This is the segment where we kind of pre tease out the show for this year. We do a CUBE review and analyze and talk about some of the things we're expecting trends in the marketplace. And I'm pleased to announce a new CUBE co-host with me, Ali Amagasu, who's been part of theCUBE community since 2013, going back to the OpenStack days, which is now different name, but it's private clouds making a come back. But she's part of the cloud community, the cloud Harati, as we say, Ali, welcome to being a CUBE host. >> Thank you so much, John. It's a pleasure, it's been a while since we've hung out, but I do remember pestering you back in those days, and I've certainly stayed with theCUBE ever since then. I mean, you guys are an institution to put it. >> It's been so much fun, I have to say I had less gray hair. I didn't have glasses, I wear contacts. Now I have progressive vision, so I can't wear the contacts. They're hard for me, but it's been such a great evolution. And one of the things that's been really important to our mission has been to be kind of like an upstream project to be kind of open and be part of the community to be on the ground floor. We can't be there this year 'cause of the pandemic, but it's been great and about a few years ago, Stu Miniman and I were seeing that we had a great community of people who wanted a co-host, and we got a great community host model. And thanks for coming on and being part of this mission, it's been important to our mission. We've got Lisa Martin, Rebecca Knight, John Troyer, Keith Townson, Justin Warren, Corey Quinn, to name a few. So welcome to the crew, thanks for coming on. >> Sure I'm happy to step in. >> So I want to go back in time. I mean, when we first met in 2013, you were a part of Metacloud, which got acquired by Cisco at that time, OpenStack was hot, OpenStack was at the cloud. And if you think about where Amazon was at that point and time, it was really the beginning of that sea change of rapid cloud scale, public cloud, specifically OpenStack kind of settled in, and that's kind of making a nice foundation for private cloud right now. It's still out there, telco clouds. You're seeing that trend, but this is the sixth Kubecon we've been there at all of them. We were there at the founding president creation. What an interesting turn of events. The world is kind of spun in the direction of all the conversations we were having back in 2013, 14, 15, 16. Now fast forward Kubernetes is the hottest thing on the planet and cloud native is the construct for all these modern apps, so what's your take on it. What's your view on this? 'Cause you've been riding this wave. >> Well, I think it's interesting. You brought up OpenStack because I remember in those days, OpenStack was smoking hot. And I remember talking to some of the organizers from the foundation, what they said was we want OpenStack to be boring. We want it to be part of the background. We will know we've made it when it's boring. And we could argue that they're there now, right? They aren't what we're talking about as much, but they're still there, they're still doing their thing. They're still growing as far as I know. So that's happened and now Kubernetes is the incredible hotness and it's just exploded. And so it turned from, you know, just a few projects, to now, if you look at the list of projects that are in incubation list of projects that have graduated, it's pretty long, and it's an impressive set of capabilities, when you look. >> It's been really interesting, you know, Dan Collin who's, the Ben was the director of the CNCF. I remember talking to him early on. And when he came, when he joined, he was, he hustled hard. He was smart. And he had a vision to balance the growing ecosystem cause he's done successful startups. So he kind of kind of knows the rocket ship labor, but he basically brought that entrepreneurial startup mentality. And I saw him in China when I was there with Intel with Alibaba conference in the lobby of the hotel, I'm like, dad, what are you doing here? So the CNC, I was already thinking global. They build out the most impressive landscape of vendors to participate in cloud nativecon and Kubecon At the same time, they maintain that end user focused. If you look at Envoy, right, it came from Lyft. So you have this really nice balance. And you know, it was always people chirping and complaining about this, that, and the other thing on the vendor's side. But the end user focus has been such a strong hand for Kubecon and the CNCF. It's just been really impressive and they maintain that. And this is the key. >> And I think what's impressive is that they've evolved. They've continued, they haven't sat there and said, "We've got a couple of fantastic projects," right? They're bringing in new ones all the time. They're staying at the cutting edge. They're looking at serverless and making sure there's projects that are taking care of that. And so I think that's, what's keeping it relevant, is the fact that they're relentlessly evolving. >> Yeah, and we comment, I think two years ago, Stu and I were pontificating about, can they maintain it? And one of the things that we were predicting, I want to get your reaction to this is that as Kubernetes becomes more standard and you're starting to see the tipping point now where it's beyond just testing and deploying in some clusters, you're starting to see Kubernetes native and in part of everything, in part of the future as service meshes and wrap around it and other things, the commercialization, the success of the vendor side is starting to be there. You starting