>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Spark became a top level Apache project in 2014, and then shortly thereafter, burst onto the big data scene. Spark, along with the cloud, transformed and in many ways, disrupted the big data market. Databricks optimized its tech stack for Spark and took advantage of the cloud to really cleverly deliver a managed service that has become a leading AI and data platform among data scientists and data engineers. However, emerging customer data requirements are shifting into a direction that will cause modern data platform players generally and Databricks, specifically, we think, to make some key directional decisions and perhaps even reinvent themselves. Hello and welcome to this week's wikibon theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we're going to do a deep dive into Databricks. We'll explore its current impressive market momentum. We're going to use some ETR survey data to show that, and then we'll lay out how customer data requirements are changing and what the ideal data platform will look like in the midterm future. We'll then evaluate core elements of the Databricks portfolio against that vision, and then we'll close with some strategic decisions that we think the company faces. And to do so, we welcome in our good friend, George Gilbert, former equities analyst, market analyst, and current Principal at TechAlpha Partners. George, good to see you. Thanks for coming on. >> Good to see you, Dave. >> All right, let me set this up. We're going to start by taking a look at where Databricks sits in the market in terms of how customers perceive the company and what it's momentum looks like. And this chart that we're showing here is data from ETS, the emerging technology survey of private companies. The N is 1,421. What we did is we cut the data on three sectors, analytics, database-data warehouse, and AI/ML. The vertical axis is a measure of customer sentiment, which evaluates an IT decision maker's awareness of the firm and the likelihood of engaging and/or purchase intent. The horizontal axis shows mindshare in the dataset, and we've highlighted Databricks, which has been a consistent high performer in this survey over the last several quarters. And as we, by the way, just as aside as we previously reported, OpenAI, which burst onto the scene this past quarter, leads all names, but Databricks is still prominent. You can see that the ETR shows some open source tools for reference, but as far as firms go, Databricks is very impressively positioned. Now, let's see how they stack up to some mainstream cohorts in the data space, against some bigger companies and sometimes public companies. This chart shows net score on the vertical axis, which is a measure of spending momentum and pervasiveness in the data set is on the horizontal axis. You can see that chart insert in the upper right, that informs how the dots are plotted, and net score against shared N. And that red dotted line at 40% indicates a highly elevated net score, anything above that we think is really, really impressive. And here we're just comparing Databricks with Snowflake, Cloudera, and Oracle. And that squiggly line leading to Databricks shows their path since 2021 by quarter. And you can see it's performing extremely well, maintaining an elevated net score and net range. Now it's comparable in the vertical axis to Snowflake, and it consistently is moving to the right and gaining share. Now, why did we choose to show Cloudera and Oracle? The reason is that Cloudera got the whole big data era started and was disrupted by Spark. And of course the cloud, Spark and Databricks and Oracle in many ways, was the target of early big data players like Cloudera. Take a listen to Cloudera CEO at the time, Mike Olson. This is back in 2010, first year of theCUBE, play the clip. >> Look, back in the day, if you had a data problem, if you needed to run business analytics, you wrote the biggest check you could to Sun Microsystems, and you bought a great big, single box, central server, and any money that was left over, you handed to Oracle for a database licenses and you installed that database on that box, and that was where you went for data. That was your temple of information. >> Okay? So Mike Olson implied that monolithic model was too expensive and inflexible, and Cloudera set out to fix that. But the best laid plans, as they say, George, what do you make of the data that we just shared? >> So where Databricks has really come up out of sort of Cloudera's tailpipe was they took big data processing, made it coherent, made it a managed service so it could run in the cloud. So it relieved customers of the operational burden. Where they're really strong and where their traditional meat and potatoes or bread and butter is the predictive and prescriptive analytics that building and training and serving machine learning models. They've tried to move into traditional business intelligence, the more traditional descriptive and diagnostic analytics, but they're less mature there. So what that means is, the reason you see Databricks and Snowflake kind of side by side is there are many, many accounts that have both Snowflake for business intelligence, Databricks for AI machine learning, where Snowflake, I'm sorry, where Databricks also did really well was in core data engineering, refining the data, the old ETL process, which kind of turned into ELT, where you loaded into the analytic repository in raw form and refine it. And so people have really used both, and each is trying to get into the other. >> Yeah, absolutely. We've reported on this quite a bit. Snowflake, kind of moving into the domain of Databricks and vice versa. And the last bit of ETR evidence that we want to share in terms of the company's momentum comes from ETR's Round Tables. They're run by Erik Bradley, and now former Gartner analyst and George, your colleague back at Gartner, Daren Brabham. And what we're going to show here is some direct quotes of IT pros in those Round Tables. There's a data science head and a CIO as well. Just make a few call outs here, we won't spend too much time on it, but starting at the top, like all of us, we can't talk about Databricks without mentioning Snowflake. Those two get us excited. Second comment zeros in on the flexibility and the robustness of Databricks from a data warehouse perspective. And then the last point is, despite competition from cloud players, Databricks has reinvented itself a couple of times over the year. And George, we're going to lay out today a scenario that perhaps calls for Databricks to do that once again. >> Their big opportunity and their big challenge for every tech company, it's managing a technology transition. The transition that we're talking about is something that's been bubbling up, but it's really epical. First time in 60 years, we're moving from an application-centric view of the world to a data-centric view, because decisions are becoming more important than automating processes. So let me let you sort of develop. >> Yeah, so let's talk about that here. We going to put up some bullets on precisely that point and the changing sort of customer environment. So you got IT stacks are shifting is George just said, from application centric silos to data centric stacks where the priority is shifting from automating processes to automating decision. You know how look at RPA and there's still a lot of automation going on, but from the focus of that application centricity and the data locked into those apps, that's changing. Data has historically been on the outskirts in silos, but organizations, you think of Amazon, think Uber, Airbnb, they're putting data at the core, and logic is increasingly being embedded in the data instead of the reverse. In other words, today, the data's locked inside the app, which is why you need to extract that data is sticking it to a data warehouse. The point, George, is we're putting forth this new vision for how data is going to be used. And you've used this Uber example to underscore the future state. Please explain? >> Okay, so this is hopefully an example everyone can relate to. The idea is first, you're automating things that are happening in the real world and decisions that make those things happen autonomously without humans in the loop all the time. So to use the Uber example on your phone, you call a car, you call a driver. Automatically, the Uber app then looks at what drivers are in the vicinity, what drivers are free, matches one, calculates an ETA to you, calculates a price, calculates an ETA to your destination, and then directs the driver once they're there. The point of this is that that cannot happen in an application-centric world very easily because all these little apps, the drivers, the riders, the routes, the fares, those call on data locked up in many different apps, but they have to sit on a layer that makes it all coherent. >> But George, so if Uber's doing this, doesn't this tech already exist? Isn't there a tech platform that does this already? >> Yes, and the mission of the entire tech industry is to build services that make it possible to compose and operate similar platforms and tools, but with the skills of mainstream developers in mainstream corporations, not the rocket scientists at Uber and Amazon. >> Okay, so we're talking about horizontally scaling across the industry, and actually giving a lot more organizations access to this technology. So by way of review, let's summarize the trend that's going on today in terms of the modern data stack that is propelling the likes of Databricks and Snowflake, which we just showed you in the ETR data and is really is a tailwind form. So the trend is toward this common repository for analytic data, that could be multiple virtual data warehouses inside of Snowflake, but you're in that Snowflake environment or Lakehouses from Databricks or multiple data lakes. And we've talked about what JP Morgan Chase is doing with the data mesh and gluing data lakes together, you've got various public clouds playing in this game, and then the data is annotated to have a common meaning. In other words, there's a semantic layer that enables applications to talk to the data elements and know that they have common and coherent meaning. So George, the good news is this approach is more effective than the legacy monolithic models that Mike Olson was talking about, so what's the problem with this in your view? >> So today's data platforms added immense value 'cause they connected the data that was previously locked up in these monolithic apps or on all these different microservices, and that supported traditional BI and AI/ML use cases. But now if we want to build apps like Uber or Amazon.com, where they've got essentially an autonomously running supply chain and e-commerce app where humans only care and feed it. But the thing is figuring out what to buy, when to buy, where to deploy it, when to ship it. We needed a semantic layer on top of the data. So that, as you were saying, the data that's coming from all those apps, the different apps that's integrated, not just connected, but it means the same. And the issue is whenever you add a new layer to a stack to support new applications, there are implications for the already existing layers, like can they support the new layer and its use cases? So for instance, if you add a semantic layer that embeds app logic with the data rather than vice versa, which we been talking about and that's been the case for 60 years, then the new data layer faces challenges that the way you manage that data, the way you analyze that data, is not supported by today's tools. >> Okay, so actually Alex, bring me up that last slide if you would, I mean, you're basically saying at the bottom here, today's repositories don't really do joins at scale. The future is you're talking about hundreds or thousands or millions of data connections, and today's systems, we're talking about, I don't know, 6, 8, 10 joins and that is the fundamental problem you're saying, is a new data error coming and existing systems won't be able to handle it? >> Yeah, one way of thinking about it is that even though we call them relational databases, when we actually want to do lots of joins or when we want to analyze data from lots of different tables, we created a whole new industry for analytic databases where you sort of mung the data together into fewer tables. So you didn't have to do as many joins because the joins are difficult and slow. And when you're going to arbitrarily join thousands, hundreds of thousands or across millions of elements, you need a new type of database. We have them, they're called graph databases, but to query them, you go back to the prerelational era in terms of their usability. >> Okay, so we're going to come back to that and talk about how you get around that problem. But let's first lay out what the ideal data platform of the future we think looks like. And again, we're going to come back to use this Uber example. In this graphic that George put together, awesome. We got three layers. The application layer is where the data products reside. The example here is drivers, rides, maps, routes, ETA, et cetera. The digital version of what we were talking about in the previous slide, people, places and things. The next layer is the data layer, that breaks down the silos and connects the data elements through semantics and everything is coherent. And then the bottom layers, the legacy operational systems feed that data layer. George, explain what's different here, the graph database element, you talk about the relational query capabilities, and why can't I just throw memory at solving this problem? >> Some of the graph databases do throw memory at the problem and maybe without naming names, some of them live entirely in memory. And what you're dealing with is a prerelational in-memory database system where you navigate between elements, and the issue with that is we've had SQL for 50 years, so we don't have to navigate, we can say what we want without how to get it. That's the core of the problem. >> Okay. So if I may, I just want to drill into this a little bit. So you're talking about the expressiveness of a graph. Alex, if you'd bring that back out, the fourth bullet, expressiveness of a graph database with the relational ease of query. Can you explain what you mean by that? >> Yeah, so graphs are great because when you can describe anything with a graph, that's why they're becoming so popular. Expressive means you can represent anything easily. They're conducive to, you might say, in a world where we now want like the metaverse, like with a 3D world, and I don't mean the Facebook metaverse, I mean like the business metaverse when we want to capture data about everything, but we want it in context, we want to build a set of digital twins that represent everything going on in the world. And Uber is a tiny example of that. Uber built a graph to represent all the drivers and riders and maps and routes. But what you need out of a database isn't just a way to store stuff and update stuff. You need to be able to ask questions of it, you need to be able to query it. And if you go back to prerelational days, you had to know how to find your way to the data. It's sort of like when you give directions to someone and they didn't have a GPS system and a mapping system, you had to give them turn by turn directions. Whereas when you have a GPS and a mapping system, which is like the relational thing, you just say where you want to go, and it spits out the turn by turn directions, which let's say, the car might follow or whoever you're directing would follow. But the point is, it's much easier in a relational database to say, "I just want to get these results. You figure out how to get it." The graph database, they have not taken over the world because in some ways, it's taking a 50 year leap backwards. >> Alright, got it. Okay. Let's take a look at how the current Databricks offerings map to that ideal state that we just laid out. So to do that, we put together this chart that looks at the key elements of the Databricks portfolio, the core capability, the weakness, and the threat that may loom. Start with the Delta Lake, that's the storage layer, which is great for files and tables. It's got true separation of compute and storage, I want you to double click on that George, as independent elements, but it's weaker for the type of low latency ingest that we see coming in the future. And some of the threats highlighted here. AWS could add transactional tables to S3, Iceberg adoption is picking up and could accelerate, that could disrupt Databricks. George, add some color here please? >> Okay, so this is the sort of a classic competitive forces where you want to look at, so what are customers demanding? What's competitive pressure? What are substitutes? Even what your suppliers might be pushing. Here, Delta Lake is at its core, a set of transactional tables that sit on an object store. So think of it in a database system, this is the storage engine. So since S3 has been getting stronger for 15 years, you could see a scenario where they add transactional tables. We have an open source alternative in Iceberg, which Snowflake and others support. But at the same time, Databricks has built an ecosystem out of tools, their own and others, that read and write to Delta tables, that's what makes the Delta Lake and ecosystem. So they have a catalog, the whole machine learning tool chain talks directly to the data here. That was their great advantage because in the past with Snowflake, you had to pull all the data out of the database before the machine learning tools could work with it, that was a major shortcoming. They fixed that. But the point here is that even before we get to the semantic layer, the core foundation is under threat. >> Yep. Got it. Okay. We got a lot of ground to cover. So we're going to take a look at the Spark Execution Engine next. Think of that as the refinery that runs really efficient batch processing. That's kind of what disrupted the DOOp in a large way, but it's not Python friendly and that's an issue because the data science and the data engineering crowd are moving in that direction, and/or they're using DBT. George, we had Tristan Handy on at Supercloud, really interesting discussion that you and I did. Explain why this is an issue for Databricks? >> So once the data lake was in place, what people did was they refined their data batch, and Spark has always had streaming support and it's gotten better. The underlying storage as we've talked about is an issue. But basically they took raw data, then they refined it into tables that were like customers and products and partners. And then they refined that again into what was like gold artifacts, which might be business intelligence metrics or dashboards, which were collections of metrics. But they were running it on the Spark Execution Engine, which it's a Java-based engine or it's running on a Java-based virtual machine, which means all the data scientists and the data engineers who want to work with Python are really working in sort of oil and water. Like if you get an error in Python, you can't tell whether the problems in Python or where it's in Spark. There's just an impedance mismatch between the two. And then at the same time, the whole world is now gravitating towards DBT because it's a very nice and simple way to compose these data processing pipelines, and people are using either SQL in DBT or Python in DBT, and that kind of is a substitute for doing it all in Spark. So it's under threat even before we get to that semantic layer, it so happens that DBT itself is becoming the authoring environment for the semantic layer with business intelligent metrics. But that's again, this is the second element that's under direct substitution and competitive threat. >> Okay, let's now move down to the third element, which is the Photon. Photon is Databricks' BI Lakehouse, which has integration with the Databricks tooling, which is very rich, it's newer. And it's also not well suited for high concurrency and low latency use cases, which we think are going to increasingly become the norm over time. George, the call out threat here is customers want to connect everything to a semantic layer. Explain your thinking here and why this is a potential threat to Databricks? >> Okay, so two issues here. What you were touching on, which is the high concurrency, low latency, when people are running like thousands of dashboards and data is streaming in, that's a problem because SQL data warehouse, the query engine, something like that matures over five to 10 years. It's one of these things, the joke that Andy Jassy makes just in general, he's really talking about Azure, but there's no compression algorithm for experience. The Snowflake guy started more than five years earlier, and for a bunch of reasons, that lead is not something that Databricks can shrink. They'll always be behind. So that's why Snowflake has transactional tables now and we can get into that in another show. But the key point is, so near term, it's struggling to keep up with the use cases that are core to business intelligence, which is highly concurrent, lots of users doing interactive query. But then when you get to a semantic layer, that's when you need to be able to query data that might have thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of joins. And that's a SQL query engine, traditional SQL query engine is just not built for that. That's the core problem of traditional relational databases. >> Now this is a quick aside. We always talk about Snowflake and Databricks in sort of the same context. We're not necessarily saying that Snowflake is in a position to tackle all these problems. We'll deal with that separately. So we don't mean to imply that, but we're just sort of laying out some of the things that Snowflake or rather Databricks customers we think, need to be thinking about and having conversations with Databricks about and we hope to have them as well. We'll come back to that in terms of sort of strategic options. But finally, when come back to the table, we have Databricks' AI/ML Tool Chain, which has been an awesome capability for the data science crowd. It's comprehensive, it's a one-stop shop solution, but the kicker here is that it's optimized for supervised model building. And the concern is that foundational models like GPT could cannibalize the current Databricks tooling, but George, can't Databricks, like other software companies, integrate foundation model capabilities into its platform? >> Okay, so the sound bite answer to that is sure, IBM 3270 terminals could call out to a graphical user interface when they're running on the XT terminal, but they're not exactly good citizens in that world. The core issue is Databricks has this wonderful end-to-end tool chain for training, deploying, monitoring, running inference on supervised models. But the paradigm there is the customer builds and trains and deploys each model for each feature or application. In a world of foundation models which are pre-trained and unsupervised, the entire tool chain is different. So it's not like Databricks can junk everything they've done and start over with all their engineers. They have to keep maintaining what they've done in the old world, but they have to build something new that's optimized for the new world. It's a classic technology transition and their mentality appears to be, "Oh, we'll support the new stuff from our old stuff." Which is suboptimal, and as we'll talk about, their biggest patron and the company that put them on the map, Microsoft, really stopped working on their old stuff three years ago so that they could build a new tool chain optimized for this new world. >> Yeah, and so let's sort of close with what we think the options are and decisions that Databricks has for its future architecture. They're smart people. I mean we've had Ali Ghodsi on many times, super impressive. I think they've got to be keenly aware of the limitations, what's going on with foundation models. But at any rate, here in this chart, we lay out sort of three scenarios. One is re-architect the platform by incrementally adopting new technologies. And example might be to layer a graph query engine on top of its stack. They could license key technologies like graph database, they could get aggressive on M&A and buy-in, relational knowledge graphs, semantic technologies, vector database technologies. George, as David Floyer always says, "A lot of ways to skin a cat." We've seen companies like, even think about EMC maintained its relevance through M&A for many, many years. George, give us your thought on each of these strategic options? >> Okay, I find this question the most challenging 'cause remember, I used to be an equity research analyst. I worked for Frank Quattrone, we were one of the top tech shops in the banking industry, although this is 20 years ago. But the M&A team was the top team in the industry and everyone wanted them on their side. And I remember going to meetings with these CEOs, where Frank and the bankers would say, "You want us for your M&A work because we can do better." And they really could do better. But in software, it's not like with EMC in hardware because with hardware, it's easier to connect different boxes. With software, the whole point of a software company is to integrate and architect the components so they fit together and reinforce each other, and that makes M&A harder. You can do it, but it takes a long time to fit the pieces together. Let me give you examples. If they put a graph query engine, let's say something like TinkerPop, on top of, I don't even know if it's possible, but let's say they put it on top of Delta Lake, then you have this graph query engine talking to their storage layer, Delta Lake. But if you want to do analysis, you got to put the data in Photon, which is not really ideal for highly connected data. If you license a graph database, then most of your data is in the Delta Lake and how do you sync it with the graph database? If you do sync it, you've got data in two places, which kind of defeats the purpose of having a unified repository. I find this semantic layer option in number three actually more promising, because that's something that you can layer on top of the storage layer that you have already. You just have to figure out then how to have your query engines talk to that. What I'm trying to highlight is, it's easy as an analyst to say, "You can buy this company or license that technology." But the really hard work is making it all work together and that is where the challenge is. >> Yeah, and well look, I thank you for laying that out. We've seen it, certainly Microsoft and Oracle. I guess you might argue that well, Microsoft had a monopoly in its desktop software and was able to throw off cash for a decade plus while it's stock was going sideways. Oracle had won the database wars and had amazing margins and cash flow to be able to do that. Databricks isn't even gone public yet, but I want to close with some of the players to watch. Alex, if you'd bring that back up, number four here. AWS, we talked about some of their options with S3 and it's not just AWS, it's blob storage, object storage. Microsoft, as you sort of alluded to, was an early go-to market channel for Databricks. We didn't address that really. So maybe in the closing comments we can. Google obviously, Snowflake of course, we're going to dissect their options in future Breaking Analysis. Dbt labs, where do they fit? Bob Muglia's company, Relational.ai, why are these players to watch George, in your opinion? >> So everyone is trying to assemble and integrate the pieces that would make building data applications, data products easy. And the critical part isn't just assembling a bunch of pieces, which is traditionally what AWS did. It's a Unix ethos, which is we give you the tools, you put 'em together, 'cause you then have the maximum choice and maximum power. So what the hyperscalers are doing is they're taking their key value stores, in the case of ASW it's DynamoDB, in the case of Azure it's Cosmos DB, and each are putting a graph query engine on top of those. So they have a unified storage and graph database engine, like all the data would be collected in the key value store. Then you have a graph database, that's how they're going to be presenting a foundation for building these data apps. Dbt labs is putting a semantic layer on top of data lakes and data warehouses and as we'll talk about, I'm sure in the future, that makes it easier to swap out the underlying data platform or swap in new ones for specialized use cases. Snowflake, what they're doing, they're so strong in data management and with their transactional tables, what they're trying to do is take in the operational data that used to be in the province of many state stores like MongoDB and say, "If you manage that data with us, it'll be connected to your analytic data without having to send it through a pipeline." And that's hugely valuable. Relational.ai is the wildcard, 'cause what they're trying to do, it's almost like a holy grail where you're trying to take the expressiveness of connecting all your data in a graph but making it as easy to query as you've always had it in a SQL database or I should say, in a relational database. And if they do that, it's sort of like, it'll be as easy to program these data apps as a spreadsheet was compared to procedural languages, like BASIC or Pascal. That's the implications of Relational.ai. >> Yeah, and again, we talked before, why can't you just throw this all in memory? We're talking in that example of really getting down to differences in how you lay the data out on disk in really, new database architecture, correct? >> Yes. And that's why it's not clear that you could take a data lake or even a Snowflake and why you can't put a relational knowledge graph on those. You could potentially put a graph database, but it'll be compromised because to really do what Relational.ai has done, which is the ease of Relational on top of the power of graph, you actually need to change how you're storing your data on disk or even in memory. So you can't, in other words, it's not like, oh we can add graph support to Snowflake, 'cause if you did that, you'd have to change, or in your data lake, you'd have to change how the data is physically laid out. And then that would break all the tools that talk to that currently. >> What in your estimation, is the timeframe where this becomes critical for a Databricks and potentially Snowflake and others? I mentioned earlier midterm, are we talking three to five years here? Are we talking end of decade? What's your radar say? >> I think something surprising is going on that's going to sort of come up the tailpipe and take everyone by storm. All the hype around business intelligence metrics, which is what we used to put in our dashboards where bookings, billings, revenue, customer, those things, those were the key artifacts that used to live in definitions in your BI tools, and DBT has basically created a standard for defining those so they live in your data pipeline or they're defined in their data pipeline and executed in the data warehouse or data lake in a shared way, so that all tools can use them. This sounds like a digression, it's not. All this stuff about data mesh, data fabric, all that's going on is we need a semantic layer and the business intelligence metrics are defining common semantics for your data. And I think we're going to find by the end of this year, that metrics are how we annotate all our analytic data to start adding common semantics to it. And we're going to find this semantic layer, it's not three to five years off, it's going to be staring us in the face by the end of this year. >> Interesting. And of course SVB today was shut down. We're seeing serious tech headwinds, and oftentimes in these sort of downturns or flat turns, which feels like this could be going on for a while, we emerge with a lot of new players and a lot of new technology. George, we got to leave it there. Thank you to George Gilbert for excellent insights and input for today's episode. I want to thank Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast, of course Ken Schiffman as well. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our EIC over at Siliconangle.com, he does some great editing. Remember all these episodes, they're available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, all you got to do is search Breaking Analysis Podcast, we publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com, or you can email me at David.Vellante@siliconangle.com, or DM me @DVellante. Comment on our LinkedIn post, and please do check out ETR.ai, great survey data, enterprise tech focus, phenomenal. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis.