to see real viable companies be started. So do they become end-users or so? So the question was, can it maintain its open source vibe while you have all this commercialization going on? Because that's always the challenge in open source. How do you balance it? What's your reaction to that threat or maybe an opportunity? >> I don't think it's a threat. I think there will always be folks who want to do it themselves. They want to use the vanilla upstream, Kubernetes. They want to build it. They don't want any vendor interference. There's also a very other solid other camp that says, "No, no, we don't want to deal with the updates ourselves. We don't want to deal with the integration with networking and security and all those things." And the vendor takes care of that. So I really think it's just serving two different audiences that as far as I can tell are changing, they're not, I don't see one side growing and one side shrinking. I really see it staying same, pretty stable. And so it's serving both teams. >> Yeah, I totally agree. And this is what's great about evolution. And when you talk about the community gets about the people involved. And I was riffing with someone the other day and were like, "Hey, you know what makes CNCF different?" And we were saying that everyone kind of knows each other. So as you have, you know, the most popular thing at Kubecon is the hallway tracks, right? So hallway tracks are always popular. And just being in the hallways, we call it lobby con and the CUBES on the floor there. So there's a lot of hallway conversations as hallway tracks, there's lightening talks, there's always something exciting, but even though people might move around from company to company for project to project, everyone kind of knows each other. So I think that kind of gives this kind of self governance piece, some legs. >> It does, and you're bringing up something that's really relevant right now 'cause it's virtual this year, right? So we don't get to have those hallway conversations. We don't get to have those, you know, accidental, you know, connections that means so much. I think they did an amazing job, amazing with the European version of Kubecon and you know, they're doing the best they can, I think the attend, I heard the attendance was great. The sessions were incredible from an efficiency standpoint. If you're an attendee, you could hit so many more sessions from home. There was so much to learn, the content was fabulous. The one thing that's missing, and I don't know how they replicate it is that ability to connect with your colleagues in the hallway, the folks you haven't seen'cause they, they moved on, they went to a different company. Maybe they'd been to two or three companies since you saw them last and the one place, you know, you're going to see them is at Kubecon or some of the other conferences you attend. >> Yeah and talking to Priyanka. And some of the co-chairs one of the things that was interesting out of that last conference was you had the virtual theater, but the Slack channel was very engaging. So you had people leaning in on the dialogue and it's interesting. And this is where I want to ask you your thoughts on the top conversations as we prepare. And we start doing the remote interviews, with the leaders of the CNCF, as well as the top end users, as well as vendors and companies, people want to know what's the top conversation that's happening and what are we looking for? So I want to ask you, what are you looking for, Ali? What are the things that you're trying to squint through? What smoke signals you're looking for? What's the trends that you're trying to tease out a coupon this year? >> I'm going to be really interested. You know, I already mentioned it once, but I'm going to be interested to hear how the new serverless projects are going. I know there are a couple in incubation that sounds really interesting. Priyanka brought them up when I've spoken with her. And so I'd love to see if those are getting so traction. What does the momentum around those look like? Is there as much excitement service meshes there was last year. I know there was a lot of discussion about what was happening with search. Most people were really excited. So I want to know what's happening with that. I want to know how new users to the community are dealing with the proliferation of projects. You know, how are they finding out ways to get involved? How are we nurturing new members to the CNCF community and making sure that they aren't overwhelmed, that they find their niche and they're able to contribute to become users, to do whatever their role is meant to be. I think those are the interesting things to me. How about you? >> That's a good question. I mean, I've, there's so many things. I mean, I look at the first of all, the open source projects are phenomenal. And again, talking about the people, I love to see the things that are maturing and getting promoted and what's kind of in sandbox, but I look at the, some of the ecosystem landscape maps with the vendors. And if you look at Amazon, Cisco and the HPE, IBM cloud, red hat, VMware to name a few, and you've got some other companies like Convolt for instance, which is pivoting to a cloud service, Microsoft Palo Alto networks for security Rancho was acquired., you know, a lot of companies are, I think at capital one out there, always in great end. You always great stuff. You got interesting and in Docker, for example, cup Docker containers, we did Docker con this year and I was blown away by the demand, the interest and just the openness of DAPA as they re-pivoted back to their roots. But I'm interested to see how the big cloud vendors are going to play because Google has always been an impressive and dominant partner in KubeCon, Amazon then joined, Azure is in there as well. So you've got those three, the big three in there. So the question is, okay, as this ecosystem is growing, I'm trying to tease out what is this, everything as a service, because one of the things that's coming out on the customer side, if you work backwards from the customer, they're getting kind of the missions from the CEOs and the CIO or CSO saying, "Take everything as a service," which is kind of like, I call it the ivory tower kind of marching orders. And then it gets handed down to the cloud architects and the developers and they go, "What's that? How's that, how does it's kind of hard?" It's not easy, right? So the modern apps is one and then this, everything as a service business model is going to be based upon cloud native. So I think the cloud native, this is the year that cloud native is going to start showing some signs and some visibility into what the metrics are going to be for success around the key projects. And then who can deliver at scale, do everything is a service. So, you know, understanding what that means, what does Kubernetes enable? What are some of the new things? So to me, I'm trying to tease that out because I think that's the next big wave. Everything is a service. And then what that means technically, how do you achieve it? Because when you start rolling out, it's like, okay, what's next? >> Yeah, I wonder who are going to be the new super users that emerged from this, you know, who are going to be the companies that maybe didn't adopt early, they're getting in now and they start running with it and they do incredible new things with it. And the truth is going to your earlier point about whether or not commercializing that, you know, should it be an upstream thing where you're using it vanilla using, you know, pure Kubernetes or using a vendor version? The truth is when you start getting vendors involved and getting super users involved, and these big companies, they can throw 10, 20 people at projects as contributors. You know, I tend to think of open source as being a bunch of small companies, but the truth is it's a lot harder for a small company to dedicate multiple head count to full-time contributions, right? Well big company, you could throw a couple dozen at them and not even blink. And so that's, it's critical to the survival truthfully of the community that we have, these big companies get in there and run with it. >> You know, I was talking to Constance and Steven Augustus, they're both co-chairs of the event and Steven brought up something. That's interesting because it's the theme that's kind of talked about, but no one likes to talk about it because it's kind of important and ugly at the same time. It's security and I think one of the things that I'm looking for this year, Ali is, you know, there's a buzz word out there has been kind of overused, but it's still kind of relevant and it's called shift left. So shift left means how do you build security into the CICB pipeline? So developers don't have to come back and do stuff, right? So it's like baking security in. This is going to be kind of a nuance point because of course everyone wants security, but that's not what application developers think about every day, right? It's like, they're not like security people, right? So, but they got to have security. So I think whoever can crack the code on making security brain dead easy will be great. And how that works together with across multiple vendors. So to me, that's something that I want to understand more. I don't yet have a formed opinion on it, but certainly we're hearing "Shift left" a lot. >> Yes I agree 100% at first we had developers and operators. Then we had devOps. Now I hear sec devOps all the time. You know, that I started hearing that last year and now these poor developers, you know, suddenly they are, whether they want to be, or not, to some degree, they are responsible for their company security, because if they aren't integrating best practices into their code, then they are introducing vulnerabilities. And so it it's just fallen upon them, whether they signed up for it or not, it's fallen upon them. And it'll be real interesting to see how that plays out. >> Well, one of the things I'd love to do is get me, you John, Troy, Keith Townsend, Justin Warren, and certainly Corey Quinn on a podcast or CUBE interview because man, we would have some war stories and have some real good stories to tell the evolution of what's real. And what's not real. Certainly Cory queen allows to talk about kind of like squinting through the hype and calling out kind of what's real, but this is kind of really kind of what's going on with coop comes a lot of exciting things. So I have to ask you over the years within CNCF and cloud nativecon and Kubecon, what are some of your favorite memories or moments that you can share could be personal, could be professional, could be code, could be accompany. What's some of the things that you can share about some, some happy moments for Kubecon >> Sure, sure, I'd say for me, some of the best moments have been the recent pivot toward trying to take care of the attendees. You know, I don't remember if it was San Diego. I think it was San Diego where they brought in all the puppies or mental wellness. And there was a meditation room. I don't know if you went in there, but it was quiet. And there was just some very soft lighting and some quiet music. And I didn't know how much traction that was going to get amongst attendees, that room was packed every time I went in there, dead quiet people relaxing, the puppies were bananas. People were just hoarding around the puppies and wanting to pet them. And I just really liked the way that they had really thought of a bunch of different angles to try to make sure that people who have left their families, they've come to a different place. They're, they're, they're under stress. 