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR, this is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> While never really meant to be a consumer tech event, the rapid ascendancy of smartphones sucked much of the air out of Mobile World Congress over the years, now MWC. And while the device manufacturers continue to have a major presence at the show, the maturity of intelligent devices, longer life cycles, and the disaggregation of the network stack, have put enterprise technologies front and center in the telco business. Semiconductor manufacturers, network equipment players, infrastructure companies, cloud vendors, software providers, and a spate of startups are eyeing the trillion dollar plus communications industry as one of the next big things to watch this decade. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights, powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we bring you part two of our ongoing coverage of MWC '23, with some new data on enterprise players specifically in large telco environments, a brief glimpse at some of the pre-announcement news and corresponding themes ahead of MWC, and some of the key announcement areas we'll be watching at the show on theCUBE. Now, last week we shared some ETR data that showed how traditional enterprise tech players were performing, specifically within the telecoms vertical. Here's a new look at that data from ETR, which isolates the same companies, but cuts the data for what ETR calls large telco. The N in this cut is 196, down from 288 last week when we included all company sizes in the dataset. Now remember the two dimensions here, on the y-axis is net score, or spending momentum, and on the x-axis is pervasiveness in the data set. The table insert in the upper left informs how the dots and companies are plotted, and that red dotted line, the horizontal line at 40%, that indicates a highly elevated net score. Now while the data are not dramatically different in terms of relative positioning, there are a couple of changes at the margin. So just going down the list and focusing on net score. Azure is comparable, but slightly lower in this sector in the large telco than it was overall. Google Cloud comes in at number two, and basically swapped places with AWS, which drops slightly in the large telco relative to overall telco. Snowflake is also slightly down by one percentage point, but maintains its position. Remember Snowflake, overall, its net score is much, much higher when measuring across all verticals. Snowflake comes down in telco, and relative to overall, a little bit down in large telco, but it's making some moves to attack this market that we'll talk about in a moment. Next are Red Hat OpenStack and Databricks. About the same in large tech telco as they were an overall telco. Then there's Dell next that has a big presence at MWC and is getting serious about driving 16G adoption, and new servers, and edge servers, and other partnerships. Cisco and Red Hat OpenShift basically swapped spots when moving from all telco to large telco, as Cisco drops and Red Hat bumps up a bit. And VMware dropped about four percentage points in large telco. Accenture moved up dramatically, about nine percentage points in big telco, large telco relative to all telco. HPE dropped a couple of percentage points. Oracle stayed about the same. And IBM surprisingly dropped by about five points. So look, I understand not a ton of change in terms of spending momentum in the large sector versus telco overall, but some deltas. The bottom line for enterprise players is one, they're just getting started in this new disruption journey that they're on as the stack disaggregates. Two, all these players have experience in delivering horizontal solutions, but now working with partners and identifying big problems to be solved, and three, many of these companies are generally not the fastest moving firms relative to smaller disruptive disruptors. Now, cloud has been an exception in fairness. But the good news for the legacy infrastructure and IT companies is that the telco transformation and the 5G buildout is going to take years. So it's moving at a pace that is very favorable to many of these companies. Okay, so looking at just some of the pre-announcement highlights that have hit the wire this week, I want to give you a glimpse of the diversity of innovation that is occurring in the telecommunication space. You got semiconductor manufacturers, device makers, network equipment players, carriers, cloud vendors, enterprise tech companies, software companies, startups. Now we've included, you'll see in this list, we've included OpeRAN, that logo, because there's so much buzz around the topic and we're going to come back to that. But suffice it to say, there's no way we can cover all the announcements from the 2000 plus exhibitors at the show. So we're going to cherry pick here and make a few call outs. Hewlett Packard Enterprise announced an acquisition of an Italian private cellular network company called AthoNet. Zeus Kerravala wrote about it on SiliconANGLE if you want more details. Now interestingly, HPE has a partnership with Solana, which also does private 5G. But according to Zeus, Solona is more of an out-of-the-box solution, whereas AthoNet is designed for the core and requires more integration. And as you'll see in a moment, there's going to be a lot of talk at the show about private network. There's going to be a lot of news there from other competitors, and we're going to be watching that closely. And while many are concerned about the P5G, private 5G, encroaching on wifi, Kerravala doesn't see it that way. Rather, he feels that these private networks are really designed for more industrial, and you know mission critical environments, like factories, and warehouses that are run by robots, et cetera. 'Cause these can justify the increased expense of private networks. Whereas wifi remains a very low cost and flexible option for, you know, whatever offices and homes. Now, over to Dell. Dell announced its intent to go hard after opening up the telco network with the announcement that in the second half of this year it's going to begin shipping its infrastructure blocks for Red Hat. Remember it's like kind of the converged infrastructure for telco with a more open ecosystem and sort of more flexible, you know, more mature engineered system. Dell has also announced a range of PowerEdge servers for a variety of use cases. A big wide line bringing forth its 16G portfolio and aiming squarely at the telco space. Dell also announced, here we go, a private wireless offering with airspan, and Expedo, and a solution with AthoNet, the company HPE announced it was purchasing. So I guess Dell and HPE are now partnering up in the private wireless space, and yes, hell is freezing over folks. We'll see where that relationship goes in the mid- to long-term. Dell also announced new lab and certification capabilities, which we said last week was going to be critical for the further adoption of open ecosystem technology. So props to Dell for, you know, putting real emphasis and investment in that. AWS also made a number of announcements in this space including private wireless solutions and associated managed services. AWS named Deutsche Telekom, Orange, T-Mobile, Telefonica, and some others as partners. And AWS announced the stepped up partnership, specifically with T-Mobile, to bring AWS services to T-Mobile's network portfolio. Snowflake, back to Snowflake, announced its telecom data cloud. Remember we showed the data earlier, it's Snowflake not as strong in the telco sector, but they're continuing to move toward this go-to market alignment within key industries, realigning their go-to market by vertical. It also announced that AT&T, and a number of other partners, are collaborating to break down data silos specifically in telco. Look, essentially, this is Snowflake taking its core value prop to the telco vertical and forming key partnerships that resonate in the space. So think simplification, breaking down silos, data sharing, eventually data monetization. Samsung previewed its future capability to allow smartphones to access satellite services, something Apple has previously done. AMD, Intel, Marvell, Qualcomm, are all in the act, all the semiconductor players. Qualcomm for example, announced along with Telefonica, and Erickson, a 5G millimeter network that will be showcased in Spain at the event this coming week using Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset platform, based on none other than Arm technology. Of course, Arm we said is going to dominate the edge, and is is clearly doing so. It's got the volume advantage over, you know, traditional Intel, you know, X86 architectures. And it's no surprise that Microsoft is touting its open AI relationship. You're going to hear a lot of AI talk at this conference as is AI is now, you know, is the now topic. All right, we could go on and on and on. There's just so much going on at Mobile World Congress or MWC, that we just wanted to give you a glimpse of some of the highlights that we've been watching. Which brings us to the key topics and issues that we'll be exploring at MWC next week. We touched on some of this last week. A big topic of conversation will of course be, you know, 5G. Is it ever going to become real? Is it, is anybody ever going to make money at 5G? There's so much excitement around and anticipation around 5G. It has not lived up to the hype, but that's because the rollout, as we've previous reported, is going to take years. And part of that rollout is going to rely on the disaggregation of the hardened telco stack, as we reported last week and in previous Breaking Analysis episodes. OpenRAN is a big component of that evolution. You know, as our RAN intelligent controllers, RICs, which essentially the brain of OpenRAN, if you will. Now as we build out 5G networks at massive scale and accommodate unprecedented volumes of data and apply compute-hungry AI to all this data, the issue of energy efficiency is going to be front and center. It has to be. Not only is it a, you know, hot political issue, the reality is that improving power efficiency is compulsory or the whole vision of telco's future is going to come crashing down. So chip manufacturers, equipment makers, cloud providers, everybody is going to be doubling down and clicking on this topic. Let's talk about AI. AI as we said, it is the hot topic right now, but it is happening not only in consumer, with things like ChatGPT. And think about the theme of this Breaking Analysis in the enterprise, AI in the enterprise cannot be ChatGPT. It cannot be error prone the way ChatGPT is. It has to be clean, reliable, governed, accurate. It's got to be ethical. It's got to be trusted. Okay, we're going to have Zeus Kerravala on the show next week and definitely want to get his take on private networks and how they're going to impact wifi. You know, will private networks cannibalize wifi? If not, why not? He wrote about this again on SiliconANGLE if you want more details, and we're going to unpack that on theCUBE this week. And finally, as always we'll be following the data flows to understand where and how telcos, cloud players, startups, software companies, disruptors, legacy companies, end customers, how are they going to make money from new data opportunities? 'Cause we often say in theCUBE, don't ever bet against data. All right, that's a wrap for today. Remember theCUBE is going to be on location at MWC 2023 next week. We got a great set. We're in the walkway in between halls four and five, right in Congress Square, stand CS-60. Look for us, we got a full schedule. If you got a great story or you have news, stop by. We're going to try to get you on the program. I'll be there with Lisa Martin, co-hosting, David Nicholson as well, and the entire CUBE crew, so don't forget to come by and see us. I want to thank Alex Myerson, who's on production and manages the podcast, and Ken Schiffman, as well, in our Boston studio. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at SiliconANGLE.com. He does some great editing. Thank you. All right, remember all these episodes they are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcasts. I publish each week on Wikibon.com and SiliconANGLE.com. All the video content is available on demand at theCUBE.net, or you can email me directly if you want to get in touch David.Vellante@SiliconANGLE.com or DM me @DVellante, or comment on our LinkedIn posts. And please do check out ETR.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next week at Mobile World Congress '23, MWC '23, or next time on Breaking Analysis. (bright music)

>> Hello and welcome to theCUBE's coverage of International Women's Day. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. Got a variety of interviews across the gamut from topics, women in tech, mentoring, pipelining, developers, open source, executives. Stanford's having International Women's Day celebration with the women in data science, which we're streaming that live as well. Variety of programs. In this segment, Meagen Eisenberg, friend of theCUBE, she's the CMO of Laceworks, is an amazing executive, got a great journey story as a CMO but she's also actively advising startups, companies and really pays it forward. I want to say Meagen, thank you for coming on the program and thanks for sharing. >> Yeah, thank you for having me. I'm happy to be here. >> Well, we're going to get into some of the journey celebrations that you've gone through and best practice what you've learned is pay that forward. But I got to say, one of the things that really impresses me about you as an executive is you get stuff done. You're a great CMO but also you're advised a lot of companies, you have a lot of irons in the fires and you're advising companies and sometimes they're really small startups to bigger companies, and you're paying it forward, which I love. That's kind of the spirit of this day. >> Yeah, I mean, I agree with you. When I think about my career, a lot of it was looking to mentors women out in the field. This morning I was at a breakfast by Eileen and we had the CEO of General Motors on, and she was talking about her journey nine years as a CEO. And you know, and she's paying it forward with us. But I think about, you know, when you're advising startups, you know, I've gathered knowledge and pattern recognition and to be able to share that is, you know, I enjoy it. >> Yeah. And the startups are also fun too, but it's not always easy and it can get kind of messy as you know. Some startups don't make it some succeed and it's always like the origination story is kind of rewritten and then that's that messy middle. And then it's like that arrows that don't look like a straight line but everyone thinks it's great and you know, it's not for the faint of heart. And Teresa Carlson, who I've interviewed many times, former Amazon, now she's the president of Flexport, she always says, sometimes startups on certain industries aren't for the faint of heart so you got to have a little bit of metal, right? You got to be tough. And some cases that you don't need that, but startups, it's not always easy. What have you learned? >> Yeah, I mean, certainly in the startup world, grit, creativity. You know, when I was at TripActions travel company, pandemic hits, nobody's traveling. You cut budget, you cut heads, but you focus on the core, right? You focus on what you need to survive. And creativity, I think, wins. And, you know, as a CMO when you're marketing, how do you get through that noise? Even the security space, Lacework, it's a fragmented market. You've got to be differentiated and position yourself and you know, be talking to the right target audience and customers. >> Talk about your journey over the years. What have you learned? What's some observations? Can you share any stories and best practices that someone watching could learn from? I know there's a lot of people coming into the tech space with the generative AI things going on in Cloud computing, scaling to the edge, there's a lot more aperture for technical jobs as well as just new roles and new roles that haven't, you really don't go to college for anymore. You got cybersecurity you're in. What are some of the things that you've done over your career if you can share and some best practices? >> Yeah, I think number one, continual learning. When I look through my career, I was constantly reading, networking. Part of the journey is who you're meeting along the way. As you become more senior, your ability to hire and bring in talent matters a lot. I'm always trying to meet with new people. Yeah, if I look at my Amazon feed of books I've bought, right, it kind of chronicle of my history of things I was learning about. Right now I'm reading a lot about cybersecurity, how the, you know, how how they tell me the world ends is the one I'm reading most recently. But you've got to come up to speed and then know the product, get in there and talk to customers. Certainly on the marketing front, anytime I can talk with the customer and find out how they're using us, why they love us, that, you know, helps me better position and differentiate our company. >> By the way, that book is amazing. I saw Nicole speak on Tuesday night with John Markoff and Palo Alto here. What a great story she told there. I recommend that book to everyone. It goes in and she did eight years of research into that book around zero day marketplaces to all the actors involved in security. And it was very interesting. >> Yeah, I mean, it definitely wakes you up, makes you think about what's going on in the world. Very relevant. >> It's like, yeah, it was happening all the time, wasn't it. All the hacking. But this brings me, this brings up an interesting point though, because you're in a cybersecurity area, which by the way, it's changing very fast. It's becoming a bigger industry. It's not just male dominated, although it is now, it's still male dominated, but it's becoming much more and then just tech. >> Yeah, I mean it's a constantly evolving threat landscape and we're learning, and I think more than ever you need to be able to use the data that companies have and, you know, learn from it. That's one of the ways we position ourselves. We're not just about writing rules that won't help you with those zero day attacks. You've got to be able to understand your particular environment and at any moment if it changes. And that's how we help you detect a threat. >> How is, how are things going with you? Is there any new things you guys got going on? Initiatives or programs for women in tech and increasing the range of diversity inclusion in the industry? Because again, this industry's getting much wider too. It's not just specialized, it's also growing. >> Yes, actually I'm excited. We're launching secured by women, securedbywomen.com and it's very much focused on women in the industry, which some studies are showing it's about 25% of security professionals are women. And we're going to be taking nominations and sponsoring women to go to upcoming security events. And so excited to launch that this month and really celebrate women in security and help them, you know, part of that continual learning that I talked about, making sure they're there learning, having the conversations at the conferences, being able to network. >> I have to ask you, what inspired you to pursue the career in tech? What was the motivation? >> You know, if I think way back, originally I wanted to be on the art side and my dad said, "You can do anything as long as it's in the sciences." And so in undergrad I did computer science and MIS. Graduated with MIS and computer science minor. And when I came out I was a IT engineer at Cisco and you know, that kind of started my journey and decided to go back and get my MBA. And during that process I fell in love with marketing and I thought, okay, I understand the buyer, I can come out and market technology to the IT world and developers. And then from there went to several tech companies. >> I mean my father was an engineer. He had the same kind of thing. You got to be an engineer, it's a steady, stable job. But that time, computer science, I mean we've seen the evolution of computer science now it's the most popular degree at Berkeley we've heard and around the world and the education formats are changing. You're seeing a lot of people's self-training on YouTube. The field has really changed. What are some of the challenges you see for folks trying to get into the industry and how would you advise today if you were talking to your young self, what would you, what would be the narrative? >> Yeah, I mean my drawback then was HTML pages were coming out and I thought it would be fun to design, you know, webpages. So you find something you're passionate about in the space today, whether it's gaming or it's cybersecurity. Go and be excited about it and apply and don't give up, right? Do whatever you can to read and learn. And you're right, there are a ton of online self-help. I always try to hire women and people who are continual learners and are teaching themselves something. And I try to find that in an interview to know that they, because when you come to a business, you're there to solve problems and challenges. And the folks that can do that and be innovative and learn, those are the ones I want on my team. >> It's interesting, you know, technology is now impacting society and we need everyone involved to participate and give requirements. And that kind of leads my next question for you is, like, in your opinion, or let me just step back, let me rephrase. What are some of the things that you see technology being used for, for society right now that will impact people's lives? Because this is not a gender thing. We need everybody involved 'cause society is now digital. Technology's pervasive. The AI trends now we're seeing is clearly unmasking to the mainstream that there's some cool stuff happening. >> Yeah, I mean, I think ChatGPT, think about that. All the different ways we're using it we're writing content and marketing with it. We're, you know, I just read an article yesterday, folks are using it to write children's stories and then selling those stories on Amazon, right? And the amount that they can produce with it. But if you think about it, there's unlimited uses with that technology and you've got all the major players getting involved on it. That one major launch and piece of technology is going to transform us in the next six months to a year. And it's the ability to process so much data and then turn that into just assets that we use and the creativity that's building on top of it. Even TripActions has incorporated ChatGPT into your ability to figure out where you want when you're traveling, what's happening in that city. So it's just, you're going to see that incorporated everywhere. >> I mean we've done an interview before TripAction, your other company you were at. Interesting point you don't have to type in a box to say, I'm traveling, I want a hotel. You can just say, I'm going to Barcelona for Mobile World Congress, I want to have a good time. I want some tapas and a nice dinner out. >> Yes. Yeah. That easy. We're making it easy. >> It's efficiency. >> And actually I was going to say for women specifically, I think the reason why we can do so much today is all the technology and apps that we have. I think about DoorDash, I think about Waze you know, when I was younger you had to print out instructions. Now I get in the car real quick, I need to go to soccer practice, I enter it, I need to pick them up at someone's house. I enter it. It's everything's real time. And so it takes away all the things that I don't add value to and allows me to focus on what I want in business. And so there's a bunch of, you know, apps out there that have allowed me to be so much more efficient and productive that my mother didn't have for sure when I was growing up. >> That is an amazing, I think that actually illustrates, in my opinion, the best example of ChatGPT because the maps and GPS integration were two techs, technologies merged together that replace driving and looking at the map. You know, like how do you do that? Like now it's automatically. This is what's going to happen to creative, to writing, to ideation. I even heard Nicole from her book read said that they're using ChatGPT to write zero day exploits. So you seeing it... >> That's scary stuff. You're right. >> You're seeing it everywhere. Super exciting. Well, I got to ask you before you get into some of the Lacework things that you're involved with, cause I think you're doing great work over there is, what was the most exciting projects you've worked on in your career? You came in Cisco, very technical company, so got the technical chops, CSMIS which stands for Management of Information Science for all the young people out there, that was the state of the art back then. What are some of the exciting things you've done? >> Yeah, I mean, I think about, I think about MongoDB and learning to market to developers. Taking the company public in 2017. Launching Atlas database as a service. Now there's so much more of that, you know, the PLG motion, going to TripActions, you know, surviving a pandemic, still being able to come out of that and all the learnings that went with it. You know, they recently, I guess rebranded, so they're Navan now. And then now back in the security space, you know, 14 years ago I was at ArcSite and we were bought by HP. And so getting back into the security world is exciting and it's transformed a ton as you know, it's way more complicated than it was. And so just understanding the pain of our customers and how we protect them as is fun. And I like, you know, being there from a marketing standpoint. >> Well we really appreciate you coming on and sharing that. I got to ask you, for folks watching they might be interested in some advice that you might have for them and their career in tech. I know a lot of young people love the tech. It's becoming pervasive in our lives, as we mentioned. What advice would you give for folks watching that want to start a career in tech? >> Yeah, so work hard, right? Study, network, your first job, be the best at it because every job after that you get pulled into a network. And every time I move, I'm hiring people from the last job, two jobs before, three jobs before. And I'm looking for people that are working hard, care, you know, are continual learners and you know, add value. What can you do to solve problems at your work and add value? >> What's your secret networking hack or growth hack or tip that you can share? Because you're a great networker by the way. You're amazing and you do add a lot of value. I've seen you in action. >> Well, I try never to eat alone. I've got breakfast, I've got lunch, I've got coffee breaks and dinner. And so when I'm at work, I try and always sit and eat with a team member, new group. If I'm out on the road, I'm, you know, meeting people for lunch, going for dinner, just, you know, don't sit at your desk by yourself and don't sit in the hotel room. Get out and meet with people. >> What do you think about now that we're out of the pandemic or somewhat out of the pandemic so to speak, events are back. >> Yes. >> RSA is coming up. It's a big event. The bigger events are getting bigger and then the other events are kind of smaller being distributed. What's your vision of how events are evolving? >> Yeah, I mean, you've got to be in person. Those are the relationships. Right now more than ever people care about renewals and you are building that rapport. And if you're not meeting with your customers, your competitors are. So what I would say is get out there Lacework, we're going to be at RSA, we're going to be at re:Inforce, we're going to be at all of these events, building relationships, you know, coffee, lunch, and yeah, I think the future of events are here to stay and those that don't embrace in person are going to give up business. They're going to lose market share to us. >> And networking is obviously very key on events as well. >> Yes. >> A good opportunity as always get out to the events. What's the event networking trick or advice do you give folks that are going to get out to the networking world? >> Yeah, schedule ahead of time. Don't go to an event and expect people just to come by for great swag. You should be partnering with your sales team and scheduling ahead of time, getting on people's calendars. Don't go there without having 100 or 200 meetings already booked. >> Got it. All right. Let's talk about you, your career. You're currently at Lacework. It's a very hot company in a hot field, security, very male dominated, you're a leader there. What's it like? What's the strategies? How does a woman get in there and be successful? What are some tricks, observations, any data you can share? What's the best practice? What's the secret sauce from Meagen Eisenberg? >> Yes. Yeah, for Meagen Eisenberg. For Lacework, you know, we're focused on our customers. There's nothing better than getting, being close to them, solving their pain, showcasing them. So if you want to go into security, focus on their, the issues and their problems and make sure they're aware of what you're delivering. I mean, we're focused on cloud security and we go from build time to run time. And that's the draw for me here is we had a lot of, you know, happy, excited customers by what we were doing. And what we're doing is very different from legacy security providers. And it is tapping into the trend of really understanding how much data you have and what's happening in the data to detect the anomalies and the threats that are there. >> You know, one of the conversations that I was just having with a senior leader, she was amazing and I asked her what she thought of the current landscape, the job market, the how to get promoted through the careers, all those things. And the response was interesting. I want to get your reaction. She said interdisciplinary skills are critical. And now more than ever, the having that, having a set of skills, technical and social and emotional are super valuable. Do you agree? What's your reaction to that and what would, how would you reframe that? >> Yeah, I mean, I completely agree. You can't be a leader without balance. You've got to know your craft because you're developing and training your team, but you also need to know the, you know, how to build relationships. You're not going to be successful as a C-level exec if you're not partnering across the functions. As a CMO I need to partner with product, I need to partner with the head of sales, I need to partner with finance. So those relationships matter a ton. I also need to attract the right talent. I want to have solid people on the team. And what I will say in the security, cybersecurity space, there's a talent shortage and you cannot hire enough people to protect your company in that space. And that's kind of our part of it is we reduce the number of alerts that you're getting. So you don't need hundreds of people to detect an issue. You're using technology to show, you know, to highlight the issue and then your team can focus on those alerts that matter. >> Yeah, there's a lot of emerging markets where leveling up and you don't need pedigree. You can just level up skill-wise pretty quickly. Which brings me to the next question for you is how do you keep up with all the tech day-to-day and how should someone watching stay on top of it? Because I mean, you got to be on top of this stuff and you got to ride the wave. It's pretty turbulent, but it's still growing and changing. >> Yeah, it's true. I mean, there's a lot of reading. I'm watching the news. Anytime something comes out, you know, ChatGPT I'm playing with it. I've got a great network and sharing. I'm on, you know, LinkedIn reading articles all the time. I have a team, right? Every time I hire someone, they bring new information and knowledge in and I'm you know, Cal Poly had this learn by doing that was the philosophy at San Luis Obispo. So do it. Try it, don't be afraid of it. I think that's the advice. >> Well, I love some of the points you mentioned community and network. You mentioned networking. That brings up the community question, how could people get involved? What communities are out there? How should they approach communities? 'Cause communities are also networks, but also they're welcoming people in that form networks. So it's a network of networks. So what's your take on how to engage and work with communities? How do you find your tribe? If someone's getting into the business, they want support, they might want technology learnings, what's your approach? >> Yeah, so a few, a few different places. One, I'm part of the operator collective, which is a strong female investment group that's open and works a lot with operators and they're in on the newest technologies 'cause they're investing in it. Chief I think is a great organization as well. You've got a lot of, if you're in marketing, there's a ton of CMO networking events that you can go to. I would say any field, even for us at Lacework, we've got some strong CISO networks and we do dinners around you know, we have one coming up in the Bay area, in Boston, New York, and you can come and meet other CISOs and security leaders. So when I get an invite and you know we all do, I will go to it. I'll carve out the time and meet with others. So I think, you know, part of the community is get out there and, you know, join some of these different groups. >> Meagen, thank you so much for spending the time. Final question for you. How do you see the future of tech evolving and how do you see your role in it? >> Yeah, I mean, marketing's changing wildly. There's so many different channels. You think about all the social media channels that have changed over the last five years. So when I think about the future of tech, I'm looking at apps on my phone. I have three daughters, 13, 11, and 8. I'm telling you, they come to me with new apps and new technology all the time, and I'm paying attention what they're, you know, what they're participating in and what they want to be a part of. And certainly it's going to be a lot more around the data and AI. I think we're only at the beginning of that. So we will continue to, you know, learn from it and wield it and deal with the mass amount of data that's out there. >> Well, you saw TikTok just got banned by the European Commission today around their staff. Interesting times. >> It is. >> Meagen, thank you so much as always. You're a great tech athlete. Been following your career for a while, a long time. You're an amazing leader. Thank you for sharing your story here on theCUBE, celebration of International Women's Day. Every day is IWD and thanks for coming on. >> Thank you for having me. >> Okay. I'm John Furrier here in theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto. Thank you for watching, more to come stay with us. (bright music)