'Cause they're probably traveling with their boss and a bunch of their colleagues and they're stressed. And so to make sure that they had a break, I thought that was really somewhere where KubeCon was ahead of a lot of the other conferences I see. And it wasn't a single approach. It wasn't, we're going to throw a bunch of dogs in the hallway. It was, we're going to do that. We're going to have a therapist do a session. We're going to have puzzles in a quiet area at the hallway. It really went all in. And so for me, that was one of my favorite things from recent years. I thought that was fantastic. How about you? >> It's been fun. I mean, it's just so many moments. I mean, I love the European show. We did one year when I first, first time they had rolled out in Europe and I thought that was just so small and intimate. Of course the big mega shows have been great with activity. I think, but one of my favorite moments was I was wandering in the lobby. This was in Europe. It was, and it was a huge EU event, I think 2018 might've been, and I'm kind of buzzing around the lobby and I had nothing to do that night. And it was like five to 11 different parties to go to. People have, you know, dinners. And I ran into one of the CNCF co-hosts and also she's a Google engineer and I'm like, "Hey, what are you guys doing?" I'm like, she's like, "Oh, we're going to the women's happy hour." And I'm like, "Oh, that's cool." I'm like, "It sounds good." And she invited me and I went with her and I was the only guy there, okay. >> Oh lucky you. >> And I looked around and it was packed. And I said to myself, this is freaking amazing. And it was great women, great leaders, smart, super awesome. And they were all welcomed me. I wasn't like being stared at either, by the way. So I'm like, okay, there was no line for the men's room either by the way, just to, you know, and I was like, good tweet there. But I felt really welcomed. And I thought that was very cool. It was packed. And I went back until it's too much. Do you can't believe it was just really awesome. I was in this awesome happy hour. And I remember saying to myself, "This community is inclusive, they're awesome. And it was just one of just a great moment. >> It's great you've got to be the other side of that, right? Because as a woman, I am always on the standard side of it, which has guys everywhere, there's very few women, but here's the thing I have never felt intimidated or uncomfortable in any way at a Kubecon I've always felt welcomed, I've had fabulous interactions. I've met people from around the world. And I try to explain to my kids actually, when we talk and they they'll say something sometime not xenophobic, maybe that's an overstatement, but they're little kids. They don't have a great understanding of the world. And I'll say, "Wait till you grow up and you go to one of these conferences, you'll realize that people from countries that even fear that some of them there's some of the kindest, nicest, most polite people I have ever met. And you walk away really feeling like you want to just throw your arms around everyone, that's been my experience anyway. S0 maybe I've been lucky, but I haven't had that intimidation factor at all. >> You got it, you've got a great mindset and your kids are lucky. And I feel like for me, the moment was the community is very open and inclusive. And I think theCUBE when we interview people, we want people who are smart, you know, and we interview a lot of great women and at KubeCon, it's been fantastic, so that's the highlight. And of course the grueling hours, and then, you know, people like to drink beer in this community. And I like beer, although I'd been trimming down a little bit because, you know, IPA's have been kind of getting heavy on me, but good beer drinkers. They like to have fun and they also work hard and it's a great community, so. >> And now you have to bring your own beer. Now that it's virtual, you have to keep your own IPA. >> Well, the joke was virtual is that we can have a better lunch at home. 'Cause that's always kind of like the event thing. But I think virtuals, I miss the face to face, but we get to talk to more people with remote and they get more traffic on the site, but hopefully when it comes back, it'll be hybrid and we'll still be kind of doing more remote, but more face-to-face. >> So well, and it's more affordable. I did not look at what the pricing is this time, but I know for the European version, the pricing was very fair, certainly more affordable than going in real life. And, you know, for some folks who really can't swing that travel costs and the registration fee, it's a great opportunity to get in on the cheap and suck up a lot of knowledge really quickly. >> Well, Ali, thank you for riffing on Kubecon preview. Thank you very much. And looking forward to hosting with you and thanks for co-hosting on theCUBE, appreciate it. >> Thank you so much, John. I enjoyed it. >> Thank you, okay you're watching theCUBE virtual. This is a Kubecon preview. I'm here with Ali. I'm a goo who's our new CUBE host helping out on the Kubecon looking forward to more interviews, this is the CUBE I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching. (upbeat music)

>> Narrator: Live from Boston, Massachusetts. It's the Cube. Covering OpenStack Summit 2017. Brought to you by the OpenStack Foundation, Red Hat an additional ecosystem is support. >> Welcome back to the Cube. I'm Stu Miniman joined by my cohost John Troyer. Happy to welcome to the program two first-time guests. We have Anne McCormick who is a technical leader with Cisco. And we also have Sandhya Dasu who is a OpenStack engineer with Cisco. Thank you both for joining us. >> Sandhya: Thank you. >> Anne: Thank you. >> So Anne let's start with you, tell us just a little bit about your role at Cisco and what you're involved with when it comes to OpenStack. >> Absolutely, I've been at Cisco for 11 years. I have been working on OpenStack for about two-and-a-half now. It's been a blast, I've been to six different summits. I'm having a great time. My role at Cisco is I work under the Metacloud acquisition which is basically a managed, on-prem Cloud solution. And what my role is, is to bring Cisco technology into those deployments, so basically bringing the power of Cisco networking into OpenStack. >> Great so just to clarify, you weren't part of the Metacloud, you were part of Cisco. >> Anne: Yes. >> And you're working with that team who we know. We actually interviewed them back before the acquisition. Great to see you. Sandhya, tell us a little about your role, what you do at Cisco and with OpenStack. >> Sure, I have been with OpenStack the last three years. And Cisco about the same time as Anne, about 11 years. Worked in different routing technologies. But in OpenStack I'm responsible for the Neutron ML2 mechanism driver for Cisco UCS managers. So I've been having a great time in the OpenStack community. Developing in Neutron, giving upstreaming code and stuff like that, yeah. >> We wanted to talk about women of OpenStack but also the Women of OpenStack organization. Can you talk a little bit about what that group is here in the OpenStack community and how you got involved? >> Absolutely, Women of OpenStack is fantastic. It's something I discovered at my very first summit in Paris. I was a little leery going in 'cause I wasn't sure what the attitude would be, if it's us versus them kind of thing, that's definitely not what I'm looking for. But what I found was an extremely inclusive and encouraging community of women and men. It basically addresses the need for more women in technology and tries to make the community a more welcoming place and I think it takes both men and women to do that. And I think their charter is fantastic. They have really great events. >> Yeah, so I have been involved with Women in OpenStack also. Like Anne said, very inclusive community. I have been able to be at different levels of involvement, at different times based on the other work that I'm doing. But I also believe that just showing up and doing your work everyday is also setting a good example for everybody else to feel welcome. >> Great could you share a little bit, maybe start with Anne. The activities going on at the show. We know, like, just down the road from us here there's the Women in OpenStack lounge. I believe there's a lunch you had. What does it encompass at one of the summits? >> Yes, that's fairly typical that they have a lounge area. Today they had a working session during lunch. To kind of go over different things and discussion points. Also yesterday there was a speed mentoring session that I was a part of, it was fantastic. It was my first time doing that but I really enjoyed it. And they have ongoing mentoring for six month sessions which I'm also starting to get involved with. And I know I'm missing one, but there's just so many activities that they do, it's great. >> Sandhya? >> So I help out mostly with people trying to put their first code out for review. And I think that seems a bit daunting in the beginning because this is a very big community. You get a lot of code reviews. From lots of different people, how do you handle all the feedback? So I help out with people with their first upstreaming goal. Once they enter OpenStack. >> So I mean, tech has some diversity challenges, right. We, it's well-known, many communities in the technical realm, right? So the OpenStack community being an open source community. Comes out of a particular set of codes of conduct and expectations and participation. What have your experiences been working in the OpenStack community over the years? Does it feel, is it a, is it a welcoming egalitarian community? I mean, the Code of Conduct, last week we just had, there were some issues in the Kubernetes community which were swiftly addressed. I think the people's awareness actually is much higher than it was even say five years ago, let alone 10 or 20. But how have your experiences been working in OpenStack as a diverse and supportive community? >> I've found that my experience in the OpenStack community has been extremely positive. So I find that, I mean, before the open source, before I got into open source I did work with smart engineers but a comparatively smaller number. But now you get to interact with a whole, large number of really smart people and I think you should tap into that portion of your experience more than anything else. So the first time, I mean, I always found that I was happy with the code that I put out for review. But after making all the changes that I got as review comments, I was really proud of the output. So I think there are lots of positives in