(upbeat music) >> Okay, welcome back everyone at Supercloud 2 event, live here in Palo Alto, theCUBE Studios live stage performance, virtually syndicating it all over the world. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante here as Cube alumni, and special influencer guest, Howie Xu, VP of Machine Learning and Zscaler, also part-time as a CUBE analyst 'cause he is that good. Comes on all the time. You're basically a CUBE analyst as well. Thanks for coming on. >> Thanks for inviting me. >> John: Technically, you're not really a CUBE analyst, but you're kind of like a CUBE analyst. >> Happy New Year to everyone. >> Dave: Great to see you. >> Great to see you, Dave and John. >> John: We've been talking about ChatGPT online. You wrote a great post about it being more like Amazon, not like Google. >> Howie: More than just Google Search. >> More than Google Search. Oh, it's going to compete with Google Search, which it kind of does a little bit, but more its infrastructure. So a clever point, good segue into this conversation, because this is kind of the beginning of these kinds of next gen things we're going to see. Things where it's like an obvious next gen, it's getting real. Kind of like seeing the browser for the first time, Mosaic browser. Whoa, this internet thing's real. I think this is that moment and Supercloud like enablement is coming. So this has been a big part of the Supercloud kind of theme. >> Yeah, you talk about Supercloud, you talk about, you know, AI, ChatGPT. I really think the ChatGPT is really another Netscape moment, the browser moment. Because if you think about internet technology, right? It was brewing for 20 years before early 90s. Not until you had a, you know, browser, people realize, "Wow, this is how wonderful this technology could do." Right? You know, all the wonderful things. Then you have Yahoo and Amazon. I think we have brewing, you know, the AI technology for, you know, quite some time. Even then, you know, neural networks, deep learning. But not until ChatGPT came along, people realize, "Wow, you know, the user interface, user experience could be that great," right? So I really think, you know, if you look at the last 30 years, there is a browser moment, there is iPhone moment. I think ChatGPT moment is as big as those. >> Dave: What do you see as the intersection of things like ChatGPT and the Supercloud? Of course, the media's going to focus, journalists are going to focus on all the negatives and the privacy. Okay. You know we're going to get by that, right? Always do. Where do you see the Supercloud and sort of the distributed data fitting in with ChatGPT? Does it use that as a data source? What's the link? >> Howie: I think there are number of use cases. One of the use cases, we talked about why we even have Supercloud because of the complexity, because of the, you know, heterogeneous nature of different clouds. In order for me as a developer, in order for me to create applications, I have so many things to worry about, right? It's a complexity. But with ChatGPT, with the AI, I don't have to worry about it, right? Those kind of details will be taken care of by, you know, the underlying layer. So we have been talking about on this show, you know, over the last, what, year or so about the Supercloud, hey, defining that, you know, API layer spanning across, you know, multiple clouds. I think that will be happening. However, for a lot of the things, that will be more hidden, right? A lot of that will be automated by the bots. You know, we were just talking about it right before the show. One of the profound statement I heard from Adrian Cockcroft about 10 years ago was, "Hey Howie, you know, at Netflix, right? You know, IT is just one API call away." That's a profound statement I heard about a decade ago. I think next decade, right? You know, the IT is just one English language away, right? So when it's one English language away, it's no longer as important, API this, API that. You still need API just like hardware, right? You still need all of those things. That's going to be more hidden. The high level thing will be more, you know, English language or the language, right? Any language for that matter. >> Dave: And so through language, you'll tap services that live across the Supercloud, is what you're saying? >> Howie: You just tell what you want, what you desire, right? You know, the bots will help you to figure out where the complexity is, right? You know, like you said, a lot of criticism about, "Hey, ChatGPT doesn't do this, doesn't do that." But if you think about how to break things down, right? For instance, right, you know, ChatGPT doesn't have Microsoft stock price today, obviously, right? However, you can ask ChatGPT to write a program for you, retrieve the Microsoft stock price, (laughs) and then just run it, right? >> Dave: Yeah. >> So the thing to think about- >> John: It's only going to get better. It's only going to get better. >> The thing people kind of unfairly criticize ChatGPT is it doesn't do this. But can you not break down humans' task into smaller things and get complex things to be done by the ChatGPT? I think we are there already, you know- >> John: That to me is the real game changer. That's the assembly of atomic elements at the top of the stack, whether the interface is voice or some programmatic gesture based thing, you know, wave your hand or- >> Howie: One of the analogy I used in my blog was, you know, each person, each professional now is a quarterback. And we suddenly have, you know, a lot more linebacks or you know, any backs to work for you, right? For free even, right? You know, and then that's sort of, you should think about it. You are the quarterback of your day-to-day job, right? Your job is not to do everything manually yourself. >> Dave: You call the play- >> Yes. >> Dave: And they execute. Do your job. >> Yes, exactly. >> Yeah, all the players are there. All the elves are in the North Pole making the toys, Dave, as we say. But this is the thing, I want to get your point. This change is going to require a new kind of infrastructure software relationship, a new kind of operating runtime, a new kind of assembler, a new kind of loader link things. This very operating systems kind of concepts. >> Data intensive, right? How to process the data, how to, you know, process so gigantic data in parallel, right? That's actually a tough job, right? So if you think about ChatGPT, why OpenAI is ahead of the game, right? You know, Google may not want to acknowledge it, right? It's not necessarily they do, you know, not have enough data scientist, but the software engineering pieces, you know, behind it, right? To train the model, to actually do all those things in parallel, to do all those things in a cost effective way. So I think, you know, a lot of those still- >> Let me ask you a question. Let me ask you a question because we've had this conversation privately, but I want to do it while we're on stage here. Where are all the alpha geeks and developers and creators and entrepreneurs going to gravitate to? You know, in every wave, you see it in crypto, all the alphas went into crypto. Now I think with ChatGPT, you're going to start to see, like, "Wow, it's that moment." A lot of people are going to, you know, scrum and do startups. CTOs will invent stuff. There's a lot of invention, a lot of computer science and customer requirements to figure out. That's new. Where are the alpha entrepreneurs going to go to? What do you think they're going to gravitate to? If you could point to the next layer to enable this super environment, super app environment, Supercloud. 'Cause there's a lot to do to enable what you just said. >> Howie: Right. You know, if you think about using internet as the analogy, right? You know, in the early 90s, internet came along, browser came along. You had two kind of companies, right? One is Amazon, the other one is walmart.com. And then there were company, like maybe GE or whatnot, right? Really didn't take advantage of internet that much. I think, you know, for entrepreneurs, suddenly created the Yahoo, Amazon of the ChatGPT native era. That's what we should be all excited about. But for most of the Fortune 500 companies, your job is to surviving sort of the big revolution. So you at least need to do your walmart.com sooner than later, right? (laughs) So not be like GE, right? You know, hand waving, hey, I do a lot of the internet, but you know, when you look back last 20, 30 years, what did they do much with leveraging the- >> So you think they're going to jump in, they're going to build service companies or SaaS tech companies or Supercloud companies? >> Howie: Okay, so there are two type of opportunities from that perspective. One is, you know, the OpenAI ish kind of the companies, I think the OpenAI, the game is still open, right? You know, it's really Close AI today. (laughs) >> John: There's room for competition, you mean? >> There's room for competition, right. You know, you can still spend you know, 50, $100 million to build something interesting. You know, there are company like Cohere and so on and so on. There are a bunch of companies, I think there is that. And then there are companies who's going to leverage those sort of the new AI primitives. I think, you know, we have been talking about AI forever, but finally, finally, it's no longer just good, but also super useful. I think, you know, the time is now. >> John: And if you have the cloud behind you, what do you make the Amazon do differently? 'Cause Amazon Web Services is only going to grow with this. It's not going to get smaller. There's more horsepower to handle, there's more needs. >> Howie: Well, Microsoft already showed what's the future, right? You know, you know, yes, there is a kind of the container, you know, the serverless that will continue to grow. But the future is really not about- >> John: Microsoft's shown the future? >> Well, showing that, you know, working with OpenAI, right? >> Oh okay. >> They already said that, you know, we are going to have ChatGPT service. >> $10 billion, I think they're putting it. >> $10 billion putting, and also open up the Open API services, right? You know, I actually made a prediction that Microsoft future hinges on OpenAI. I think, you know- >> John: They believe that $10 billion bet. >> Dave: Yeah. $10 billion bet. So I want to ask you a question. It's somewhat academic, but it's relevant. For a number of years, it looked like having first mover advantage wasn't an advantage. PCs, spreadsheets, the browser, right? Social media, Friendster, right? Mobile. Apple wasn't first to mobile. But that's somewhat changed. The cloud, AWS was first. You could debate whether or not, but AWS okay, they have first mover advantage. Crypto, Bitcoin, first mover advantage. Do you think OpenAI will have first mover advantage? >> It certainly has its advantage today. I think it's year two. I mean, I think the game is still out there, right? You know, we're still in the first inning, early inning of the game. So I don't think that the game is over for the rest of the players, whether the big players or the OpenAI kind of the, sort of competitors. So one of the VCs actually asked me the other day, right? "Hey, how much money do I need to spend, invest, to get, you know, another shot to the OpenAI sort of the level?" You know, I did a- (laughs) >> Line up. >> That's classic VC. "How much does it cost me to replicate?" >> I'm pretty sure he asked the question to a bunch of guys, right? >> Good luck with that. (laughs) >> So we kind of did some napkin- >> What'd you come up with? (laughs) >> $100 million is the order of magnitude that I came up with, right? You know, not a billion, not 10 million, right? So 100 million. >> John: Hundreds of millions. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. 100 million order of magnitude is what I came up with. You know, we can get into details, you know, in other sort of the time, but- >> Dave: That's actually not that much if you think about it. >> Howie: Exactly. So when he heard me articulating why is that, you know, he's thinking, right? You know, he actually, you know, asked me, "Hey, you know, there's this company. Do you happen to know this company? Can I reach out?" You know, those things. So I truly believe it's not a billion or 10 billion issue, it's more like 100. >> John: And also, your other point about referencing the internet revolution as a good comparable. The other thing there is online user population was a big driver of the growth of that. So what's the equivalent here for online user population for AI? Is it more apps, more users? I mean, we're still early on, it's first inning. >> Yeah. We're kind of the, you know- >> What's the key metric for success of this sector? Do you have a read on that? >> I think the, you know, the number of users is a good metrics, but I think it's going to be a lot of people are going to use AI services without even knowing they're using it, right? You know, I think a lot of the applications are being already built on top of OpenAI, and then they are kind of, you know, help people to do marketing, legal documents, you know, so they're already inherently OpenAI kind of the users already. So I think yeah. >> Well, Howie, we've got to wrap, but I really appreciate you coming on. I want to give you a last minute to wrap up here. In your experience, and you've seen many waves of innovation. You've even had your hands in a lot of the big waves past three inflection points. And obviously, machine learning you're doing now, you're deep end. Why is this Supercloud movement, this wave of Supercloud and the discussion of this next inflection point, why is it so important? For the folks watching, why should they be paying attention to this particular moment in time? Could you share your super clip on Supercloud? >> Howie: Right. So this is simple from my point of view. So why do you even have cloud to begin with, right? IT is too complex, too complex to operate or too expensive. So there's a newer model. There is a better model, right? Let someone else operate it, there is elasticity out of it, right? That's great. Until you have multiple vendors, right? Many vendors even, you know, we're talking about kind of how to make multiple vendors look like the same, but frankly speaking, even one vendor has, you know, thousand services. Now it's kind of getting, what Kid was talking about what, cloud chaos, right? It's the evolution. You know, the history repeats itself, right? You know, you have, you know, next great things and then too many great things, and then people need to sort of abstract this out. So it's almost that you must do this. But I think how to abstract this out is something that at this time, AI is going to help a lot, right? You know, like I mentioned, right? A lot of the abstraction, you don't have to think about API anymore. I bet 10 years from now, you know, IT is one language away, not API away. So think about that world, right? So Supercloud in, in my opinion, sure, you kind of abstract things out. You have, you know, consistent layers. But who's going to do that? Is that like we all agreed upon the model, agreed upon those APIs? Not necessary. There are certain, you know, truth in that, but there are other truths, let bots take care of, right? Whether you know, I want some X happens, whether it's going to be done by Azure, by AWS, by GCP, bots will figure out at a given time with certain contacts with your security requirement, posture requirement. I'll think that out. >> John: That's awesome. And you know, Dave, you and I have been talking about this. We think scale is the new ratification. If you have first mover advantage, I'll see the benefit, but scale is a huge thing. OpenAI, AWS. >> Howie: Yeah. Every day, we are using OpenAI. Today, we are labeling data for them. So you know, that's a little bit of the- (laughs) >> John: Yeah. >> First mover advantage that other people don't have, right? So it's kind of scary. So I'm very sure that Google is a little bit- (laughs) >> When we do our super AI event, you're definitely going to be keynoting. (laughs) >> Howie: I think, you know, we're talking about Supercloud, you know, before long, we are going to talk about super intelligent cloud. (laughs) >> I'm super excited, Howie, about this. Thanks for coming on. Great to see you, Howie Xu. Always a great analyst for us contributing to the community. VP of Machine Learning and Zscaler, industry legend and friend of theCUBE. Thanks for coming on and sharing really, really great advice and insight into what this next wave means. This Supercloud is the next wave. "If you're not on it, you're driftwood," says Pat Gelsinger. So you're going to see a lot more discussion. We'll be back more here live in Palo Alto after this short break. >> Thank you. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Confidential computing is a technology that aims to enhance data privacy and security, by providing encrypted computation on sensitive data and isolating data, and apps that are fenced off enclave during processing. The concept of, I got to start over. I fucked that up, I'm sorry. That's not right, what I said was not right. On Dave in five, four, three. Confidential computing is a technology that aims to enhance data privacy and security by providing encrypted computation on sensitive data, isolating data from apps and a fenced off enclave during processing. The concept of confidential computing is gaining popularity, especially in the cloud computing space, where sensitive data is often stored and of course processed. However, there are some who view confidential computing as an unnecessary technology in a marketing ploy by cloud providers aimed at calming customers who are cloud phobic. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we revisit the notion of confidential computing, and to do so, we'll invite two Google experts to the show. But before we get there, let's summarize briefly. There's not a ton of ETR data on the topic of confidential computing, I mean, it's a technology that's deeply embedded into silicon and computing architectures. But at the highest level, security remains the number one priority being addressed by IT decision makers in the coming year as shown here. And this data is pretty much across the board by industry, by region, by size of company. I mean we dug into it and the only slight deviation from the mean is in financial services. The second and third most cited priorities, cloud migration and analytics are noticeably closer to cybersecurity in financial services than in other sectors, likely because financial services has always been hyper security conscious, but security is still a clear number one priority in that sector. The idea behind confidential computing is to better address threat models for data in execution. Protecting data at rest and data in transit have long been a focus of security approaches, but more recently, silicon manufacturers have introduced architectures that separate data and applications from the host system, ARM, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and other suppliers are all on board, as are the big cloud players. Now, the argument against confidential computing is that it narrowly focuses on memory encryption and it doesn't solve the biggest problems in security. Multiple system images, updates, different services and the entire code flow aren't directly addressed by memory encryption. Rather to truly attack these problems, many believe that OSs need to be re-engineered with the attacker and hacker in mind. There are so many variables and at the end of the day, critics say the emphasis on confidential computing made by cloud providers is overstated and largely hype. This tweet from security researcher Rodrigo Bronco, sums up the sentiment of many skeptics. He says, "Confidential computing is mostly a marketing campaign from memory encryption. It's not driving the industry towards the hard open problems. It is selling an illusion." Okay. Nonetheless, encrypting data in use and fencing off key components of the system isn't a bad thing, especially if it comes with the package essentially for free. There has been a lack of standardization and interoperability between different confidential computing approaches. But the confidential computing consortium was established in 2019 ostensibly to accelerate the market and influence standards. Notably, AWS is not part of the consortium, likely because the politics of the consortium were probably a conundrum for AWS because the base technology defined by the consortium is seen as limiting by AWS. This is my guess, not AWS' words. But I think joining the consortium would validate a definition which AWS isn't aligned with. And two, it's got to lead with this Annapurna acquisition. It was way ahead with ARM integration, and so it's probably doesn't feel the need to validate its competitors. Anyway, one of the premier members of the confidential computing consortium is Google, along with many high profile names, including Aem, Intel, Meta, Red Hat, Microsoft, and others. And we're pleased to welcome two experts on confidential computing from Google to unpack the topic. Nelly Porter is Head of Product for GCP Confidential Computing and Encryption and Dr. Patricia Florissi is the Technical Director for the Office of the CTO at Google Cloud. Welcome Nelly and Patricia, great to have you. >> Great to be here. >> Thank you so much for having us. >> You're very welcome. Nelly, why don't you start and then Patricia, you can weigh in. Just tell the audience a little bit about each of your roles at Google Cloud. >> So I'll start, I'm owning a lot of interesting activities in Google and again, security or infrastructure securities that I usually own. And we are talking about encryption, end-to-end encryption, and confidential computing is a part of portfolio. Additional areas that I contribute to get with my team to Google and our customers is secure software supply chain because you need to trust your software. Is it operate in your confidential environment to have end-to-end security, about if you believe that your software and your environment doing what you expect, it's my role. >> Got it. Okay, Patricia? >> Well, I am a Technical Director in the Office of the CTO, OCTO for short in Google Cloud. And we are a global team, we include former CTOs like myself and senior technologies from large corporations, institutions and a lot of success for startups as well. And we have two main goals, first, we walk side by side with some of our largest, more strategic or most strategical customers and we help them solve complex engineering technical problems. And second, we advice Google and Google Cloud Engineering, product management on emerging trends and technologies to guide the trajectory of our business. We are unique group, I think, because we have created this collaborative culture with our customers. And within OCTO I spend a lot of time collaborating with customers in the industry at large on technologies that can address privacy, security, and sovereignty of data in general. >> Excellent. Thank you for that both of you. Let's get into it. So Nelly, what is confidential computing from Google's perspective? How do you define it? >> Confidential computing is a tool and one of the tools in our toolbox. And confidential computing is a way how we would help our customers to complete this very interesting end-to-end lifecycle of the data. And when customers bring in the data to cloud and want to protect it as they ingest it to the cloud, they protect it at rest when they store data in the cloud. But what was missing for many, many years is ability for us to continue protecting data and workloads of our customers when they run them. And again, because data is not brought to cloud to have huge graveyard, we need to ensure that this data is actually indexed. Again, there is some insights driven and drawn from this data. You have to process this data and confidential computing here to help. Now we have end-to-end protection of our customer's data when they bring the workloads and data to cloud thanks to confidential computing. >> Thank you for that. Okay, we're going to get into the architecture a bit, but before we do Patricia, why do you think this topic of confidential computing is such an important technology? Can you explain? Do you think it's transformative for customers and if so, why? >> Yeah, I would maybe like to use one thought, one way, one intuition behind why confidential computing matters because at the end of the day, it reduces more and more the customer's thrush boundaries and the attack surface. That's about reducing that periphery, the boundary in which the customer needs to mind about trust and safety. And in a way is a natural progression that you're using encryption to secure and protect data in the same way that we are encrypting data in transit and at rest. Now, we are also encrypting data while in the use. And among other beneficials, I would say one of the most transformative ones is that organizations will be able to collaborate with each other and retain the confidentiality of the data. And that is across industry, even though it's highly focused on, I wouldn't say highly focused but very beneficial for highly regulated industries, it applies to all of industries. And if you look at financing for example, where bankers are trying to detect fraud and specifically double finance where a customer is actually trying to get a finance on an asset, let's say a boat or a house, and then it goes to another bank and gets another finance on that asset. Now bankers would be able to collaborate and detect fraud while preserving confidentiality and privacy of the data. >> Interesting and I want to understand that a little bit more but I got to push you a little bit on this, Nellie if I can, because there's a narrative out there that says confidential computing is a marketing ploy I talked about this up front, by cloud providers that are just trying to placate people that are scared of the cloud. And I'm presuming you don't agree with that, but I'd like you to weigh in here. The argument is confidential computing is just memory encryption, it doesn't address many other problems. It is over hyped by cloud providers. What do you say to that line of thinking? >> I absolutely disagree as you can imagine Dave, with this statement. But the most importantly is we mixing