this environment. You need to make use of that, focus on that. And in terms of the Code of Conduct. I have only had very positive experiences here. >> And I find the community to be equally welcoming. When I walk into one of these big rooms with a predominantly male population I don't go in thinking I'm a female minority, I go in thinking I'm an engineer and this is my tribe, you know? So I think it's great. >> Alright, anything in particular that Sandhya was talking about. You know, setting an example as an engineer and as a female engineer. Anne what has your experience been? >> It's interesting, when I first started out in engineering. I got a scholarship to an engineering school, that was my first, when I started off on the road. And I remember being so proud and going up to receive this scholarship. And I heard somebody next to me say, "Oh what a waste, they're giving it to a girl." And it's funny because it had never until that point occurred to me that there might be any kind of perception like that. So my first knee-jerk reaction was, "Well I guess all the dinosaurs didn't go extinct." But after that-- >> John: Good for you. >> (laughs) But I mean I could easily have been bitter about it but instead I kind of saw it as an opportunity to set an example and to lead with my work and with my confidence. And to help to change the perception that gender matters when it comes to what you do for a living 'cause I don't believe it does. >> I studied in engineering. I know when I had group projects and had women on the project it helped, you need diversity of ideas. You need diversity of background and skillset. Sandhya, any comments about just diversity in general that you'd comment from the engineering standpoint? >> I think like Anne mentioned, once in a while you do get, you are conscious of the fact that there are very few other women in the room. But that's really, that should not be hindering your progress in any way. Just focus on being an engineer. And I think after a point everybody starts looking past the gender thing and just look at your work. >> Once you're around the table or you know, working on a shared whiteboard or Google doc, right, the gender falls away, you're working on the project. >> Sandhya: Exactly. >> Anne: Absolutely. >> And the same thing applies to IRC too. It's a very democratic channel. Everyone has an equal voice. And then in the end it turns out to be a meritocracy there. And if you have a good idea people will take it. Otherwise like everybody else, you just have to work on tweaking it. >> The concept of mentoring has come up a couple of times in this conversation already. As people look at the diverse workforce, and diverse workforce in tech. People talk about things like the pipeline problem. But from what I understand and have read, you know, a lot of it is supporting underrepresented groups within their careers and in their career growth right? And so that, a lot of that comes down to setting examples and mentoring. Can you talk a little bit about Women of OpenStack and how you talked about speed mentoring maybe and how, one let's talk about Women of OpenStack and mentoring. And then maybe even how you're doing mentoring in your own personal career at Cisco. >> Absolutely, mentoring is something that I'm kind of new to but it's becoming a passion of mine. As a way to both give back and to help encourage other people but also I get something out of it. I get inspired by the energy that people bring to things and by the enthusiasm. Yesterday at my speed mentoring session, one of the women that I talked to was very, very qualified and very excited about OpenStack. She has a full time job that doesn't involve OpenStack so she was involved in OpenStack on the side, you know, 'cause that's fun (laughs) to do on the side. But basically she was telling me that it was hard for her to break into the community. And she was a little bit shy about handing off her resume and stuff. And I think, I kind of said to her, "You know you're selling yourself short. "You've got a lot of enthusiasm. "And I think companies would be inspired by that. "And want to include you." So it was just kind of a nice way to help inspire people and encourage them. >> Have you done any mentoring yourself? >> Yes so I find that while I'm mentoring someone there's something that I get out of it too, because whenever you talk to a new grad you get this enthusiasm, this burst of enthusiasm. That helps you fuel your own work again. But I have heard lot of people discouraging each other from entering this field because they say it's not set up for their success. But then I think that's a self-possessing processing. So the more of them that there are in this field the better it is for everyone else. So that should not be a reason for not getting into this field. >> Sandhya could you talk to us a little about your upstream contributions, what things you've been proud of and excited about when it comes to OpenStack in general? >> Yeah so I have been active in the Neutron community. Mostly in the ML2 area of Neutron plugins. What I'm working on is the Cisco UCS mechanism driver for the Neutron ML2. What it helps you do is to use the Cisco UCS Manager to set up virtual networks, Neutron virtual networks and configure SR-IOV ports. And basically use the entire UCS ecosystem in context of OpenStack. >> Great, Anne you've been to six of these summits. Anything as you reflect back, just the maturity of the project, the maturity of the community. Or one of the themes this week has been kind of resetting expectations about what OpenStack is and