a multiple concepts I guess, and exactly as Patricia said, we need to look at the end-to-end story, not again, is a mechanism. How confidential computing trying to execute and protect customer's data and why it's so critically important. Because what confidential computing was able to do, it's in addition to isolate our tenants in multi-tenant environments the cloud offering to offer additional stronger isolation, they called it cryptographic isolation. It's why customers will have more trust to customers and to other customers, the tenants running on the same host but also us because they don't need to worry about against rats and more malicious attempts to penetrate the environment. So what confidential computing is helping us to offer our customers stronger isolation between tenants in this multi-tenant environment, but also incredibly important, stronger isolation of our customers to tenants from us. We also writing code, we also software providers, we also make mistakes or have some zero days. Sometimes again us introduce, sometimes introduced by our adversaries. But what I'm trying to say by creating this cryptographic layer of isolation between us and our tenants and among those tenants, we really providing meaningful security to our customers and eliminate some of the worries that they have running on multi-tenant spaces or even collaborating together with very sensitive data knowing that this particular protection is available to them. >> Okay, thank you. Appreciate that. And I think malicious code is often a threat model missed in these narratives. You know, operator access. Yeah, maybe I trust my cloud's provider, but if I can fence off your access even better, I'll sleep better at night separating a code from the data. Everybody's ARM, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and others, they're all doing it. I wonder if Nell, if we could stay with you and bring up the slide on the architecture. What's architecturally different with confidential computing versus how operating systems and VMs have worked traditionally? We're showing a slide here with some VMs, maybe you could take us through that. >> Absolutely, and Dave, the whole idea for Google and now industry way of dealing with confidential computing is to ensure that three main property is actually preserved. Customers don't need to change the code. They can operate in those VMs exactly as they would with normal non-confidential VMs. But to give them this opportunity of lift and shift though, no changing the apps and performing and having very, very, very low latency and scale as any cloud can, some things that Google actually pioneer in confidential computing. I think we need to open and explain how this magic was actually done, and as I said, it's again the whole entire system have to change to be able to provide this magic. And I would start with we have this concept of root of trust and root of trust where we will ensure that this machine within the whole entire host has integrity guarantee, means nobody changing my code on the most low level of system, and we introduce this in 2017 called Titan. So our specific ASIC, specific inch by inch system on every single motherboard that we have that ensures that your low level former, your actually system code, your kernel, the most powerful system is actually proper configured and not changed, not tempered. We do it for everybody, confidential computing included, but for confidential computing is what we have to change, we bring in AMD or future silicon vendors and we have to trust their former, their way to deal with our confidential environments. And that's why we have obligation to validate intelligent not only our software and our former but also former and software of our vendors, silicon vendors. So we actually, when we booting this machine as you can see, we validate that integrity of all of this system is in place. It means nobody touching, nobody changing, nobody modifying it. But then we have this concept of AMD Secure Processor, it's special ASIC best specific things that generate a key for every single VM that our customers will run or every single node in Kubernetes or every single worker thread in our Hadoop spark capability. We offer all of that and those keys are not available to us. It's the best case ever in encryption space because when we are talking about encryption, the first question that I'm receiving all the time, "Where's the key? Who will have access to the key?" because if you have access to the key then it doesn't matter if you encrypted or not. So, but the case in confidential computing why it's so revolutionary technology, us cloud providers who don't have access to the keys, they're sitting in the hardware and they fed to memory controller. And it means when hypervisors that also know about this wonderful things saying I need to get access to the memories, that this particular VM I'm trying to get access to. They do not decrypt the data, they don't have access to the key because those keys are random, ephemeral and per VM, but most importantly in hardware not exportable. And it means now you will be able to have this very interesting world that customers or cloud providers will not be able to get access to your memory. And what we do, again as you can see, our customers don't need to change their applications. Their VMs are running exactly as it should run. And what you've running in VM, you actually see your memory clear, it's not encrypted. But God forbid is trying somebody to do it outside of my confidential box, no, no, no, no, no, you will now be able to do it. Now, you'll see cyber test and it's exactly what combination of these multiple hardware pieces and software pieces have to do. So OS is also modified and OS is modified such way to provide integrity. It means even OS that you're running in your VM box is not modifiable and you as customer can verify. But the most interesting thing I guess how to ensure the super performance of this environment because you can imagine Dave, that's increasing and it's additional performance, additional time, additional latency. So we're able to mitigate all of that by providing incredibly interesting capability in the OS itself. So our customers will get no changes needed, fantastic performance and scales as they would expect from cloud providers like Google. >> Okay, thank you. Excellent, appreciate that explanation. So you know again, the narrative on this is, well, you've already given me guarantees as a cloud provider that you don't have access to my data, but this gives another level of assurance, key management as they say is key. Now humans aren't managing the keys, the machines are managing them. So Patricia, my question to you is in addition to, let's go pre-confidential computing days, what are the sort of new guarantees that these hardware based technologies are going to provide to customers? >> So if I am a customer, I am saying I now have full guarantee of confidentiality and integrity of the data and of the code. So if you look at code and data confidentiality, the customer cares and they want to know whether their systems are protected from outside or unauthorized access, and that we covered with Nelly that it is. Confidential computing actually ensures that the applications and data antennas remain secret. The code is actually looking at the data, only the memory is decrypting the data with a key that is ephemeral, and per VM, and generated on demand. Then you have the second point where you have code and data integrity and now customers want to know whether their data was corrupted, tempered with or impacted by outside actors. And what confidential computing ensures is that application internals are not tempered with. So the application, the workload as we call it, that is processing the data is also has not been tempered and preserves integrity. I would also say that this is all verifiable, so you have attestation and this attestation actually generates a log trail and the log trail guarantees that provides a proof that it was preserved. And I think that the offers also a guarantee of what we call sealing, this idea that the secrets have been preserved and not tempered with, confidentiality and integrity of code and data. >> Got it. Okay, thank you. Nelly, you mentioned, I think I heard you say that the applications is transparent, you don't have to change the application, it just comes for free essentially. And we showed some various parts of the stack before, I'm curious as to what's affected, but really more importantly, what is specifically Google's value add? How do partners participate in this, the ecosystem or maybe said another way, how does Google ensure the compatibility of confidential computing with existing systems and applications? >> And a fantastic question by the way, and it's very difficult and definitely complicated world because to be able to provide these guarantees, actually a lot of work was done by community. Google is very much operate and open. So again our operating system, we working this operating system repository OS is OS vendors to ensure that all capabilities that we need is part of the kernels are part of the releases and it's available for customers to understand and even explore if they have fun to explore a lot of code. We have also modified together with our silicon vendors kernel, host kernel to support this capability and it means working this community to ensure that all of those pages are there. We also worked with every single silicon vendor as you've seen, and it's what I probably feel that Google contributed quite a bit in this world. We moved our industry, our community, our vendors to understand the value of easy to use confidential computing or removing barriers. And now I don't know if you noticed Intel is following the lead and also announcing a trusted domain extension, very similar architecture and no surprise, it's a lot of work done with our partners to convince work with them and make this capability available. The same with ARM this year, actually last year, ARM announced future design for confidential computing, it's called confidential computing architecture. And it's also influenced very heavily with similar ideas by Google and industry overall. So it's a lot of work in confidential computing consortiums that we are doing, for example, simply to mention, to ensure interop as you mentioned, between different confidential environments of cloud providers. They want to ensure that they can attest to each other because when you're communicating with different environments, you need to trust them. And if it's running on different cloud providers, you need to ensure that you can trust your receiver when you sharing your sensitive data workloads or secret with them. So we coming as a community and we have this at Station Sig, the community-based systems that we want to build, and influence, and work with ARM and every other cloud providers to ensure that they can interop. And it means it doesn't matter where confidential workloads will be hosted, but they can exchange the data in secure, verifiable and controlled by customers really. And to do it, we need to continue what we are doing, working open and contribute with our ideas and ideas of our partners to this role to become what we see confidential computing has to become, it has to become utility. It doesn't need to be so special, but it's what what we've wanted to become. >> Let's talk about, thank you for that explanation. Let's talk about data sovereignty because when you think about data sharing, you think about data sharing across the ecosystem in different regions and then of course data sovereignty comes up, typically public policy, lags, the technology industry and sometimes it's problematic. I know there's a lot of discussions about exceptions but Patricia, we have a graphic on data sovereignty. I'm interested in how confidential computing ensures that data sovereignty and privacy edicts are adhered to, even if they're out of alignment maybe with the pace of technology. One of the frequent examples is when you delete data, can you actually prove the data is deleted with a hundred percent certainty, you got to prove that and a lot of other issues. So looking at this slide, maybe you could take us through your thinking on data sovereignty. >> Perfect. So for us, data sovereignty is only one of the three pillars of digital sovereignty. And I don't want to give the impression that confidential computing addresses it at all, that's why we want to step back and say, hey, digital sovereignty includes data sovereignty where we are giving you full control and ownership of the location, encryption and access to your data. Operational sovereignty where the goal is to give our Google Cloud customers full visibility and control over the provider operations, right? So if there are any updates on hardware, software stack, any operations, there is full transparency, full visibility. And then the third pillar is around software sovereignty, where the customer wants to ensure that they can run their workloads without dependency on the provider's software. So they have sometimes is often referred as survivability that you can actually survive if you are untethered to the cloud and that you can use open source. Now, let's take a deep dive on data sovereignty, which by the way is one of my favorite topics. And we typically focus on saying, hey, we need to care about data residency. We care where the data resides because where the data is at rest or in processing need to typically abides to the jurisdiction, the regulations of the jurisdiction where the data resides. And others say, hey, let's focus on data protection, we want to ensure the confidentiality, and integrity, and availability of the data, which confidential computing is at the heart of that data protection. But it is yet another element that people typically don't talk about when talking about data sovereignty, which is the element of user control. And here Dave, is about what happens to the data when I give you access to my data, and this reminds me of security two decades ago, even a decade ago, where we started the security movement by putting firewall protections and logging accesses. But once you were in, you were able to do everything you wanted with the data. An insider had access to all the infrastructure, the data, and the code. And that's similar because with data sovereignty, we care about whether it resides, who is operating on the data, but the moment that the data is being processed, I need to trust that the processing of the data we abide by user's control, by the policies that I put in place of how my data is going to be used. And if you look at a lot of the regulation today and a lot of the initiatives around the International Data Space Association, IDSA and Gaia-X, there is a movement of saying the two parties, the provider of the data and the receiver of the data going to agree on a contract that describes what my data can be used for. The challenge is to ensure that once the data crosses boundaries, that the data will be used for the purposes that it was intended and specified in the contract. And if you actually bring together, and this is the exciting part, confidential computing together with policy enforcement. Now, the policy enforcement can guarantee that the data is only processed within the confines of a confidential computing environment, that the workload is in cryptographically verified that there is the workload that was meant to process the data and that the data will be only used when abiding to the confidentiality and integrity safety of the confidential computing environment. And that's why we believe confidential computing is one necessary and essential technology that will allow us to ensure data sovereignty, especially when it comes to user's control. >> Thank you for that. I mean it was a deep dive, I mean brief, but really detailed. So I appreciate that, especially the verification of the enforcement. Last question, I met you two because as part of my year-end prediction post, you guys sent in some predictions and I wasn't able to get to them in the predictions post, so I'm thrilled that you were able to make the time to come on the program. How widespread do you think the adoption of confidential computing will be in '23 and what's the maturity curve look like this decade in your opinion? Maybe each of you could give us a brief answer. >> So my prediction in five, seven years as I started, it will become utility, it will become TLS. As of freakin' 10 years ago, we couldn't believe that websites will have certificates and we will support encrypted traffic. Now we do, and it's become ubiquity. It's exactly where our confidential computing is heeding and heading, I don't know we deserve yet. It'll take a few years of maturity for us, but we'll do that. >> Thank you. And Patricia, what's your prediction? >> I would double that and say, hey, in the very near future, you will not be able to afford not having it. I believe as digital sovereignty becomes ever more top of mind with sovereign states and also for multinational organizations, and for organizations that want to collaborate with each other, confidential computing will become the norm, it will become the default, if I say mode of operation. I like to compare that today is inconceivable if we talk to the young technologists, it's inconceivable to think that at some point in history and I happen to be alive, that we had data at rest that was non-encrypted, data in transit that was not encrypted. And I think that we'll be inconceivable at some point in the near future that to have unencrypted data while we use. >> You know, and plus I think the beauty of the this industry is because there's so much competition, this essentially comes for free. I want to thank you both for spending some time on Breaking Analysis, there's so much more we could cover. I hope you'll come back to share the progress that you're making in this area and we can double click on some of these topics. Really appreciate your time. >> Anytime. >> Thank you so much, yeah. >> In summary, while confidential computing is being touted by the cloud players as a promising technology for enhancing data privacy and security, there are also those as we said, who remain skeptical. The truth probably lies somewhere in between and it will depend on the specific implementation and the use case as to how effective confidential computing will be. Look as with any new tech, it's important to carefully evaluate the potential benefits, the drawbacks, and make informed decisions based on the specific requirements in the situation and the constraints of each individual customer. But the bottom line is silicon manufacturers are working with cloud providers and other system companies to include confidential computing into their architectures. Competition in our view will moderate price hikes and at the end of the day, this is under-the-covers technology that essentially will come for free, so we'll take it. I want to thank our guests today, Nelly and Patricia from Google. And thanks to Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well out of our Boston studio. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters, and Rob Hoof is our editor-in-chief over at siliconangle.com, does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com where you can get all the news. If you want to get in touch, you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me at D Vellante, and you can also comment on my LinkedIn post. Definitely you want to check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. I know we didn't hit on a lot today, but there's some amazing data and it's always being updated, so check that out. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (subtle music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> OpenAI The company, and ChatGPT have taken the world by storm. Microsoft reportedly is investing an additional 10 billion dollars into the company. But in our view, while the hype around ChatGPT is justified, we don't believe OpenAI will lock up the market with its first mover advantage. Rather, we believe that success in this market will be directly proportional to the quality and quantity of data that a technology company has at its disposal, and the compute power that it could deploy to run its system. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE insights, powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we unpack the excitement around ChatGPT, and debate the premise that the company's early entry into the space may not confer winner take all advantage to OpenAI. And to do so, we welcome CUBE collaborator, alum, Sarbjeet Johal, (chuckles) and John Furrier, co-host of the Cube. Great to see you Sarbjeet, John. Really appreciate you guys coming to the program. >> Great to be on. >> Okay, so what is ChatGPT? Well, actually we asked ChatGPT, what is ChatGPT? So here's what it said. ChatGPT is a state-of-the-art language model developed by OpenAI that can generate human-like text. It could be fine tuned for a variety of language tasks, such as conversation, summarization, and language translation. So I asked it, give it to me in 50 words or less. How did it do? Anything to add? >> Yeah, think it did good. It's large language model, like previous models, but it started applying the transformers sort of mechanism to focus on what prompt you have given it to itself. And then also the what answer it gave you in the first, sort of, one sentence or two sentences, and then introspect on itself, like what I have already said to you. And so just work on that. So it it's self sort of focus if you will. It does, the transformers help the large language models to do that. >> So to your point, it's a large language model, and GPT stands for generative pre-trained transformer. >> And if you put the definition back up there again, if you put it back up on the screen, let's see it back up. Okay, it actually missed the large, word large. So one of the problems with ChatGPT, it's not always accurate. It's actually a large language model, and it says state of the art language model. And if you look at Google, Google has dominated AI for many times and they're well known as being the best at this. And apparently Google has their own large language model, LLM, in play and have been holding it back to release because of backlash on the accuracy. Like just in that example you showed is a great point. They got almost right, but they missed the key word. >> You know what's funny about that John, is I had previously asked it in my prompt to give me it in less than a hundred words, and it was too long, I said I was too long for Breaking Analysis, and there it went into the fact that it's a large language model. So it largely, it gave me a really different answer the, for both times. So, but it's still pretty amazing for those of you who haven't played with it yet. And one of the best examples that I saw was Ben Charrington from This Week In ML AI podcast. And I stumbled on this thanks to Brian Gracely, who was listening to one of his Cloudcasts. Basically what Ben did is he took, he prompted ChatGPT to interview ChatGPT, and he simply gave the system the prompts, and then he ran the questions and answers into this avatar builder and sped it up 2X so it didn't sound like a machine. And voila, it was amazing. So John is ChatGPT going to take over as a cube host? >> Well, I was thinking, we get the questions in advance sometimes from PR people. We should actually just plug it in ChatGPT, add it to our notes, and saying, "Is this good enough for you? Let's ask the real question." So I think, you know, I think there's a lot of heavy lifting that gets done. I think the ChatGPT is a phenomenal revolution. I think it highlights the use case. Like that example we showed earlier. It gets most of it right. So it's directionally correct and it feels like it's an answer, but it's not a hundred percent accurate. And I think that's where people are seeing value in it. Writing marketing, copy, brainstorming, guest list, gift list for somebody. Write me some lyrics to a song. Give me a thesis about healthcare policy in the United States. It'll do a bang up job, and then you got to go in and you can massage it. So we're going to do three quarters of the work. That's why plagiarism and schools are kind of freaking out. And that's why Microsoft put 10 billion in, because why wouldn't this be a feature of Word, or the OS to help it do stuff on behalf of the user. So linguistically it's a beautiful thing. You can input a string and get a good answer. It's not a search result. >> And we're going to get your take on on Microsoft and, but it kind of levels the playing- but ChatGPT writes better than I do, Sarbjeet, and I know you have some good examples too. You mentioned the Reed Hastings example. >> Yeah, I was listening to Reed Hastings fireside chat with ChatGPT, and the answers were coming as sort of voice, in the voice format. And it was amazing what, he was having very sort of philosophy kind of talk with the ChatGPT, the longer sentences, like he was going on, like, just like we are talking, he was talking for like almost two minutes and then ChatGPT was answering. It was not one sentence question, and then a lot of answers from ChatGPT and yeah, you're right. I, this is our ability. I've been thinking deep about this since yesterday, we talked about, like, we want to do this segment. The data is fed into the data model. It can be the current data as well, but I think that, like, models like ChatGPT, other companies will have those too. They can, they're democratizing the intelligence, but they're not creating intelligence yet, definitely yet I can say that. They will give you all the finite answers. Like, okay, how do you do this for loop in Java, versus, you know, C sharp, and as a programmer you can do that, in, but they can't tell you that, how to write a new algorithm or write a new search algorithm for you. They cannot create a secretive code for you to- >> Not yet. >> Have competitive advantage. >> Not yet, not yet. >> but you- >> Can Google do that today? >> No one really can. The reasoning side of the data is, we talked about at our Supercloud event, with Zhamak Dehghani who's was CEO of, now of Nextdata. This next wave of data intelligence is going to come from entrepreneurs that are probably cross discipline, computer science and some other discipline. But they're going to be new things, for example, data, metadata, and data. It's hard to do reasoning like a human being, so that needs more data to train itself. So I think the first gen of this training module for the large language model they have is a corpus of text. Lot of that's why blog posts are, but the facts are wrong and sometimes out of context, because that contextual reasoning takes time, it takes intelligence. So machines need to become intelligent, and so therefore they need to be trained. So you're going to start to see, I think, a lot of acceleration on training the data sets. And again, it's only as good as the data you can get. And again, proprietary data sets will be a huge winner. Anyone who's got a large corpus of content, proprietary content like theCUBE or SiliconANGLE as a publisher will benefit from this. Large FinTech companies, anyone with large proprietary data will probably be a big winner on this generative AI wave, because it just, it will eat that up, and turn that back into something better. So I think there's going to be a lot of interesting things to look at here. And certainly productivity's going to be off the charts for vanilla and the internet is going to get swarmed with vanilla content. So if you're in the content business, and you're an original content producer of any kind, you're going to be not vanilla, so you're going to be better. So I think there's so much at play Dave (indistinct). >> I think the playing field has been risen, so we- >> Risen and leveled? >> Yeah, and leveled to certain extent. So it's now like that few people as consumers, as consumers of AI, we will have a advantage and others cannot have that advantage. So it will be democratized. That's, I'm sure about that. But if you take the example of calculator, when the calculator came in, and a lot of people are, "Oh, people can't do math anymore because calculator is there." right? So it's a similar sort of moment, just like a calculator for the next level. But, again- >> I see it more like open source, Sarbjeet, because like if you think about what ChatGPT's doing, you do a query and it comes from somewhere the value of a post from ChatGPT is just a reuse of AI. The original content accent will be come from a human. So if I lay out a paragraph from ChatGPT, did some heavy lifting on some facts, I check the facts, save me about maybe- >> Yeah, it's productive. >> An hour writing, and then I write a killer two, three sentences of, like, sharp original thinking or critical analysis. I then took that body of work, open source content, and then laid something on top of it. >> And Sarbjeet's example is a good one, because like if the calculator kids don't do math as well anymore, the slide rule, remember we had slide rules as kids, remember we first started using Waze, you know, we were this minority and you had an advantage over other drivers. Now Waze is like, you know, social traffic, you know, navigation, everybody had, you know- >> All the back roads are crowded. >> They're car crowded. (group laughs) Exactly. All right, let's, let's move on. What about this notion that futurist Ray Amara put forth and really Amara's Law that we're showing here, it's, the law is we, you know, "We tend to overestimate the effect of technology in the short run and underestimate it in the long run." Is that the case, do you think, with ChatGPT? What do you think Sarbjeet? >> I think that's true actually. There's a lot of, >> We don't debate this. >> There's a lot of awe, like when people see the results from ChatGPT, they say what, what the heck? Like, it can do this? But then if you use it more and more and more, and I ask the set of similar question, not the same question, and it gives you like same answer. It's like reading from the same bucket of text in, the interior read (indistinct) where the ChatGPT, you will see that in some couple of segments. It's very, it sounds so boring that the ChatGPT is coming out the same two sentences every time. So it is kind of good, but it's not as good as people think it is right now. But we will have, go through this, you know, hype sort of cycle and get realistic with it. And then in the long term, I think it's a great thing in the short term, it's not something which will (indistinct) >> What's your counter point? You're saying it's not. >> I, no I think the question was, it's hyped up in the short term and not it's underestimated long term. That's what I think what he said, quote. >> Yes, yeah. That's what he said. >> Okay, I think that's wrong with this, because this is a unique, ChatGPT is a unique kind of impact and it's very generational. People have been comparing it, I have been comparing to the internet, like the web, web browser Mosaic and Netscape, right, Navigator. I mean, I clearly still remember the days seeing Navigator for the first time, wow. And there weren't not many sites you could go to, everyone typed in, you know, cars.com, you know. >> That (indistinct) wasn't that overestimated, the overhyped at the beginning and underestimated. >> No, it was, it was underestimated long run, people thought. >> But that Amara's law. >> That's what is. >> No, they said overestimated? >> Overestimated near term underestimated- overhyped near term, underestimated long term. I got, right I mean? >> Well, I, yeah okay, so I would then agree, okay then- >> We were off the charts about the internet in the early days, and it actually exceeded our expectations. >> Well there were people who were, like, poo-pooing it early on. So when the browser came out, people were like, "Oh, the web's a toy for kids." I mean, in 1995 the web was a joke, right? So '96, you had online populations growing, so you had structural changes going on around the browser, internet population. And then that replaced other things, direct mail, other business activities that were once analog then went to the web, kind of read only as you, as we always talk about. So I think that's a moment where the hype long term, the smart money, and the smart industry experts all get the long term. And in this case, there's more poo-pooing in the short term. "Ah, it's not a big deal, it's just AI." I've heard many people poo-pooing ChatGPT, and a lot of smart people saying, "No this is next gen, this is different and it's only going to get better." So I think people are estimating a big long game on this one. >> So you're saying it's bifurcated. There's those who say- >> Yes. >> Okay, all right, let's get to the heart of the premise, and possibly the debate for today's episode. Will OpenAI's early entry into the market confer sustainable competitive advantage for the company. And if you look at the history of tech, the technology industry, it's kind of littered with first mover failures. Altair, IBM, Tandy, Commodore, they and Apple even, they were really early in the PC game. They took a backseat to Dell who came in the scene years later with a better business model. Netscape, you were just talking about, was all the rage in Silicon Valley, with the first browser, drove up all the housing prices out here. AltaVista was the first search engine to really, you know, index full text. >> Owned by Dell, I mean DEC. >> Owned by Digital. >> Yeah, Digital Equipment >> Compaq bought it. And of course as an aside, Digital, they wanted to showcase their hardware, right? Their super computer stuff. And then so Friendster and MySpace, they came before Facebook. The iPhone certainly wasn't the first mobile device. So lots of failed examples, but there are some recent successes like AWS and cloud. >> You could say smartphone. So I mean. >> Well I know, and you can, we can parse this so we'll debate it. Now Twitter, you could argue, had first mover advantage. You kind of gave me that one John. Bitcoin and crypto clearly had first mover advantage, and sustaining that. Guys, will OpenAI make it to the list on the right with ChatGPT, what do you think? >> I think categorically as a company, it probably won't, but as a category, I think what they're doing will, so OpenAI as a company, they get funding, there's power dynamics involved. Microsoft put a billion dollars in early on, then they just pony it up. Now they're reporting 10 billion more. So, like, if the browsers, Microsoft had competitive advantage over Netscape, and used monopoly power, and convicted by the Department of Justice for killing Netscape with their monopoly, Netscape should have had won that battle, but Microsoft killed it. In this case, Microsoft's not killing it, they're buying into it. So I think the embrace extend Microsoft power here makes OpenAI vulnerable for that one vendor solution. So the AI as a company might not make the list, but the category of what this is, large language model AI, is probably will be on the right hand side. >> Okay, we're going to come back to the government intervention and maybe do some comparisons, but what are your thoughts on this premise here? That, it will basically set- put forth the premise that it, that ChatGPT, its early entry into the market will not confer competitive advantage to >> For OpenAI. >> To Open- Yeah, do you agree with that? >> I agree with that actually. It, because Google has been at it, and they have been holding back, as John said because of the scrutiny from the Fed, right, so- >> And privacy too. >> And the privacy and the accuracy as well. But I think Sam Altman and the company on those guys, right? They have put this in a hasty way out there, you know, because it makes mistakes, and there are a lot of questions around the, sort of, where the content is coming from. You saw that as your example, it just stole the content, and without your permission, you know? >> Yeah. So as quick this aside- >> And it codes on people's behalf and the, those codes are wrong. So there's a lot of, sort of, false information it's putting out there. So it's a very vulnerable thing to do what Sam Altman- >> So even though it'll get better, others will compete. >> So look, just side note, a term which Reid Hoffman used a little bit. Like he said, it's experimental launch, like, you know, it's- >> It's pretty damn good. >> It is clever because according to Sam- >> It's more than clever. It's good. >> It's awesome, if you haven't used it. I mean you write- you read what it writes and you go, "This thing writes so well, it writes so much better than you." >> The human emotion drives that too. I think that's a big thing. But- >> I Want to add one more- >> Make your last point. >> Last one. Okay. So, but he's still holding back. He's conducting quite a few interviews. If you want to get the gist of it, there's an interview with StrictlyVC interview from yesterday with Sam Altman. Listen to that one it's an eye opening what they want- where they want to take it. But my last one I want to make it on this point is that Satya Nadella yesterday did an interview with Wall Street Journal. I think he was doing- >> You were not impressed. >> I was not impressed because he was pushing it too much. So Sam Altman's holding back so there's less backlash. >> Got 10 billion reasons to push. >> I think he's almost- >> Microsoft just laid off 10000 people. Hey ChatGPT, find me a job. You know like. (group laughs) >> He's overselling it to an extent that I think it will backfire on Microsoft. And he's over promising a lot of stuff right now, I think. I don't know why he's very jittery about all these things. And he did the same thing during Ignite as well. So he said, "Oh, this AI will write code for you and this and that." Like you called him out- >> The hyperbole- >> During your- >> from Satya Nadella, he's got a lot of hyperbole. (group talks over each other) >> All right, Let's, go ahead. >> Well, can I weigh in on the whole- >> Yeah, sure. >> Microsoft thing on whether OpenAI, here's the take on this. I think it's more like the browser moment to me, because I could relate to that experience with ChatG, personally, emotionally, when I saw that, and I remember vividly- >> You mean that aha moment (indistinct). >> Like this is obviously the future. Anything else in the old world is dead, website's going to be everywhere. It was just instant dot connection for me. And a lot of other smart people who saw this. Lot of people by the way, didn't see it. Someone said the web's a toy. At the company I was worked for at the time, Hewlett Packard, they like, they could have been in, they had invented HTML, and so like all this stuff was, like, they just passed, the web was just being passed over. But at that time, the browser got better, more websites came on board. So the structural advantage there was online web usage was growing, online user population. So that was growing exponentially with the rise of the Netscape browser. So OpenAI could stay on the right side of your list as durable, if they leverage the category that they're creating, can get the scale. And if they can get the scale, just like Twitter, that failed so many times that they still hung around. So it was a product that was always successful, right? So I mean, it should have- >> You're right, it was terrible, we kept coming back. >> The fail whale, but it still grew. So OpenAI has that moment. They could do it if Microsoft doesn't meddle too much with too much power as a vendor. They could be the Netscape Navigator, without the anti-competitive behavior of somebody else. So to me, they have the pole position. So they have an opportunity. So if not, if they don't execute, then there's opportunity. There's not a lot of barriers to entry, vis-a-vis say the CapEx of say a cloud company like AWS. You can't replicate that, Many have tried, but I think you can replicate OpenAI. >> And we're going to talk about that. Okay, so real quick, I want to bring in some ETR data. This isn't an ETR heavy segment, only because this so new, you know, they haven't coverage yet, but they do cover AI. So basically what we're seeing here is a slide on the vertical axis's net score, which is a measure of spending momentum, and in the horizontal axis's is presence in the dataset. Think of it as, like, market presence. And in the insert right there, you can see how the dots are plotted, the two columns. And so, but the key point here that we want to make, there's a bunch of companies on the left, is he like, you know, DataRobot and C3 AI and some others, but the big whales, Google, AWS, Microsoft, are really dominant in this market. So that's really the key takeaway that, can we- >> I notice IBM is way low. >> Yeah, IBM's low, and actually bring that back up and you, but then you see Oracle who actually is injecting. So I guess that's the other point is, you're not necessarily going to go buy AI, and you know, build your own AI, you're going to, it's going to be there and, it, Salesforce is going to embed it into its platform, the SaaS companies, and you're going to purchase AI. You're not necessarily going to build it. But some companies obviously are. >> I mean to quote IBM's general manager Rob Thomas, "You can't have AI with IA." information architecture and David Flynn- >> You can't Have AI without IA >> without, you can't have AI without IA. You can't have, if you have an Information Architecture, you then can power AI. Yesterday David Flynn, with Hammersmith, was on our Supercloud. He was pointing out that the relationship of storage, where you store things, also impacts the data and stressablity, and Zhamak from Nextdata, she was pointing out that same thing. So the data problem factors into all this too, Dave. >> So you got the big cloud and internet giants, they're all poised to go after this opportunity. Microsoft is investing up to 10 billion. Google's code red, which was, you know, the headline in the New York Times. Of course Apple is there and several alternatives in the market today. Guys like Chinchilla, Bloom, and there's a company Jasper and several others, and then Lena Khan looms large and the government's around the world, EU, US, China, all taking notice before the market really is coalesced around a single player. You know, John, you mentioned Netscape, they kind of really, the US government was way late to that game. It was kind of game over. And Netscape, I remember Barksdale was like, "Eh, we're going to be selling software in the enterprise anyway." and then, pshew, the company just dissipated. So, but it looks like the US government, especially with Lena Khan, they're changing the definition of antitrust and what the cause is to go after people, and they're really much more aggressive. It's only what, two years ago that (indistinct). >> Yeah, the problem I have with the federal oversight is this, they're always like late to the game, and they're slow to catch up. So in other words, they're working on stuff that should have been solved a year and a half, two years ago around some of the social networks hiding behind some of the rules around open web back in the days, and I think- >> But they're like 15 years late to that. >> Yeah, and now they got this new thing on top of it. So like, I just worry about them getting their fingers. >> But there's only two years, you know, OpenAI. >> No, but the thing (indistinct). >> No, they're still fighting other battles. But the problem with government is that they're going to label Big Tech as like a evil thing like Pharma, it's like smoke- >> You know Lena Khan wants to kill Big Tech, there's no question. >> So I think Big Tech is getting a very seriously bad rap. And I think anything that the government does that shades darkness on tech, is politically motivated in most cases. You can almost look at everything, and my 80 20 rule is in play here. 80% of the government activity around tech is bullshit, it's politically motivated, and the 20% is probably relevant, but off the mark and not organized. >> Well market forces have always been the determining factor of success. The governments, you know, have been pretty much failed. I mean you look at IBM's antitrust, that, what did that do? The market ultimately beat them. You look at Microsoft back in the day, right? Windows 95 was peaking, the government came in. But you know, like you said, they missed the web, right, and >> so they were hanging on- >> There's nobody in government >> to Windows. >> that actually knows- >> And so, you, I think you're right. It's market forces that are going to determine this. But Sarbjeet, what do you make of Microsoft's big bet here, you weren't impressed with with Nadella. How do you think, where are they going to apply it? Is this going to be a Hail Mary for Bing, or is it going to be applied elsewhere? What do you think. >> They are saying that they will, sort of, weave this into their products, office products, productivity and also to write code as well, developer productivity as well. That's a big play for them. But coming back to your antitrust sort of comments, right? I believe the, your comment was like, oh, fed was late 10 years or 15 years earlier, but now they're two years. But things are moving very fast now as compared to they used to move. >> So two years is like 10 Years. >> Yeah, two years is like 10 years. Just want to make that point. (Dave laughs) This thing is going like wildfire. Any new tech which comes in that I think they're going against distribution channels. Lina Khan has commented time and again that the marketplace model is that she wants to have some grip on. Cloud marketplaces are a kind of monopolistic kind of way. >> I don't, I don't see this, I don't see a Chat AI. >> You told me it's not Bing, you had an interesting comment. >> No, no. First of all, this is great from Microsoft. If you're Microsoft- >> Why? >> Because Microsoft doesn't have the AI chops that Google has, right? Google is got so much core competency on how they run their search, how they run their backends, their cloud, even though they don't get a lot of cloud market share in the enterprise, they got a kick ass cloud cause they needed one. >> Totally. >> They've invented SRE. I mean Google's development and engineering chops are off the scales, right? Amazon's got some good chops, but Google's got like 10 times more chops than AWS in my opinion. Cloud's a whole different story. Microsoft gets AI, they get a playbook, they get a product they can render into, the not only Bing, productivity software, helping people write papers, PowerPoint, also don't forget the cloud AI can super help. We had this conversation on our Supercloud event, where AI's going to do a lot of the heavy lifting around understanding observability and managing service meshes, to managing microservices, to turning on and off applications, and or maybe writing code in real time. So there's a plethora of use cases for Microsoft to deploy this. combined with their R and D budgets, they can then turbocharge more research, build on it. So I think this gives them a car in the game, Google may have pole position with AI, but this puts Microsoft right in the game, and they already have a lot of stuff going on. But this just, I mean everything gets lifted up. Security, cloud, productivity suite, everything. >> What's under the hood at Google, and why aren't they talking about it? I mean they got to be freaked out about this. No? Or do they have kind of a magic bullet? >> I think they have the, they have the chops definitely. Magic bullet, I don't know where they are, as compared to the ChatGPT 3 or 4 models. Like they, but if you look at the online sort of activity and the videos put out there from Google folks, Google technology folks, that's account you should look at if you are looking there, they have put all these distinctions what ChatGPT 3 has used, they have been talking about for a while as well. So it's not like it's a secret thing that you cannot replicate. As you said earlier, like in the beginning of this segment, that anybody who has more data and the capacity to process that data, which Google has both, I think they will win this. >> Obviously living in Palo Alto where the Google founders are, and Google's headquarters next town over we have- >> We're so close to them. We have inside information on some of the thinking and that hasn't been reported by any outlet yet. And that is, is that, from what I'm hearing from my sources, is Google has it, they don't want to release it for many reasons. One is it might screw up their search monopoly, one, two, they're worried about the accuracy, 'cause Google will get sued. 'Cause a lot of people are jamming on this ChatGPT as, "Oh it does everything for me." when it's clearly not a hundred percent accurate all the time. >> So Lina Kahn is looming, and so Google's like be careful. >> Yeah so Google's just like, this is the third, could be a third rail. >> But the first thing you said is a concern. >> Well no. >> The disruptive (indistinct) >> What they will do is do a Waymo kind of thing, where they spin out a separate company. >> They're doing that. >> The discussions happening, they're going to spin out the separate company and put it over there, and saying, "This is AI, got search over there, don't touch that search, 'cause that's where all the revenue is." (chuckles) >> So, okay, so that's how they deal with the Clay Christensen dilemma. What's the business model here? I mean it's not advertising, right? Is it to charge you for a query? What, how do you make money at this? >> It's a good question, I mean my thinking is, first of all, it's cool to type stuff in and see a paper get written, or write a blog post, or gimme a marketing slogan for this or that or write some code. I think the API side of the business will be critical. And I think Howie Xu, I know you're going to reference some of his comments yesterday on Supercloud, I think this brings a whole 'nother user interface into technology consumption. I think the business model, not yet clear, but it will probably be some sort of either API and developer environment or just a straight up free consumer product, with some sort of freemium backend thing for business. >> And he was saying too, it's natural language is the way in which you're going to interact with these systems. >> I think it's APIs, it's APIs, APIs, APIs, because these people who are cooking up these models, and it takes a lot of compute power to train these and to, for inference as well. Somebody did the analysis on the how many cents a Google search costs to Google, and how many cents the ChatGPT query costs. It's, you know, 100x or something on that. You can take a look at that. >> A 100x on which side? >> You're saying two orders of magnitude more expensive for ChatGPT >> Much more, yeah. >> Than for Google. >> It's very expensive. >> So Google's got the data, they got the infrastructure and they got, you're saying they got the cost (indistinct) >> No actually it's a simple query as well, but they are trying to put together the answers, and they're going through a lot more data versus index data already, you know. >> Let me clarify, you're saying that Google's version of ChatGPT is more efficient? >> No, I'm, I'm saying Google search results. >> Ah, search results. >> What are used to today, but cheaper. >> But that, does that, is that going to confer advantage to Google's large language (indistinct)? >> It will, because there were deep science (indistinct). >> Google, I don't think Google search is doing a large language model on their search, it's keyword search. You know, what's the weather in Santa Cruz? Or how, what's the weather going to be? Or you know, how do I find this? Now they have done a smart job of doing some things with those queries, auto complete, re direct navigation. But it's, it's not entity. It's not like, "Hey, what's Dave Vellante thinking this week in Breaking Analysis?" ChatGPT might get that, because it'll get your Breaking Analysis, it'll synthesize it. There'll be some, maybe some clips. It'll be like, you know, I mean. >> Well I got to tell you, I asked ChatGPT to, like, I said, I'm going to enter a transcript of a discussion I had with Nir Zuk, the CTO of Palo Alto Networks, And I want you to write a 750 word blog. I never input the transcript. It wrote a 750 word blog. It attributed quotes to him, and it just pulled a bunch of stuff that, and said, okay, here it is. It talked about Supercloud, it defined Supercloud. >> It's made, it makes you- >> Wow, But it was a big lie. It was fraudulent, but still, blew me away. >> Again, vanilla content and non accurate content. So we are going to see a surge of misinformation on steroids, but I call it the vanilla content. Wow, that's just so boring, (indistinct). >> There's so many dangers. >> Make your point, cause we got to, almost out of time. >> Okay, so the consumption, like how do you consume this thing. As humans, we are consuming it and we are, like, getting a nicely, like, surprisingly shocked, you know, wow, that's cool. It's going to increase productivity and all that stuff, right? And on the danger side as well, the bad actors can take hold of it and create fake content and we have the fake sort of intelligence, if you go out there. So that's one thing. The second thing is, we are as humans are consuming this as language. Like we read that, we listen to it, whatever format we consume that is, but the ultimate usage of that will be when the machines can take that output from likes of ChatGPT, and do actions based on that. The robots can work, the robot can paint your house, we were talking about, right? Right now we can't do that. >> Data apps. >> So the data has to be ingested by the machines. It has to be digestible by the machines. And the machines cannot digest unorganized data right now, we will get better on the ingestion side as well. So we are getting better. >> Data, reasoning, insights, and action. >> I like that mall, paint my house. >> So, okay- >> By the way, that means drones that'll come in. Spray painting your house. >> Hey, it wasn't too long ago that robots couldn't climb stairs, as I like to point out. Okay, and of course it's no surprise the venture capitalists are lining up to eat at the trough, as I'd like to say. Let's hear, you'd referenced this earlier, John, let's hear what AI expert Howie Xu said at the Supercloud event, about what it takes to clone ChatGPT. Please, play the clip. >> So one of the VCs actually asked me the other day, right? "Hey, how much money do I need to spend, invest to get a, you know, another shot to the openAI sort of the level." You know, I did a (indistinct) >> Line up. >> A hundred million dollar is the order of magnitude that I came up with, right? You know, not a billion, not 10 million, right? So a hundred- >> Guys a hundred million dollars, that's an astoundingly low figure. What do you make of it? >> I was in an interview with, I was interviewing, I think he said hundred million or so, but in the hundreds of millions, not a billion right? >> You were trying to get him up, you were like "Hundreds of millions." >> Well I think, I- >> He's like, eh, not 10, not a billion. >> Well first of all, Howie Xu's an expert machine learning. He's at Zscaler, he's a machine learning AI guy. But he comes from VMware, he's got his technology pedigrees really off the chart. Great friend of theCUBE and kind of like a CUBE analyst for us. And he's smart. He's right. I think the barriers to entry from a dollar standpoint are lower than say the CapEx required to compete with AWS. Clearly, the CapEx spending to build all the tech for the run a cloud. >> And you don't need a huge sales force. >> And in some case apps too, it's the same thing. But I think it's not that hard. >> But am I right about that? You don't need a huge sales force either. It's, what, you know >> If the product's good, it will sell, this is a new era. The better mouse trap will win. This is the new economics in software, right? So- >> Because you look at the amount of money Lacework, and Snyk, Snowflake, Databrooks. Look at the amount of money they've raised. I mean it's like a billion dollars before they get to IPO or more. 'Cause they need promotion, they need go to market. You don't need (indistinct) >> OpenAI's been working on this for multiple five years plus it's, hasn't, wasn't born yesterday. Took a lot of years to get going. And Sam is depositioning all the success, because he's trying to manage expectations, To your point Sarbjeet, earlier. It's like, yeah, he's trying to "Whoa, whoa, settle down everybody, (Dave laughs) it's not that great." because he doesn't want to fall into that, you know, hero and then get taken down, so. >> It may take a 100 million or 150 or 200 million to train the model. But to, for the inference to, yeah to for the inference machine, It will take a lot more, I believe. >> Give it, so imagine, >> Because- >> Go ahead, sorry. >> Go ahead. But because it consumes a lot more compute cycles and it's certain level of storage and everything, right, which they already have. So I think to compute is different. To frame the model is a different cost. But to run the business is different, because I think 100 million can go into just fighting the Fed. >> Well there's a flywheel too. >> Oh that's (indistinct) >> (indistinct) >> We are running the business, right? >> It's an interesting number, but it's also kind of, like, context to it. So here, a hundred million spend it, you get there, but you got to factor in the fact that the ways companies win these days is critical mass scale, hitting a flywheel. If they can keep that flywheel of the value that they got going on and get better, you can almost imagine a marketplace where, hey, we have proprietary data, we're SiliconANGLE in theCUBE. We have proprietary content, CUBE videos, transcripts. Well wouldn't it be great if someone in a marketplace could sell a module for us, right? We buy that, Amazon's thing and things like that. So if they can get a marketplace going where you can apply to data sets that may be proprietary, you can start to see this become bigger. And so I think the key barriers to entry is going to be success. I'll give you an example, Reddit. Reddit is successful and it's hard to copy, not because of the software. >> They built the moat. >> Because you can, buy Reddit open source software and try To compete. >> They built the moat with their community. >> Their community, their scale, their user expectation. Twitter, we referenced earlier, that thing should have gone under the first two years, but there was such a great emotional product. People would tolerate the fail whale. And then, you know, well that was a whole 'nother thing. >> Then a plane landed in (John laughs) the Hudson and it was over. >> I think verticals, a lot of verticals will build applications using these models like for lawyers, for doctors, for scientists, for content creators, for- >> So you'll have many hundreds of millions of dollars investments that are going to be seeping out. If, all right, we got to wrap, if you had to put odds on it that that OpenAI is going to be the leader, maybe not a winner take all leader, but like you look at like Amazon and cloud, they're not winner take all, these aren't necessarily winner take all markets. It's not necessarily a zero sum game, but let's call it winner take most. What odds would you give that open AI 10 years from now will be in that position. >> If I'm 0 to 10 kind of thing? >> Yeah, it's like horse race, 3 to 1, 2 to 1, even money, 10 to 1, 50 to 1. >> Maybe 2 to 1, >> 2 to 1, that's pretty low odds. That's basically saying they're the favorite, they're the front runner. Would you agree with that? >> I'd say 4 to 1. >> Yeah, I was going to say I'm like a 5 to 1, 7 to 1 type of person, 'cause I'm a skeptic with, you know, there's so much competition, but- >> I think they're definitely the leader. I mean you got to say, I mean. >> Oh there's no question. There's no question about it. >> The question is can they execute? >> They're not Friendster, is what you're saying. >> They're not Friendster and they're more like Twitter and Reddit where they have momentum. If they can execute on the product side, and if they don't stumble on that, they will continue to have the lead. >> If they say stay neutral, as Sam is, has been saying, that, hey, Microsoft is one of our partners, if you look at their company model, how they have structured the company, then they're going to pay back to the investors, like Microsoft is the biggest one, up to certain, like by certain number of years, they're going to pay back from all the money they make, and after that, they're going to give the money back to the public, to the, I don't know who they give it to, like non-profit or something. (indistinct) >> Okay, the odds are dropping. (group talks over each other) That's a good point though >> Actually they might have done that to fend off the criticism of this. But it's really interesting to see the model they have adopted. >> The wildcard in all this, My last word on this is that, if there's a developer shift in how developers and data can come together again, we have conferences around the future of data, Supercloud and meshs versus, you know, how the data world, coding with data, how that evolves will also dictate, 'cause a wild card could be a shift in the landscape around how developers are using either machine learning or AI like techniques to code into their apps, so. >> That's fantastic insight. I can't thank you enough for your time, on the heels of Supercloud 2, really appreciate it. All right, thanks to John and Sarbjeet for the outstanding conversation today. Special thanks to the Palo Alto studio team. My goodness, Anderson, this great backdrop. You guys got it all out here, I'm jealous. And Noah, really appreciate it, Chuck, Andrew Frick and Cameron, Andrew Frick switching, Cameron on the video lake, great job. And Alex Myerson, he's on production, manages the podcast for us, Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and our newsletters. Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at SiliconANGLE, does some great editing, thanks to all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcast, wherever you listen. Publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Want to get in touch, email me directly, david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me at dvellante, or comment on our LinkedIn post. And by all means, check out etr.ai. They got really great survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, We'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (electronic music)