isn't. What's your take on the community? >> That's interesting. I feel that there was a bit of a bubble perhaps. Maybe a year or so ago with OpenStack. But I don't think, I don't think we have to reset expectations too far. I do think that it's necessary, I don't think it's going anywhere. I think it's evolving and I really do see it as the second wave of the Internet. So we need it and I think it's great. >> Anne, Sandhya, really appreciate you joining, sharing your perspectives. We always love to have the diverse experience and OpenStack actually one of the better shows in making sure we have, you know, smart, energetic, contributing, you know, women participants in the community. We've had a number on, have a few more. So thanks so much for joining us and thanks for all of your contributions in the community. >> Anne: Thank you very much. >> Sandhya: Thank you for having us. >> John and myself, we'll be back with lots more coverage here from the Cube at OpenStack Summit Boston, Massachusetts. Thanks for watching the Cube. (upbeat techno music)

>> Voiceover: Live from Boston, Massachusettts, it's the Cube covering the Red Hat summit 2017. Brought to you by Red Hat. >> Welcome back to the Cube's coverage of the Red Hat Summit here in Boston, Massachusetts. I'm your host Rebecca Knight, along with my cohost Stu Miniman. We are joined by Radesh Balakrishnan. He is the general manager at openstack.com. Thank you so much for joining us, Radesh. >> My pleasure. >> I want to hear a status report. Where are we with openstack? What does it look like? Before the cameras were rolling you were saying we're alive and well, we're better than that, we're thriving. Lay it out for us. >> Yeah you could look at it from three perspectives. First is, how are we doing on number of production deployments. So just from the red hat lens itself, we have over 500 customers across the globe, spanning across multiple verticals, be it financial, telco, education, research and development, academia, etc. >> Stu: Put a point on that, production you said. >> Production customers. >> That doesn't include all the tests, you know that kind of stuff. >> That's right. >> Please. >> So that's a healthy spot to be in. The second lens to bring in from an openstack health perspective is how is the partner ecosystem shaping up? This is a space where there have been probably misreading of some of the moves that have been happening here. From our perspective, what has happened is a very healthy consolidation and standardization of the different place that needs to happen in the space. If you look at the openstack ecosystem that red hat has been able to pull through, we have certified solutions across compute, storage, networking, as well as ISP solutions that today customers can deploy with peace of mind. That's another indication of the fact that the ecosystem is maturing as well. A dimension along which that I'm personally excited about the ecosystem maturing is the fact that managed service providers are also taking on openstack and delivering solutions on top of it. For example, rackspace, IBM, Cisco metacloud, etc. All of them have built their manage service offering based on their openstack platform. >> So let's stay big picture here and look at the industry five years down the road, you're talking about it maturing, consolidation a natural part of that. What do you see, as I said again, big picture? >> I think the largest picture here is that hybrid cloud has become the norm. Five years ago, is cloud going to be there, real, is it secure, all of those questions have been answered. Multi cloud has become a real possibility. Hybrid cloud is going to be the normed implementation. The role openstack has is two fold in that context. One is, clearly as a private cloud implementation for enterprises wanting lack of vendor locking when it comes to implementing a cloud infrastructure. The second perspective is how can you stitch together multiple clouds using an API at the infrastructure layer that openstack can provide. That's the value that openstack is providing. >> Radesh, I want to dig into that a little bit because there was a vision of openstack, we're going to have, it will be the open cloud, we can build lots of clouds on that. You mentioned a few service providers. Of course rackspace was there since the early days. Great to see IBM, Cisco still doing some even though Cisco kind of killed the intercloud piece. But when I heard multi cloud talked about this week it is AWS, big partnership announcement with open shift. Google, Microsoft Azure, hybrid pieces of that and stitches those together, so I wonder, how does openstack in general and specifically the red hat solution stitch together openstack components with some of those other public cloud components? Because that seemed to be a gap in what openstack did itself. >> Yeah, so from our perspective, if you think it as a ratage, 80% of the focus is on private cloud. The remaining 20% is on think about security, privacy, compliance requirements dictating country specific public cloud requirements. Say Servpro in Brazil, or UK Cloud which provides services for Garmin Cloud, or Swisscom, a standing up Swiss cloud. That's kind of the mix and match of it. The context that I was worrying about was even when you have a private cloud, you can use the API that openstack provides to manipulate the resources that are on AWS, Google, Azure, etc. That's where I see the future shaping up. >> Radesh, we're going to be covering openstack next week, we'll see lots of red hatters there, I know. My take is that we need to reset