>> Narrator: From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante >> Enterprise tech practitioners, like most of us they want to make their lives easier so they can focus on delivering more value to their businesses. And to do so, they want to tap best of breed services in the public cloud, but at the same time connect their on-prem intellectual property to emerging applications which drive top line revenue and bottom line profits. But creating a consistent experience across clouds and on-prem estates has been an elusive capability for most organizations, forcing trade-offs and injecting friction into the system. The need to create seamless experiences is clear and the technology industry is starting to respond with platforms, architectures, and visions of what we've called the Supercloud. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis we give you a preview of Supercloud 2, the second event of its kind that we've had on the topic. Yes, folks that's right Supercloud 2 is here. As of this recording, it's just about four days away 33 guests, 21 sessions, combining live discussions and fireside chats from theCUBE's Palo Alto Studio with prerecorded conversations on the future of cloud and data. You can register for free at supercloud.world. And we are super excited about the Supercloud 2 lineup of guests whereas Supercloud 22 in August, was all about refining the definition of Supercloud testing its technical feasibility and understanding various deployment models. Supercloud 2 features practitioners, technologists and analysts discussing what customers need with real-world examples of Supercloud and will expose thinking around a new breed of cross-cloud apps, data apps, if you will that change the way machines and humans interact with each other. Now the example we'd use if you think about applications today, say a CRM system, sales reps, what are they doing? They're entering data into opportunities they're choosing products they're importing contacts, et cetera. And sure the machine can then take all that data and spit out a forecast by rep, by region, by product, et cetera. But today's applications are largely about filling in forms and or codifying processes. In the future, the Supercloud community sees a new breed of applications emerging where data resides on different clouds, in different data storages, databases, Lakehouse, et cetera. And the machine uses AI to inspect the e-commerce system the inventory data, supply chain information and other systems, and puts together a plan without any human intervention whatsoever. Think about a system that orchestrates people, places and things like an Uber for business. So at Supercloud 2, you'll hear about this vision along with some of today's challenges facing practitioners. Zhamak Dehghani, the founder of Data Mesh is a headliner. Kit Colbert also is headlining. He laid out at the first Supercloud an initial architecture for what that's going to look like. That was last August. And he's going to present his most current thinking on the topic. Veronika Durgin of Sachs will be featured and talk about data sharing across clouds and you know what she needs in the future. One of the main highlights of Supercloud 2 is a dive into Walmart's Supercloud. Other featured practitioners include Western Union Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Warner Media. We've got deep, deep technology dives with folks like Bob Muglia, David Flynn Tristan Handy of DBT Labs, Nir Zuk, the founder of Palo Alto Networks focused on security. Thomas Hazel, who's going to talk about a new type of database for Supercloud. It's several analysts including Keith Townsend Maribel Lopez, George Gilbert, Sanjeev Mohan and so many more guests, we don't have time to list them all. They're all up on supercloud.world with a full agenda, so you can check that out. Now let's take a look at some of the things that we're exploring in more detail starting with the Walmart Cloud native platform, they call it WCNP. We definitely see this as a Supercloud and we dig into it with Jack Greenfield. He's the head of architecture at Walmart. Here's a quote from Jack. "WCNP is an implementation of Kubernetes for the Walmart ecosystem. We've taken Kubernetes off the shelf as open source." By the way, they do the same thing with OpenStack. "And we have integrated it with a number of foundational services that provide other aspects of our computational environment. Kubernetes off the shelf doesn't do everything." And so what Walmart chose to do, they took a do-it-yourself approach to build a Supercloud for a variety of reasons that Jack will explain, along with Walmart's so-called triplet architecture connecting on-prem, Azure and GCP. No surprise, there's no Amazon at Walmart for obvious reasons. And what they do is they create a common experience for devs across clouds. Jack is going to talk about how Walmart is evolving its Supercloud in the future. You don't want to miss that. Now, next, let's take a look at how Veronica Durgin of SAKS thinks about data sharing across clouds. Data sharing we think is a potential killer use case for Supercloud. In fact, let's hear it in Veronica's own words. Please play the clip. >> How do we talk to each other? And more importantly, how do we data share? You know, I work with data, you know this is what I do. So if you know I want to get data from a company that's using, say Google, how do we share it in a smooth way where it doesn't have to be this crazy I don't know, SFTP file moving? So that's where I think Supercloud comes to me in my mind, is like practical applications. How do we create that mesh, that network that we can easily share data with each other? >> Now data mesh is a possible architectural approach that will enable more facile data sharing and the monetization of data products. You'll hear Zhamak Dehghani live in studio talking about what standards are missing to make this vision a reality across the Supercloud. Now one of the other things that we're really excited about is digging deeper into the right approach for Supercloud adoption. And we're going to share a preview of a debate that's going on right now in the community. Bob Muglia, former CEO of Snowflake and Microsoft Exec was kind enough to spend some time looking at the community's supercloud definition and he felt that it needed to be simplified. So in near real time he came up with the following definition that we're showing here. I'll read it. "A Supercloud is a platform that provides programmatically consistent services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers." So not only did Bob simplify the initial definition he's stressed that the Supercloud is a platform versus an architecture implying that the platform provider eg Snowflake, VMware, Databricks, Cohesity, et cetera is responsible for determining the architecture. Now interestingly in the shared Google doc that the working group uses to collaborate on the supercloud de definition, Dr. Nelu Mihai who is actually building a Supercloud responded as follows to Bob's assertion "We need to avoid creating many Supercloud platforms with their own architectures. If we do that, then we create other proprietary clouds on top of existing ones. We need to define an architecture of how Supercloud interfaces with all other clouds. What is the information model? What is the execution model and how users will interact with Supercloud?" What does this seemingly nuanced point tell us and why does it matter? Well, history suggests that de facto standards will emerge more quickly to resolve real world practitioner problems and catch on more quickly than consensus-based architectures and standards-based architectures. But in the long run, the ladder may serve customers better. So we'll be exploring this topic in more detail in Supercloud 2, and of course we'd love to hear what you think platform, architecture, both? Now one of the real technical gurus that we'll have in studio at Supercloud two is David Flynn. He's one of the people behind the the movement that enabled enterprise flash adoption, that craze. And he did that with Fusion IO and he is now working on a system to enable read write data access to any user in any application in any data center or on any cloud anywhere. So think of this company as a Supercloud enabler. Allow me to share an excerpt from a conversation David Flore and I had with David Flynn last year. He as well gave a lot of thought to the Supercloud definition and was really helpful with an opinionated point of view. He said something to us that was, we thought relevant. "What is the operating system for a decentralized cloud? The main two functions of an operating system or an operating environment are one the process scheduler and two, the file system. The strongest argument for supercloud is made when you go down to the platform layer and talk about it as an operating environment on which you can run all forms of applications." So a couple of implications here that will be exploring with David Flynn in studio. First we're inferring from his comment that he's in the platform camp where the platform owner is responsible for the architecture and there are obviously trade-offs there and benefits but we'll have to clarify that with him. And second, he's basically saying, you kill the concept the further you move up the stack. So the weak, the further you move the stack the weaker the supercloud argument becomes because it's just becoming SaaS. Now this is something we're going to explore to better understand is thinking on this, but also whether the existing notion of SaaS is changing and whether or not a new breed of Supercloud apps will emerge. Which brings us to this really interesting fellow that George Gilbert and I RIFed with ahead of Supercloud two. Tristan Handy, he's the founder and CEO of DBT Labs and he has a highly opinionated and technical mind. Here's what he said, "One of the things that we still don't know how to API-ify is concepts that live inside of your data warehouse inside of your data lake. These are core concepts that the business should be able to create applications around very easily. In fact, that's not the case because it involves a lot of data engineering pipeline and other work to make these available. So if you really want to make it easy to create these data experiences for users you need to have an ability to describe these metrics and then to turn them into APIs to make them accessible to application developers who have literally no idea how they're calculated behind the scenes and they don't need to." A lot of implications to this statement that will explore at Supercloud two versus Jamma Dani's data mesh comes into play here with her critique of hyper specialized data pipeline experts with little or no domain knowledge. Also the need for simplified self-service infrastructure which Kit Colbert is likely going to touch upon. Veronica Durgin of SAKS and her ideal state for data shearing along with Harveer Singh of Western Union. They got to deal with 200 locations around the world in data privacy issues, data sovereignty how do you share data safely? Same with Nick Taylor of Ionis Pharmaceutical. And not to blow your mind but Thomas Hazel and Bob Muglia deposit that to make data apps a reality across the Supercloud you have to rethink everything. You can't just let in memory databases and caching architectures take care of everything in a brute force manner. Rather you have to get down to really detailed levels even things like how data is laid out on disk, ie flash and think about rewriting applications for the Supercloud and the MLAI era. All of this and more at Supercloud two which wouldn't be complete without some data. So we pinged our friends from ETR Eric Bradley and Darren Bramberm to see if they had any data on Supercloud that we could tap. And so we're going to be analyzing a number of the players as well at Supercloud two. Now, many of you are familiar with this graphic here we show some of the players involved in delivering or enabling Supercloud-like capabilities. On the Y axis is spending momentum and on the horizontal accesses market presence or pervasiveness in the data. So netscore versus what they call overlap or end in the data. And the table insert shows how the dots are plotted now not to steal ETR's thunder but the first point is you really can't have supercloud without the hyperscale cloud platforms which is shown on this graphic. But the exciting aspect of Supercloud is the opportunity to build value on top of that hyperscale infrastructure. Snowflake here continues to show strong spending velocity as those Databricks, Hashi, Rubrik. VMware Tanzu, which we all put under the magnifying glass after the Broadcom announcements, is also showing momentum. Unfortunately due to a scheduling conflict we weren't able to get Red Hat on the program but they're clearly a player here. And we've put Cohesity and Veeam on the chart as well because backup is a likely use case across clouds and on-premises. And now one other call out that we drill down on at Supercloud two is CloudFlare, which actually uses the term supercloud maybe in a different way. They look at Supercloud really as you know, serverless on steroids. And so the data brains at ETR will have more to say on this topic at Supercloud two along with many others. Okay, so why should you attend Supercloud two? What's in it for me kind of thing? So first of all, if you're a practitioner and you want to understand what the possibilities are for doing cross-cloud services for monetizing data how your peers are doing data sharing, how some of your peers are actually building out a Supercloud you're going to get real world input from practitioners. If you're a technologist, you're trying to figure out various ways to solve problems around data, data sharing, cross-cloud service deployment there's going to be a number of deep technology experts that are going to share how they're doing it. We're also going to drill down with Walmart into a practical example of Supercloud with some other examples of how practitioners are dealing with cross-cloud complexity. Some of them, by the way, are kind of thrown up their hands and saying, Hey, we're going mono cloud. And we'll talk about the potential implications and dangers and risks of doing that. And also some of the benefits. You know, there's a question, right? Is Supercloud the same wine new bottle or is it truly something different that can drive substantive business value? So look, go to Supercloud.world it's January 17th at 9:00 AM Pacific. You can register for free and participate directly in the program. Okay, that's a wrap. I want to give a shout out to the Supercloud supporters. VMware has been a great partner as our anchor sponsor Chaos Search Proximo, and Alura as well. For contributing to the effort I want to thank Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman is his supporting cast as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight to help get the word out on social media and at our newsletters. And Rob Ho is our editor-in-chief over at Silicon Angle. Thank you all. Remember, these episodes are all available as podcast. Wherever you listen we really appreciate the support that you've given. We just saw some stats from from Buzz Sprout, we hit the top 25% we're almost at 400,000 downloads last year. So really appreciate your participation. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcast and you'll find those I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or if you want to get ahold of me you can email me directly at David.Vellante@siliconangle.com or dm me DVellante or comment on our LinkedIn post. I want you to check out etr.ai. They've got the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next week at Supercloud two or next time on breaking analysis. (light music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> Recent conversations with IT decision makers show a stark contrast between exiting 2023 versus the mindset when we were leaving 2022. CIOs are generally funding new initiatives by pushing off or cutting lower priority items, while security efforts are still being funded. Those that enable business initiatives that generate revenue or taking priority over cleaning up legacy technical debt. The bottom line is, for the moment, at least, the mindset is not cut everything, rather, it's put a pause on cleaning up legacy hairballs and fund monetization. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we tap recent discussions from two primary sources, year-end ETR roundtables with IT decision makers, and CUBE conversations with data, cloud, and IT architecture practitioners. The sources of data for this breaking analysis come from the following areas. Eric Bradley's recent ETR year end panel featured a financial services DevOps and SRE manager, a CSO in a large hospitality firm, a director of IT for a big tech company, the head of IT infrastructure for a financial firm, and a CTO for global travel enterprise, and for our upcoming Supercloud2 conference on January 17th, which you can register free by the way, at supercloud.world, we've had CUBE conversations with data and cloud practitioners, specifically, heads of data in retail and financial services, a cloud architect and a biotech firm, the director of cloud and data at a large media firm, and the director of engineering at a financial services company. Now we've curated commentary from these sources and now we share them with you today as anecdotal evidence supporting what we've been reporting on in the marketplace for these last couple of quarters. On this program, we've likened the economy to the slingshot effect when you're driving, when you're cruising along at full speed on the highway, and suddenly you see red brake lights up ahead, so, you tap your own brakes and then you speed up again, and traffic is moving along at full speed, so, you think nothing of it, and then, all of a sudden, the same thing happens. You slow down to a crawl and you start wondering, "What the heck is happening?" And you become a lot more cautious about the rate of acceleration when you start moving again. Well, that's the trend in IT spend right now. Back in June, we reported that despite the macro headwinds, CIOs were still expecting 6% to 7% spending growth for 2022. Now that was down from 8%, which we reported at the beginning of 2022. That was before Ukraine, and Fed tightening, but given those two factors, you know that that seemed pretty robust, but throughout the fall, we began reporting consistently declining expectations where CIOs are now saying Q4 will come in at around 3% growth relative to last year, and they're expecting, or should we say hoping that it pops back up in 2023 to 4% to 5%. The recent ETR panelists, when they heard this, are saying based on their businesses and discussions with their peers, they could see low single digit growth for 2023, so, 1%, 2%, 3%, so, this sort of slingshotting, or sometimes we call it a seesaw economy, has caught everyone off guard. Amazon is a good example of this, and there are others, but Amazon entered the pandemic with around 800,000 employees. It doubled that workforce during the pandemic. Now, right before Thanksgiving in 2022, Amazon announced that it was laying off 10,000 employees, and, Jassy, the CEO of Amazon, just last week announced that number is now going to grow to 18,000. Now look, this is a rounding error at Amazon from a headcount standpoint and their headcount remains far above 2019 levels. Its stock price, however, does not and it's back down to 2019 levels. The point is that visibility is very poor right now and it's reflected in that uncertainty. We've seen a lot of layoffs, obviously, the stock market's choppy, et cetera. Now importantly, not everything is on hold, and this downturn is different from previous tech pullbacks in that the speed at which new initiatives can be rolled out is much greater thanks to the cloud, and if you can show a fast return, you're going to get funding. Organizations are pausing on the cleanup of technical debt, unless it's driving fast business value. They're holding off on modernization projects. Those business enablement initiatives are still getting funded. CIOs are finding the money by consolidating redundant vendors, and they're stealing from other pockets of budget, so, it's not surprising that cybersecurity remains the number one technology priority in 2023. We've been reporting that for quite some time now. It's specifically cloud, cloud native security container and API security. That's where all the action is, because there's still holes to plug from that forced march to digital that occurred during COVID. Cloud migration, kind of showing here on number two on this chart, still a high priority, while optimizing cloud spend is definitely a strategy that organizations are taking to cut costs. It's behind consolidating redundant vendors by a long shot. There's very little evidence that cloud repatriation, i.e., moving workloads back on prem is a major cost cutting trend. The data just doesn't show it. What is a trend is getting more real time with analytics, so, companies can do faster and more accurate customer targeting, and they're really prioritizing that, obviously, in this down economy. Real time, we sometimes lose it, what's real time? Real time, we sometimes define as before you lose the customer. Now in the hiring front, customers tell us they're still having a hard time finding qualified site reliability engineers, SREs, Kubernetes expertise, and deep analytics pros. These job markets remain very tight. Let's stay with security for just a moment. We said many times that, prior to COVID, zero trust was this undefined buzzword, and the joke, of course, is, if you ask three people, "What is zero trust?" You're going to get three different answers, but the truth is that virtually every security company that was resisting taking a position on zero trust in an attempt to avoid... They didn't want to get caught up in the buzzword vortex, but they're now really being forced to go there by CISOs, so, there are some good quotes here on cyber that we want to share that came out of the recent conversations that we cited up front. The first one, "Zero trust is the highest ROI, because it enables business transformation." In other words, if I can have good security, I can move fast, it's not a blocker anymore. Second quote here, "ZTA," zero trust architecture, "Is more than securing the perimeter. It encompasses strong authentication and multiple identity layers. It requires taking a software approach to security instead of a hardware focus." The next one, "I'd love to have a security data lake that I could apply to asset management, vulnerability management, incident management, incident response, and all aspects for my security team. I see huge promise in that space," and the last one, I see NLP, natural language processing, as the foundation for email security, so, instead of searching for IP addresses, you can now read emails at light speed and identify phishing threats, so, look at, this is a small snapshot of the mindset around security, but I'll add, when you talk to the likes of CrowdStrike, and Zscaler, and Okta, and Palo Alto Networks, and many other security firms, they're listening to these narratives around zero trust. I'm confident they're working hard on skating to this puck, if you will. A good example is this idea of a security data lake and using analytics to improve security. We're hearing a lot about that. We're hearing architectures, there's acquisitions in that regard, and so, that's becoming real, and there are many other examples, because data is at the heart of digital business. This is the next area that we want to talk about. It's obvious that data, as a topic, gets a lot of mind share amongst practitioners, but getting data right is still really hard. It's a challenge for most organizations to get ROI and expected return out of data. Most companies still put data at the periphery of their businesses. It's not at the core. Data lives within silos or different business units, different clouds, it's on-prem, and increasingly it's at the edge, and it seems like the problem is getting worse before it gets better, so, here are some instructive comments from our recent conversations. The first one, "We're publishing events onto Kafka, having those events be processed by Dataproc." Dataproc is a Google managed service to run Hadoop, and Spark, and Flank, and Presto, and a bunch of other open source tools. We're putting them into the appropriate storage models within Google, and then normalize the data into BigQuery, and only then can you take advantage of tools like ThoughtSpot, so, here's a company like ThoughtSpot, and they're all about simplifying data, democratizing data, but to get there, you have to go through some pretty complex processes, so, this is a good example. All right, another comment. "In order to use Google's AI tools, we have to put the data into BigQuery. They haven't integrated in the way AWS and Snowflake have with SageMaker. Moving the data is too expensive, time consuming, and risky," so, I'll just say this, sharing data is a killer super cloud use case, and firms like Snowflake are on top of it, but it's still not pretty across clouds, and Google's posture seems to be, "We're going to let our database product competitiveness drive the strategy first, and the ecosystem is going to take a backseat." Now, in a way, I get it, owning the database is critical, and Google doesn't want to capitulate on that front. Look, BigQuery is really good and competitive, but you can't help but roll your eyes when a CEO stands up, and look, I'm not calling out Thomas Kurian, every CEO does this, and talks about how important their customers are, and they'll do whatever is right by the customer, so, look, I'm telling you, I'm rolling my eyes on that. Now let me also comment, AWS has figured this out. They're killing it in database. If you take Redshift for example, it's still growing, as is Aurora, really fast growing services and other data stores, but AWS realizes it can make more money in the long-term partnering with the Snowflakes and Databricks of the world, and other ecosystem vendors versus sub optimizing their relationships with partners and customers in order to sell more of their own homegrown tools. I get it. It's hard not to feature your own product. IBM chose OS/2 over Windows, and tried for years to popularize it. It failed. Lotus, go back way back to Lotus 1, 2, and 3, they refused to run on Windows when it first came out. They were running on DEC VAX. Many of you young people in the United States have never even heard of DEC VAX. IBM wanted to run every everything only in its cloud, the same with Oracle, originally. VMware, as you might recall, tried to build its own cloud, but, eventually, when the market speaks and reveals what seems to be obvious to analysts, years before, the vendors come around, they face reality, and they stop wasting money, fighting a losing battle. "The trend is your friend," as the saying goes. All right, last pull quote on data, "The hardest part is transformations, moving traditional Informatica, Teradata, or Oracle infrastructure to something more modern and real time, and that's why people still run apps in COBOL. In IT, we rarely get rid of stuff, rather we add on another coat of paint until the wood rots out or the roof is going to cave in. All right, the last key finding we want to highlight is going to bring us back to the cloud repatriation myth. Followers of this program know it's a real sore spot with us. We've heard the stories about repatriation, we've read the thoughtful articles from VCs on the subject, we've been whispered to by vendors that you should investigate this trend. It's really happening, but the data simply doesn't support it. Here's the question that was posed to these practitioners. If you had unlimited budget and the economy miraculously flipped, what initiatives would you tackle first? Where would you really lean into? The first answer, "I'd rip out legacy on-prem infrastructure and move to the cloud even faster," so, the thing here is, look, maybe renting infrastructure is more expensive than owning, maybe, but if I can optimize my rental with better utilization, turn off compute, use things like serverless, get on a steeper and higher performance over time, and lower cost Silicon curve with things like Graviton, tap best of breed tools in AI, and other areas that make my business more competitive. Move faster, fail faster, experiment more quickly, and cheaply, what's that worth? Even the most hard-o CFOs understand the business benefits far outweigh the possible added cost per gigabyte, and, again, I stress "possible." Okay, other interesting comments from practitioners. "I'd hire 50 more data engineers and accelerate our real-time data capabilities to better target customers." Real-time is becoming a thing. AI is being injected into data and apps to make faster decisions, perhaps, with less or even no human involvement. That's on the rise. Next quote, "I'd like to focus on resolving the concerns around cloud data compliance," so, again, despite the risks of data being spread out in different clouds, organizations realize cloud is a given, and they want to find ways to make it work better, not move away from it. The same thing in the next one, "I would automate the data analytics pipeline and focus on a safer way to share data across the states without moving it," and, finally, "The way I'm addressing complexity is to standardize on a single cloud." MonoCloud is actually a thing. We're hearing this more and more. Yes, my company has multiple clouds, but in my group, we've standardized on a single cloud to simplify things, and this is a somewhat dangerous trend, because it's creating even more silos and it's an opportunity that needs to be addressed, and that's why we've been talking so much about supercloud is a cross-cloud, unifying, architectural framework, or, perhaps, it's a platform. In fact, that's a question that we will be exploring later this month at Supercloud2 live from our Palo Alto Studios. Is supercloud an architecture or is it a platform? And in this program, we're featuring technologists, analysts, practitioners to explore the intersection between data and cloud and the future of cloud computing, so, you don't want to miss this opportunity. Go to supercloud.world. You can register for free and participate in the event directly. All right, thanks for listening. That's a wrap. I'd like to thank Alex Myerson, who's on production and manages our podcast, Ken Schiffman as well, Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they helped get the word out on social media, and in our newsletters, and Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at siliconangle.com. He does some great editing. Thank you, all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you've got to do is search "breaking analysis podcasts." I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com where you can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me, @Dante, or comment on our LinkedIn posts. By all means, check out etr.ai. They get the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. We'll be doing our annual predictions post in a few weeks, once the data comes out from the January survey. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, everybody, and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR, this is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> A decade of big data investments combined with cloud scale, the rise of much more cost effective processing power. And the introduction of advanced tooling has catapulted machine intelligence to the forefront of technology investments. No matter what job you have, your operation will be AI powered within five years and machines may actually even be doing your job. Artificial intelligence is being infused into applications, infrastructure, equipment, and virtually every aspect of our lives. AI is proving to be extremely helpful at things like controlling vehicles, speeding up medical diagnoses, processing language, advancing science, and generally raising the stakes on what it means to apply technology for business advantage. But business value realization has been a challenge for most organizations due to lack of skills, complexity of programming models, immature technology integration, sizable upfront investments, ethical concerns, and lack of business alignment. Mastering AI technology will not be a requirement for success in our view. However, figuring out how and where to apply AI to your business will be crucial. That means understanding the business case, picking the right technology partner, experimenting in bite-sized chunks, and quickly identifying winners to double down on from an investment standpoint. Hello and welcome to this week's Wiki-bond CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we update you on the state of AI and what it means for the competition. And to do so, we invite into our studios Andy Thurai of Constellation Research. Andy covers AI deeply. He knows the players, he knows the pitfalls of AI investment, and he's a collaborator. Andy, great to have you on the program. Thanks for coming into our CUBE studios. >> Thanks for having me on. >> You're very welcome. Okay, let's set the table with a premise and a series of assertions we want to test with Andy. I'm going to lay 'em out. And then Andy, I'd love for you to comment. So, first of all, according to McKinsey, AI adoption has more than doubled since 2017, but only 10% of organizations report seeing significant ROI. That's a BCG and MIT study. And part of that challenge of AI is it requires data, is requires good data, data proficiency, which is not trivial, as you know. Firms that can master both data and AI, we believe are going to have a competitive advantage this decade. Hyperscalers, as we show you dominate AI and ML. We'll show you some data on that. And having said that, there's plenty of room for specialists. They need to partner with the cloud vendors for go to market productivity. And finally, organizations increasingly have to put data and AI at the center of their enterprises. And to do that, most are going to rely on vendor R&D to leverage AI and ML. In other words, Andy, they're going to buy it and apply it as opposed to build it. What are your thoughts on that setup and that premise? >> Yeah, I see that a lot happening in the field, right? So first of all, the only 10% of realizing a return on investment. That's so true because we talked about this earlier, the most companies are still in the innovation cycle. So they're trying to innovate and see what they can do to apply. A lot of these times when you look at the solutions, what they come up with or the models they create, the experimentation they do, most times they don't even have a good business case to solve, right? So they just experiment and then they figure it out, "Oh my God, this model is working. Can we do something to solve it?" So it's like you found a hammer and then you're trying to find the needle kind of thing, right? That never works. >> 'Cause it's cool or whatever it is. >> It is, right? So that's why, I always advise, when they come to me and ask me things like, "Hey, what's the right way to do it? What is the secret sauce?" And, we talked about this. The first thing I tell them is, "Find out what is the business case that's having the most amount of problems, that that can be solved using some of the AI use cases," right? Not all of them can be solved. Even after you experiment, do the whole nine yards, spend millions of dollars on that, right? And later on you make it efficient only by saving maybe $50,000 for the company or a $100,000 for the company, is it really even worth the experiment, right? So you got to start with the saying that, you know, where's the base for this happening? Where's the need? What's a business use case? It doesn't have to be about cost efficient and saving money in the existing processes. It could be a new thing. You want to bring in a new revenue stream, but figure out what is a business use case, how much money potentially I can make off of that. The same way that start-ups go after. Right? >> Yeah. Pretty straightforward. All right, let's take a look at where ML and AI fit relative to the other hot sectors of the ETR dataset. This XY graph shows net score spending velocity in the vertical axis and presence in the survey, they call it sector perversion for the October survey, the January survey's in the field. Then that squiggly line on ML/AI represents the progression. Since the January 21 survey, you can see the downward trajectory. And we position ML and AI relative to the other big four hot sectors or big three, including, ML/AI is four. Containers, cloud and RPA. These have consistently performed above that magic 40% red dotted line for most of the past two years. Anything above 40%, we think is highly elevated. And we've just included analytics and big data for context and relevant adjacentness, if you will. Now note that green arrow moving toward, you know, the 40% mark on ML/AI. I got a glimpse of the January survey, which is in the field. It's got more than a thousand responses already, and it's trending up for the current survey. So Andy, what do you make of this downward trajectory over the past seven quarters and the presumed uptick in the coming months? >> So one of the things you have to keep in mind is when the pandemic happened, it's about survival mode, right? So when somebody's in a survival mode, what happens, the luxury and the innovations get cut. That's what happens. And this is exactly what happened in the situation. So as you can see in the last seven quarters, which is almost dating back close to pandemic, everybody was trying to keep their operations alive, especially digital operations. How do I keep the lights on? That's the most important thing for them. So while the numbers spent on AI, ML is less overall, I still think the AI ML to spend to sort of like a employee experience or the IT ops, AI ops, ML ops, as we talked about, some of those areas actually went up. There are companies, we talked about it, Atlassian had a lot of platform issues till the amount of money people are spending on that is exorbitant and simply because they are offering the solution that was not available other way. So there are companies out there, you can take AoPS or incident management for that matter, right? A lot of companies have a digital insurance, they don't know how to properly manage it. How do you find an intern solve it immediately? That's all using AI ML and some of those areas actually growing unbelievable, the companies in that area. >> So this is a really good point. If you can you bring up that chart again, what Andy's saying is a lot of the companies in the ETR taxonomy that are doing things with AI might not necessarily show up in a granular fashion. And I think the other point I would make is, these are still highly elevated numbers. If you put on like storage and servers, they would read way, way down the list. And, look in the pandemic, we had to deal with work from home, we had to re-architect the network, we had to worry about security. So those are really good points that you made there. Let's, unpack this a little bit and look at the ML AI sector and the ETR data and specifically at the players and get Andy to comment on this. This chart here shows the same x y dimensions, and it just notes some of the players that are specifically have services and products that people spend money on, that CIOs and IT buyers can comment on. So the table insert shows how the companies are plotted, it's net score, and then the ends in the survey. And Andy, the hyperscalers are dominant, as you can see. You see Databricks there showing strong as a specialist, and then you got to pack a six or seven in there. And then Oracle and IBM, kind of the big whales of yester year are in the mix. And to your point, companies like Salesforce that you mentioned to me offline aren't in that mix, but they do a lot in AI. But what are your takeaways from that data? >> If you could put the slide back on please. I want to make quick comments on a couple of those. So the first one is, it's surprising other hyperscalers, right? As you and I talked about this earlier, AWS is more about logo blocks. We discussed that, right? >> Like what? Like a SageMaker as an example. >> We'll give you all the components what do you need. Whether it's MLOps component or whether it's, CodeWhisperer that we talked about, or a oral platform or data or data, whatever you want. They'll give you the blocks and then you'll build things on top of it, right? But Google took a different way. Matter of fact, if we did those numbers a few years ago, Google would've been number one because they did a lot of work with their acquisition of DeepMind and other things. They're way ahead of the pack when it comes to AI for longest time. Now, I think Microsoft's move of partnering and taking a huge competitor out would open the eyes is unbelievable. You saw that everybody is talking about chat GPI, right? And the open AI tool and ChatGPT rather. Remember as Warren Buffet is saying that, when my laundry lady comes and talk to me about stock market, it's heated up. So that's how it's heated up. Everybody's using ChatGPT. What that means is at the end of the day is they're creating, it's still in beta, keep in mind. It's not fully... >> Can you play with it a little bit? >> I have a little bit. >> I have, but it's good and it's not good. You know what I mean? >> Look, so at the end of the day, you take the massive text of all the available text in the world today, mass them all together. And then you ask a question, it's going to basically search through that and figure it out and answer that back. Yes, it's good. But again, as we discussed, if there's no business use case of what problem you're going to solve. This is building hype. But then eventually they'll figure out, for example, all your chats, online chats, could be aided by your AI chat bots, which is already there, which is not there at that level. This could build help that, right? Or the other thing we talked about is one of the areas where I'm more concerned about is that it is able to produce equal enough original text at the level that humans can produce, for example, ChatGPT or the equal enough, the large language transformer can help you write stories as of Shakespeare wrote it. Pretty close to it. It'll learn from that. So when it comes down to it, talk about creating messages, articles, blogs, especially during political seasons, not necessarily just in US, but anywhere for that matter. If people are able to produce at the emission speed and throw it at the consumers and confuse them, the elections can be won, the governments can be toppled. >> Because to your point about chatbots is chatbots have obviously, reduced the number of bodies that you need to support chat. But they haven't solved the problem of serving consumers. Most of the chat bots are conditioned response, which of the following best describes your problem? >> The current chatbot. >> Yeah. Hey, did we solve your problem? No. Is the answer. So that has some real potential. But if you could bring up that slide again, Ken, I mean you've got the hyperscalers that are dominant. You talked about Google and Microsoft is ubiquitous, they seem to be dominant in every ETR category. But then you have these other specialists. How do those guys compete? And maybe you could even, cite some of the guys that you know, how do they compete with the hyperscalers? What's the key there for like a C3 ai or some of the others that are on there? >> So I've spoken with at least two of the CEOs of the smaller companies that you have on the list. One of the things they're worried about is that if they continue to operate independently without being part of hyperscaler, either the hyperscalers will develop something to compete against them full scale, or they'll become irrelevant. Because at the end of the day, look, cloud is dominant. Not many companies are going to do like AI modeling and training and deployment the whole nine yards by independent by themselves. They're going to depend on one of the clouds, right? So if they're already going to be in the cloud, by taking them out to come to you, it's going to be extremely difficult issue to solve. So all these companies are going and saying, "You know what? We need to be in hyperscalers." For example, you could have looked at DataRobot recently, they made announcements, Google and AWS, and they are all over the place. So you need to go where the customers are. Right? >> All right, before we go on, I want to share some other data from ETR and why people adopt AI and get your feedback. So the data historically shows that feature breadth and technical capabilities were the main decision points for AI adoption, historically. What says to me that it's too much focus on technology. In your view, is that changing? Does it have to change? Will it change? >> Yes. Simple answer is yes. So here's the thing. The data you're speaking from is from previous years. >> Yes >> I can guarantee you, if you look at the latest data that's coming in now, those two will be a secondary and tertiary points. The number one would be about ROI. And how do I achieve? I've spent ton of money on all of my experiments. This is the same thing theme I'm seeing across when talking to everybody who's spending money on AI. I've spent so much money on it. When can I get it live in production? How much, how can I quickly get it? Because you know, the board is breathing down their neck. You already spend this much money. Show me something that's valuable. So the ROI is going to become, take it from me, I'm predicting this for 2023, that's going to become number one. >> Yeah, and if people focus on it, they'll figure it out. Okay. Let's take a look at some of the top players that won, some of the names we just looked at and double click on that and break down their spending profile. So the chart here shows the net score, how net score is calculated. So pay attention to the second set of bars that Databricks, who was pretty prominent on the previous chart. And we've annotated the colors. The lime green is, we're bringing the platform in new. The forest green is, we're going to spend 6% or more relative to last year. And the gray is flat spending. The pinkish is our spending's going to be down on AI and ML, 6% or worse. And the red is churn. So you don't want big red. You subtract the reds from the greens and you get net score, which is shown by those blue dots that you see there. So AWS has the highest net score and very little churn. I mean, single low single digit churn. But notably, you see Databricks and DataRobot are next in line within Microsoft and Google also, they've got very low churn. Andy, what are your thoughts on this data? >> So a couple of things that stands out to me. Most of them are in line with my conversation with customers. Couple of them stood out to me on how bad IBM Watson is doing. >> Yeah, bring that back up if you would. Let's take a look at that. IBM Watson is the far right and the red, that bright red is churning and again, you want low red here. Why do you think that is? >> Well, so look, IBM has been in the forefront of innovating things for many, many years now, right? And over the course of years we talked about this, they moved from a product innovation centric company into more of a services company. And over the years they were making, as at one point, you know that they were making about majority of that money from services. Now things have changed Arvind has taken over, he came from research. So he's doing a great job of trying to reinvent themselves as a company. But it's going to have a long way to catch up. IBM Watson, if you think about it, that played what, jeopardy and chess years ago, like 15 years ago? >> It was jaw dropping when you first saw it. And then they weren't able to commercialize that. >> Yeah. >> And you're making a good point. When Gerstner took over IBM at the time, John Akers wanted to split the company up. He wanted to have a database company, he wanted to have a storage company. Because that's where the industry trend was, Gerstner said no, he came from AMEX, right? He came from American Express. He said, "No, we're going to have a single throat to choke for the customer." They bought PWC for relatively short money. I think it was $15 billion, completely transformed and I would argue saved IBM. But the trade off was, it sort of took them out of product leadership. And so from Gerstner to Palmisano to Remedi, it was really a services led company. And I think Arvind is really bringing it back to a product company with strong consulting. I mean, that's one of the pillars. And so I think that's, they've got a strong story in data and AI. They just got to sort of bring it together and better. Bring that chart up one more time. I want to, the other point is Oracle, Oracle sort of has the dominant lock-in for mission critical database and they're sort of applying AI there. But to your point, they're really not an AI company in the sense that they're taking unstructured data and doing sort of new things. It's really about how to make Oracle better, right? >> Well, you got to remember, Oracle is about database for the structure data. So in yesterday's world, they were dominant database. But you know, if you are to start storing like videos and texts and audio and other things, and then start doing search of vector search and all that, Oracle is not necessarily the database company of choice. And they're strongest thing being apps and building AI into the apps? They are kind of surviving in that area. But again, I wouldn't name them as an AI company, right? But the other thing that that surprised me in that list, what you showed me is yes, AWS is number one. >> Bring that back up if you would, Ken. >> AWS is number one as you, it should be. But what what actually caught me by surprise is how DataRobot is holding, you know? I mean, look at that. The either net new addition and or expansion, DataRobot seem to be doing equally well, even better than Microsoft and Google. That surprises me. >> DataRobot's, and again, this is a function of spending momentum. So remember from the previous chart that Microsoft and Google, much, much larger than DataRobot. DataRobot more niche. But with spending velocity and has always had strong spending velocity, despite some of the recent challenges, organizational challenges. And then you see these other specialists, H2O.ai, Anaconda, dataiku, little bit of red showing there C3.ai. But these again, to stress are the sort of specialists other than obviously the hyperscalers. These are the specialists in AI. All right, so we hit the bigger names in the sector. Now let's take a look at the emerging technology companies. And one of the gems of the ETR dataset is the emerging technology survey. It's called ETS. They used to just do it like twice a year. It's now run four times a year. I just discovered it kind of mid-2022. And it's exclusively focused on private companies that are potential disruptors, they might be M&A candidates and if they've raised enough money, they could be acquirers of companies as well. So Databricks would be an example. They've made a number of investments in companies. SNEAK would be another good example. Companies that are private, but they're buyers, they hope to go IPO at some point in time. So this chart here, shows the emerging companies in the ML AI sector of the ETR dataset. So the dimensions of this are similar, they're net sentiment on the Y axis and mind share on the X axis. Basically, the ETS study measures awareness on the x axis and intent to do something with, evaluate or implement or not, on that vertical axis. So it's like net score on the vertical where negatives are subtracted from the positives. And again, mind share is vendor awareness. That's the horizontal axis. Now that inserted table shows net sentiment and the ends in the survey, which informs the position of the dots. And you'll notice we're plotting TensorFlow as well. We know that's not a company, but it's there for reference as open source tooling is an option for customers. And ETR sometimes like to show that as a reference point. Now we've also drawn a line for Databricks to show how relatively dominant they've become in the past 10 ETS surveys and sort of mind share going back to late 2018. And you can see a dozen or so other emerging tech vendors. So Andy, I want you to share your thoughts on these players, who were the ones to watch, name some names. We'll bring that data back up as you as you comment. >> So Databricks, as you said, remember we talked about how Oracle is not necessarily the database of the choice, you know? So Databricks is kind of trying to solve some of the issue for AI/ML workloads, right? And the problem is also there is no one company that could solve all of the problems. For example, if you look at the names in here, some of them are database names, some of them are platform names, some of them are like MLOps companies like, DataRobot (indistinct) and others. And some of them are like future based companies like, you know, the Techton and stuff. >> So it's a mix of those sub sectors? >> It's a mix of those companies. >> We'll talk to ETR about that. They'd be interested in your input on how to make this more granular and these sub-sectors. You got Hugging Face in here, >> Which is NLP, yeah. >> Okay. So your take, are these companies going to get acquired? Are they going to go IPO? Are they going to merge? >> Well, most of them going to get acquired. My prediction would be most of them will get acquired because look, at the end of the day, hyperscalers need these capabilities, right? So they're going to either create their own, AWS is very good at doing that. They have done a lot of those things. But the other ones, like for particularly Azure, they're going to look at it and saying that, "You know what, it's going to take time for me to build this. Why don't I just go and buy you?" Right? Or or even the smaller players like Oracle or IBM Cloud, this will exist. They might even take a look at them, right? So at the end of the day, a lot of these companies are going to get acquired or merged with others. >> Yeah. All right, let's wrap with some final thoughts. I'm going to make some comments Andy, and then ask you to dig in here. Look, despite the challenge of leveraging AI, you know, Ken, if you could bring up the next chart. We're not repeating, we're not predicting the AI winter of the 1990s. Machine intelligence. It's a superpower that's going to permeate every aspect of the technology industry. AI and data strategies have to be connected. Leveraging first party data is going to increase AI competitiveness and shorten time to value. Andy, I'd love your thoughts on that. I know you've got some thoughts on governance and AI ethics. You know, we talked about ChatGBT, Deepfakes, help us unpack all these trends. >> So there's so much information packed up there, right? The AI and data strategy, that's very, very, very important. If you don't have a proper data, people don't realize that AI is, your AI is the morals that you built on, it's predominantly based on the data what you have. It's not, AI cannot predict something that's going to happen without knowing what it is. It need to be trained, it need to understand what is it you're talking about. So 99% of the time you got to have a good data for you to train. So this where I mentioned to you, the problem is a lot of these companies can't afford to collect the real world data because it takes too long, it's too expensive. So a lot of these companies are trying to do the synthetic data way. It has its own set of issues because you can't use all... >> What's that synthetic data? Explain that. >> Synthetic data is basically not a real world data, but it's a created or simulated data equal and based on real data. It looks, feels, smells, taste like a real data, but it's not exactly real data, right? This is particularly useful in the financial and healthcare industry for world. So you don't have to, at the end of the day, if you have real data about your and my medical history data, if you redact it, you can still reverse this. It's fairly easy, right? >> Yeah, yeah. >> So by creating a synthetic data, there is no correlation between the real data and the synthetic data. >> So that's part of AI ethics and privacy and, okay. >> So the synthetic data, the issue with that is that when you're trying to commingle that with that, you can't create models based on just on synthetic data because synthetic data, as I said is artificial data. So basically you're creating artificial models, so you got to blend in properly that that blend is the problem. And you know how much of real data, how much of synthetic data you could use. You got to use judgment between efficiency cost and the time duration stuff. So that's one-- >> And risk >> And the risk involved with that. And the secondary issues which we talked about is that when you're creating, okay, you take a business use case, okay, you think about investing things, you build the whole thing out and you're trying to put it out into the market. Most companies that I talk to don't have a proper governance in place. They don't have ethics standards in place. They don't worry about the biases in data, they just go on trying to solve a business case >> It's wild west. >> 'Cause that's what they start. It's a wild west! And then at the end of the day when they are close to some legal litigation action or something or something else happens and that's when the Oh Shit! moments happens, right? And then they come in and say, "You know what, how do I fix this?" The governance, security and all of those things, ethics bias, data bias, de-biasing, none of them can be an afterthought. It got to start with the, from the get-go. So you got to start at the beginning saying that, "You know what, I'm going to do all of those AI programs, but before we get into this, we got to set some framework for doing all these things properly." Right? And then the-- >> Yeah. So let's go back to the key points. I want to bring up the cloud again. Because you got to get cloud right. Getting that right matters in AI to the points that you were making earlier. You can't just be out on an island and hyperscalers, they're going to obviously continue to do well. They get more and more data's going into the cloud and they have the native tools. To your point, in the case of AWS, Microsoft's obviously ubiquitous. Google's got great capabilities here. They've got integrated ecosystems partners that are going to continue to strengthen through the decade. What are your thoughts here? >> So a couple of things. One is the last mile ML or last mile AI that nobody's talking about. So that need to be attended to. There are lot of players in the market that coming up, when I talk about last mile, I'm talking about after you're done with the experimentation of the model, how fast and quickly and efficiently can you get it to production? So that's production being-- >> Compressing that time is going to put dollars in your pocket. >> Exactly. Right. >> So once, >> If you got it right. >> If you get it right, of course. So there are, there are a couple of issues with that. Once you figure out that model is working, that's perfect. People don't realize, the moment you decide that moment when the decision is made, it's like a new car. After you purchase the value decreases on a minute basis. Same thing with the models. Once the model is created, you need to be in production right away because it starts losing it value on a seconds minute basis. So issue number one, how fast can I get it over there? So your deployment, you are inferencing efficiently at the edge locations, your optimization, your security, all of this is at issue. But you know what is more important than that in the last mile? You keep the model up, you continue to work on, again, going back to the car analogy, at one point you got to figure out your car is costing more than to operate. So you got to get a new car, right? And that's the same thing with the models as well. If your model has reached a stage, it is actually a potential risk for your operation. To give you an idea, if Uber has a model, the first time when you get a car from going from point A to B cost you $60. If the model decayed the next time I might give you a $40 rate, I would take it definitely. But it's lost for the company. The business risk associated with operating on a bad model, you should realize it immediately, pull the model out, retrain it, redeploy it. That's is key. >> And that's got to be huge in security model recency and security to the extent that you can get real time is big. I mean you, you see Palo Alto, CrowdStrike, a lot of other security companies are injecting AI. Again, they won't show up in the ETR ML/AI taxonomy per se as a pure play. But ServiceNow is another company that you have have mentioned to me, offline. AI is just getting embedded everywhere. >> Yep. >> And then I'm glad you brought up, kind of real-time inferencing 'cause a lot of the modeling, if we can go back to the last point that we're going to make, a lot of the AI today is modeling done in the cloud. The last point we wanted to make here, I'd love to get your thoughts on this, is real-time AI inferencing for instance at the edge is going to become increasingly important for us. It's going to usher in new economics, new types of silicon, particularly arm-based. We've covered that a lot on "Breaking Analysis", new tooling, new companies and that could disrupt the sort of cloud model if new economics emerge. 'Cause cloud obviously very centralized, they're trying to decentralize it. But over the course of this decade we could see some real disruption there. Andy, give us your final thoughts on that. >> Yes and no. I mean at the end of the day, cloud is kind of centralized now, but a lot of this companies including, AWS is kind of trying to decentralize that by putting their own sub-centers and edge locations. >> Local zones, outposts. >> Yeah, exactly. Particularly the outpost concept. And if it can even become like a micro center and stuff, it won't go to the localized level of, I go to a single IOT level. But again, the cloud extends itself to that level. So if there is an opportunity need for it, the hyperscalers will figure out a way to fit that model. So I wouldn't too much worry about that, about deployment and where to have it and what to do with that. But you know, figure out the right business use case, get the right data, get the ethics and governance place and make sure they get it to production and make sure you pull the model out when it's not operating well. >> Excellent advice. Andy, I got to thank you for coming into the studio today, helping us with this "Breaking Analysis" segment. Outstanding collaboration and insights and input in today's episode. Hope we can do more. >> Thank you. Thanks for having me. I appreciate it. >> You're very welcome. All right. I want to thank Alex Marson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight helped get the word out on social media and our newsletters. And Rob Hoof is our editor-in-chief over at Silicon Angle. He does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcast. Wherever you listen, all you got to do is search "Breaking Analysis" podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and silicon angle.com or you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com to get in touch, or DM me at dvellante or comment on our LinkedIn posts. Please check out ETR.AI for the best survey data and the enterprise tech business, Constellation Research. Andy publishes there some awesome information on AI and data. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching everybody and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis". (gentle closing tune plays)