expectations a little bit. I think red hat's been pretty consistent with what they're doing, but many people are unclear. We talked about certain players pulling back or partially or shifting what they're working on. Maybe I'd like to see your viewpoint on that as to a little bit of overblown expectations, certain players that might've been trying to push certain agendas vs. where red hat has seen things go and you want to see the community go forward. >> I think the first perspective to take here is that openstack is not the destination in itself. Openstack is an ingredient in the destination that customers want to get to. I talked a little bit about the open hybrid cloud being the end destination that customers want to get to. The usual layer cake of, there's the infrastructure layer, there's the application layer and there's the management layer. You want to get to an infrastructure layer that's open and openstack provides that one. Now, what has happened in the last two years is the focus around digital transformation has brought the shining light on the application layer square and center. In other words, developers are the kingmakers. In other words, the speed from thought to executing code is what is going to make or break a business. Which is why containers and derops, etc. is where the action is. But that doesn't preclude the need to have an adjoined infrastructure at the bottom layer. Rather than reinvent the need to do plumbing and compute and storage and networking level, you build on top of openstack so that you have open shift on top of openstack, like a Waru or a FICO doing it so that you get the fungible infrastructure at the bottom and then you get the derops implementation running on top of that. That's what we are seeing as the path to future. >> Yeah, I think that's a great point because it felt like that was a big piece missing at openstack is yeah, we've talked about containers there for a couple years but it's not about the application. I've heard lots of discussion about applications, application modernization, all the middle ware pieces. The core to many of the things that you guys are doing at red hat here and do you see, expect us to talk a lot about that at openstack summit next week? As things like Kubernetes and the container ecosystem matures, will that pull people away from some of the core activities? Because the base pieces of openstack are set in a lot of ways and sure, there's development work that needs to continue, but we've gotten some of the base pieces working well. People have been worried about some of the scope creep and the big tent and everything that falls out. How do you reconcile some of those pieces? >> Right, so I think it's a given that the world of containers and the world of openstack are coming together. Now, the confusion stems from the fact that some people are taking the view that containers are going to eliminate the need for openstack itself. The lens to bring to the picture is, how can the customer graduate from what they have to what they want to get to? If you come from that perspective, then first is to bring rationalization of existing resources by bringing in openstack and infrastructure layer. Bring in culture change through derops, through open shift, and then when it comes to implementing the full solution, you run open shift on top of openstack. That's the ideal that we get to see. Now, is every customer going to go through these steps? Maybe not, but the majority of the customer if you look at the customers who are embarking on transmuneration over the next three to five years, they're going to be in that bucket is my view. >> Can we go back to what you were saying about the beginning, it begins with the infrastructure, then the culture shift. Unpack that a little bit for us. What do you mean by that and what are you saying in terms of how that will lead to the transformation that companies want to get to? >> Right, so all I'm saying is technology is the easy part. It's down to are we fundamentally rewiring the way in which we are thinking about applications? The way in which we are writing the applications, the way in which we are delivering the applications to an entirely potentially new set of customers and partners? >> Last piece I want to ask you about is the openstack community. Some shifts as to who's contributing, talk to us a little bit about red hat's contribution, the really health of the various projects. Where you see good stuff coming out and anything as you look forward to next week without giving away what announcements you have. What should the community be excited about going into the summit? >> The openstack summits are always exciting because it's twice a year, family reunion for the whole community to come together. As a community, we made tremendous journey in identifying new use cases, such as NFE, delivering against that, etc. The other dimension is that, back to the point about rationalization etc., now there is clarity around the role of openstack itself in an infrastructure. The journey ahead is to make sure that containers and openstack can come together in a seamless manner. Secondly, in the hybrid cloud adoption model, openstack engineering will provide the API stability across the multi cloud infrastructure. Those are the areas I think all the discussions are going to be centered around next week. >> Great, Radesh thank you so much for your time. It's always a pleasure to sit down with you. >> Thank you very much. >> I'm Rebecca Knight for Stu Miniman, we'll back with one last session from the Red Hat Summit 2017. (upbeat music)