(upbeat music) >> From theCube Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCube and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> While by no means a safe haven, the cybersecurity sector has outpaced the broader tech market by a meaningful margin, that is up until very recently. Cybersecurity remains the number one technology priority for the C-suite, but as we've previously reported the CISO's budget has constraints just like other technology investments. Recent trends show that economic headwinds have elongated sales cycles, pushed deals into future quarters, and just like other tech initiatives, are pacing cybersecurity investments and breaking them into smaller chunks. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis we explain how cybersecurity trends are reverting to the mean and tracking more closely with other technology investments. We'll make a couple of valuation comparisons to show the magnitude of the challenge and which cyber firms are feeling the heat, which aren't. There are some exceptions. We'll then show the latest survey data from ETR to quantify the contraction in spending momentum and close with a glimpse of the landscape of emerging cybersecurity companies, the private companies that could be ripe for acquisition, consolidation, or disruptive to the broader market. First, let's take a look at the recent patterns for cyber stocks relative to the broader tech market as a benchmark, as an indicator. Here's a year to date comparison of the bug ETF, which comprises a basket of cyber security names, and we compare that with the tech heavy NASDAQ composite. Notice that on April 13th of this year the cyber ETF was actually in positive territory while the NAS was down nearly 14%. Now by August 16th, the green turned red for cyber stocks but they still meaningfully outpaced the broader tech market by more than 950 basis points as of December 2nd that Delta had contracted. As you can see, the cyber ETF is now down nearly 25%, year to date, while the NASDAQ is down 27% and change. Now take a look at just how far a few of the high profile cybersecurity names have fallen. Here are six security firms that we've been tracking closely since before the pandemic. We've been, you know, tracking dozens but let's just take a look at this data and the subset. We show for comparison the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ, again, just for reference, they're both up since right before the pandemic. They're up relative to right before the pandemic, and then during the pandemic the S&P shot up more than 40%, relative to its pre pandemic level, around February is what we're using for the pre pandemic level, and the NASDAQ peaked at around 65% higher than that February level. They're now down 85% and 71% of their previous. So they're at 85% and 71% respectively from their pandemic highs. You compare that to these six companies, Splunk, which was and still is working through a transition is well below its pre pandemic market value and 44, it's 44% of its pre pandemic high as of last Friday. Palo Alto Networks is the most interesting here, in that it had been facing challenges prior to the pandemic related to a pivot to the Cloud which we reported on at the time. But as we said at that time we believe the company would sort out its Cloud transition, and its go to market challenges, and sales compensation issues, which it did as you can see. And its valuation jumped from 24 billion prior to Covid to 56 billion, and it's holding 93% of its peak value. Its revenue run rate is now over 6 billion with a healthy growth rate of 24% expected for the next quarter. Similarly, Fortinet has done relatively well holding 71% of its peak Covid value, with a healthy 34% revenue guide for the coming quarter. Now, Okta has been the biggest disappointment, a darling of the pandemic Okta's communication snafu, with what was actually a pretty benign hack combined with difficulty absorbing its 7 billion off zero acquisition, knocked the company off track. Its valuation has dropped by 35 billion since its peak during the pandemic, and that's after a nice beat and bounce back quarter just announced by Okta. Now, in our view Okta remains a viable long-term leader in identity. However, its recent fiscal 24 revenue guide was exceedingly conservative at around 16% growth. So either the company is sandbagging, or has such poor visibility that it wants to be like super cautious or maybe it's actually seeing a dramatic slowdown in its business momentum. After all, this is a company that not long ago was putting up 50% plus revenue growth rates. So it's one that bears close watching. CrowdStrike is another big name that we've been talking about on Breaking Analysis for quite some time. It like Okta has led the industry in a key ETR performance indicator that measures customer spending momentum. Just last week, CrowdStrike announced revenue increased more than 50% but new ARR was soft and the company guided conservatively. Not surprisingly, the stock got absolutely crushed as CrowdStrike blamed tepid demand from smaller and midsize firms. Many analysts believe that competition from Microsoft was one factor along with cautious spending amongst those midsize and smaller customers. Notably, large customers remain active. So we'll see if this is a longer term trend or an anomaly. Zscaler is another company in the space that we've reported having great customer spending momentum from the ETR data. But even though the company beat expectations for its recent quarter, like other companies its Outlook was conservative. So other than Palo Alto, and to a lesser extent Fortinet, these companies and others that we're not showing here are feeling the economic pinch and it shows in the compression of value. CrowdStrike, for example, had a 70 billion valuation at one point during the pandemic Zscaler top 50 billion, Okta 45 billion. Now, having said that Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, CrowdStrike, and Zscaler are all still trading well above their pre pandemic levels that we tracked back in February of 2020. All right, let's go now back to ETR'S January survey and take a look at how much things have changed since the beginning of the year. Remember, this is obviously pre Ukraine, and pre all the concerns about the economic headwinds but here's an X Y graph that shows a net score, or spending momentum on the y-axis, and market presence on the x-axis. The red dotted line at 40% on the vertical indicates a highly elevated net score. Anything above that we think is, you know, super elevated. Now, we filtered the data here to show only those companies with more than 50 responses in the ETR survey. Still really crowded. Note that there were around 20 companies above that red 40% mark, which is a very, you know, high number. It's a, it's a crowded market, but lots of companies with, you know, positive momentum. Now let's jump ahead to the most recent October survey and take a look at what, what's happening. Same graphic plotting, spending momentum, and market presence, and look at the number of companies above that red line and how it's been squashed. It's really compressing, it's still a crowded market, it's still, you know, plenty of green, but the number of companies above 40% that, that key mark has gone from around 20 firms down to about five or six. And it speaks to that compression and IT spending, and of course the elongated sales cycles pushing deals out, taking them in smaller chunks. I can't tell you how many conversations with customers I had, at last week at Reinvent underscoring this exact same trend. The buyers are getting pressure from their CFOs to slow things down, do more with less and, and, and prioritize projects to those that absolutely are critical to driving revenue or cutting costs. And that's rippling through all sectors, including cyber. Now, let's do a bit more playing around with the ETR data and take a look at those companies with more than a hundred citations in the survey this quarter. So N, greater than or equal to a hundred. Now remember the followers of Breaking Analysis know that each quarter we take a look at those, what we call four star security firms. That is, those are the, that are in, that hit the top 10 for both spending momentum, net score, and the N, the mentions in the survey, the presence, the pervasiveness in the survey, and that's what we show here. The left most chart is sorted by spending momentum or net score, and the right hand chart by shared N, or the number of mentions in the survey, that pervasiveness metric. that solid red line denotes the cutoff point at the top 10. And you'll note we've actually cut it off at 11 to account for Auth 0, which is now part of Okta, and is going through a go to market transition, you know, with the company, they're kind of restructuring sales so they can take advantage of that. So starting on the left with spending momentum, again, net score, Microsoft leads all vendors, typical Microsoft, very prominent, although it hadn't always done so, it, for a while, CrowdStrike and Okta were, were taking the top spot, now it's Microsoft. CrowdStrike, still always near the top, but note that CyberArk and Cloudflare have cracked the top five in Okta, which as I just said was consistently at the top, has dropped well off its previous highs. You'll notice that Palo Alto Network Palo Alto Networks with a 38% net score, just below that magic 40% number, is healthy, especially as you look over to the right hand chart. Take a look at Palo Alto with an N of 395. It is the largest of the independent pure play security firms, and has a very healthy net score, although one caution is that net score has dropped considerably since the beginning of the year, which is the case for most of the top 10 names. The only exception is Fortinet, they're the only ones that saw an increase since January in spending momentum as ETR measures it. Now this brings us to the four star security firms, that is those that hit the top 10 in both net score on the left hand side and market presence on the right hand side. So it's Microsoft, Palo Alto, CrowdStrike, Okta, still there even not accounting for a Auth 0, just Okta on its own. If you put in Auth 0, it's, it's even stronger. Adding then in Fortinet and Zscaler. So Microsoft, Palo Alto, CrowdStrike, Okta, Fortinet, and Zscaler. And as we've mentioned since January, only Fortinet has shown an increase in net score since, since that time, again, since the January survey. Now again, this talks to the compression in spending. Now one of the big themes we hear constantly in cybersecurity is the market is overcrowded. Everybody talks about that, me included. The implication there, is there's a lot of room for consolidation and that consolidation can come in the form of M&A, or it can come in the form of people consolidating onto a single platform, and retiring some other vendors, and getting rid of duplicate vendors. We're hearing that as a big theme as well. Now, as we saw in the previous, previous chart, this is a very crowded market and we've seen lots of consolidation in 2022, in the form of M&A. Literally hundreds of M&A deals, with some of the largest companies going private. SailPoint, KnowBe4, Barracuda, Mandiant, Fedora, these are multi billion dollar acquisitions, or at least billion dollars and up, and many of them multi-billion, for these companies, and hundreds more acquisitions in the cyberspace, now less you think the pond is overfished, here's a chart from ETR of emerging tech companies in the cyber security industry. This data comes from ETR's Emerging Technologies Survey, ETS, which is this diamond in a rough that I found a couple quarters ago, and it's ripe with companies that are candidates for M&A. Many would've liked, many of these companies would've liked to, gotten to the public markets during the pandemic, but they, you know, couldn't get there. They weren't ready. So the graph, you know, similar to the previous one, but different, it shows net sentiment on the vertical axis and that's a measurement of, of, of intent to adopt against a mind share on the X axis, which measures, measures the awareness of the vendor in the community. So this is specifically a survey that ETR goes out and, and, and fields only to track those emerging tech companies that are private companies. Now, some of the standouts in Mindshare, are OneTrust, BeyondTrust, Tanium and Endpoint, Net Scope, which we've talked about in previous Breaking Analysis. 1Password, which has been acquisitive on its own. In identity, the managed security service provider, Arctic Wolf Network, a company we've also covered, we've had their CEO on. We've talked about MSSPs as a real trend, particularly in small and medium sized business, we'll come back to that, Sneek, you know, kind of high flyer in both app security and containers, and you can just see the number of companies in the space this huge and it just keeps growing. Now, just to make it a bit easier on the eyes we filtered the data on these companies with with those, and isolated on those with more than a hundred responses only within the survey. And that's what we show here. Some of the names that we just mentioned are a bit easier to see, but these are the ones that really stand out in ERT, ETS, survey of private companies, OneTrust, BeyondTrust, Taniam, Netscope, which is in Cloud, 1Password, Arctic Wolf, Sneek, BitSight, SecurityScorecard, HackerOne, Code42, and Exabeam, and Sim. All of these hit the ETS survey with more than a hundred responses by, by the IT practitioners. Okay, so these firms, you know, maybe they do some M&A on their own. We've seen that with Sneek, as I said, with 1Password has been inquisitive, as have others. Now these companies with the larger footprint, these private companies, will likely be candidate for both buying companies and eventually going public when the markets settle down a bit. So again, no shortage of players to affect consolidation, both buyers and sellers. Okay, so let's finish with some key questions that we're watching. CrowdStrike in particular on its earnings calls cited softness from smaller buyers. Is that because these smaller buyers have stopped adopting? If so, are they more at risk, or are they tactically moving toward the easy button, aka, Microsoft's good enough approach. What does that mean for the market if smaller company cohorts continue to soften? How about MSSPs? Will companies continue to outsource, or pause on on that, as well as try to free up, to try to free up some budget? Adam Celiski at Reinvent last week said, "If you want to save money the Cloud's the best place to do it." Is the cloud the best place to save money in cyber? Well, it would seem that way from the standpoint of controlling budgets with lots of, lots of optionality. You could dial up and dial down services, you know, or does the Cloud add another layer of complexity that has to be understood and managed by Devs, for example? Now, consolidation should favor the likes of Palo Alto and CrowdStrike, cause they're platform players, and some of the larger players as well, like Cisco, how about IBM and of course Microsoft. Will that happen? And how will economic uncertainty impact the risk equation, a particular concern is increase of tax on vulnerable sectors of the population, like the elderly. How will companies and governments protect them from scams? And finally, how many cybersecurity companies can actually remain independent in the slingshot economy? In so many ways the market is still strong, it's just that expectations got ahead of themselves, and now as earnings forecast come, come, come down and come down to earth, it's going to basically come down to who can execute, generate cash, and keep enough runway to get through the knothole. And the one certainty is nobody really knows how tight that knothole really is. All right, let's call it a wrap. Next week we dive deeper into Palo Alto Networks, and take a look at how and why that company has held up so well and what to expect at Ignite, Palo Alto's big user conference coming up later this month in Las Vegas. We'll be there with theCube. Okay, many thanks to Alex Myerson on production and manages the podcast, Ken Schiffman as well, as our newest edition to our Boston studio. Great to have you Ken. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our EIC over at Silicon Angle. He does some great editing for us. Thank you to all. Remember these episodes are all available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibond.com and siliconangle.com, or you can email me directly David.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @DVellante, or comment on our LinkedIn posts. Please do checkout etr.ai, they got the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCube Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Good afternoon and welcome back to KubeCon. John Furrier and I are live here from theCUBE Studios in Detroit, Michigan. And very excited for an afternoon shock full of content. John, how you holding up day too? >> I'm doing great and got a great content. This episode should be really good. We're going to be talking about modern applications, Red Hat and Konveyor, all the great stuff going on. >> Yes, and it's got a little bit of a community spin, very excited. You know I've been calling out the great Twitter handles of our guests all week and I'm not going to stop now. We have with us Coffee Art Lover, Savitha, and she's joined with Christopher here from Konveyor and Red Hat, welcome to the show. >> Thank you. >> How you doing and what's the vibe? >> The vibe is good. >> Yeah, pretty good. >> Has anything caught your attention? You guys are KubeCon veterans, we were talking about Valencia and shows prior. Anything sticking out to you this year? >> Yeah, just the amount of people here in this like post-COVID it's just so nice to see this many people get together. 'Cause the last couple of KubeCons that we've had they've been good but they've been much smaller and we haven't seen the same presence that we've had. And I feel like we're just starting to get back to normal what we had going like pre-COVID with KubeCon. >> Go ahead. >> Oh, sorry. And for me it's how everyone's like still respectful of everyone else and that's what sticking out to me. Like you go out of the conference center and you cannot see anyone like most or like respecting anyone's space. But here it's still there, it keeps you safe. So I'm super happy to be here. >> Yeah, I love that. I think that plays to the community. I mean, the CNCF community is really special. All these open source projects are layered. You run community at Red Hat so tell us a little bit more about that. >> So I have been focusing on the Konveyor community site for a while now since Konveyor got accepted into the CNCF Sandbox project. Yeah, it's so exciting and it's like I'm so thrilled and I'm so excited for the project. So it's something that I believe in and I do a lot of (indistinct) stuff and I learned a lot from the community. The community is what keeps me coming back to every KubeCon and keep me contributing. So I'm taking all the good stuff from there and then like trying to incorporate that into the conveyor community world. But not at a scale of like 20,000 or like 30,000 people but at a scale of like hundreds, we are in hundreds and hoping to like expand it to like thousands by next year. Hopefully, yeah. >> Talk about the project, give a quick overview what it is, where it's at now, obviously it's got traction, you got some momentum, I want to hear the customer. But give a quick overview of the project. Why are people excited about it? >> Sure. It is one of the open source of modernization tool sets that's available right now. So that's super exciting. So many people want to contribute to it. And what we basically do is like you see a lot of large companies and they want to like do the migration and the journey and we just want to help them, make their life easier. So we are in this environment which is like surrounded by cars, think of it like lane assist system or like think of it as an additional system, smart system but that's not taking control, like full control. But then it's there to like guide you through your journey safe and in a predictable way and you'll reach your destination point in a much happier, safer and like sooner. So that's what we are doing. I know that's a lot of talk but if you want the technical thing then I'll just say like we are here to help everyone who wants to modernize. Help them by refractoring and replatforming their applications in a safer and predictable way at scale. I think I got everything. What do you think Christopher? >> Yeah. I mean, we've seen a real need in the market to solve this problem as more and more companies are looking to go cloud native. And I feel like in the last 10 years we had this period where a lot of companies were kind of dabbling in the cloud and they're identifying the low hanging fruit for their migrations, or they were starting out with new applications in the cloud. We're just starting to move into a period where now they're trying to bring over legacy applications. Now they're trying to bring over the applications that have been running their business for 10, 20, even 30 years. And we're trying to help them solve the problem of how do we start with that? How do we take a holistic look at our applications and come up with a game plan of how we're going to bring those into being cloud native? >> Oh, yeah, go. >> One other thing I want to get to you mentioned replatforming and refactoring. A lot of discussion on what that means now. Refactoring with the cloud, we see a lot of great examples, people really getting a competitive advantage by refactoring in that case. But re-platforming also has meaning, it seems to be evolving. So guys can you share your your thoughts on what's re-platforming versus refactoring? >> I'll let you go. >> So for re-platforming, there's a few different stages that we can do this in. So we have this term in migration called lift and shift. It's basically taking something as is and just plopping it in and then having certain technologies around it that make it act in a similar way as it was before but in more of a cloud type of way. And this is a good way for people to get their feet wet, to get their applications into the cloud. But a lot of times they're not optimized around it, they're not able to scale, they're not able to have a lot of the cost effective things that go with it as well. So that's like the next step is that that's the refactoring. Where we're actually taking apart this idea, these domains is what we would call it for the business. And then breaking them down into their parts which then leads to things like microservices and things like being able to scale horizontally and proving that is. >> So the benefits of the cloud higher level services. >> Absolutely. >> So you shift to the platform which is cloud, lift and shift or get it over there, and then set it up so it can take advantage and increase the functionality. Is that kind of the difference? >> And one thing that we're seeing too is that these companies are operating this hybrid model. So they've brought some containers over and then they have legacy like virtual machines that they want to bring over into the cloud, but they're not in a position right now where they can re refactor or even- >> In position, it's not even on a table yet. >> So that's where we're also seeing opportunities where we can identify ways that we can actually lift and shift that VM closer at least to the containers. And that's where a lot of my conversations as a cloud success architect are of how do we refactor but also re-platform the most strategic candidate? >> So is Konveyor a good fit for these kinds of opportunities? >> Yes, 100%. It actually asks you like it starts certain phases like assessment phase, then it ask you a bunch of question about your infrastructure, applications and everything to gauge, and then provide you with the right strategy. It's not like one strategy. So it will provide you with the right strategy either re-platform, refracture or like what is best, retire, rehost, whatever, but replatform and refactor are the most that we are focused on right now. Hopefully that we might expand but I'm not sure. >> I think you just brought up a really good point and I was curious about this too 'cause Christopher you mentioned you're working with largely Fortune 50 companies, so some of the largest companies on earth. We're not talking about scale, we are talking about extraordinarily large scale. >> Thousands sometimes of applications. >> And I'm thinking a lot, I'm just sitting here listening to you thinking about the complexity. The complexity of each one of these situations. And I'm sure you've seen some of it before, you've been doing this for a while, and you're mentioning that Konveyor has different sorts of strategies. What's the flow like for that? I mean, just even thinking about it feels complex for me sitting here right now. >> Yeah, so typically when we're doing a large scale migration that lasts anywhere for like a year or two sometimes with these Fortune 50 companies. >> Some of this legacy stuff has got to be. >> This is usually when they're already at the point where they're ready to move and we're just there to tell them how to move it at that point. So you're right, there's years that have been going on to get to the point that even I'm involved. But from an assessment standpoint, we spend months just looking at applications and assessing them using tools like Konveyor to just figure out, okay, are you ready to go? Do you have the green light or do we have to pull the brakes? And you're right, so much goes into that and it's all strategic. >> Oh my gosh. >> So I guess, a quarter or a third of our time we're not even actually moving applications, we're assessing the applications and cutting up the strategy. >> That's right, there's many pieces to this puzzle. >> Absolutely. >> And I bet there's some even hidden in the corners under the couch that people forgot were even there. >> We learn new things every time too. Every migration we learn new patterns and new difficulties which is what's great about the community aspect. Because we take those and then we add them into the community, into Konveyor and then we can build off of that. So it's like you're sharing when we're doing those migrations or companies are using Konveyor and sharing that knowledge, we're building off what other people have done, we're expanding that. So there's a real advantage to using a tool like Konveyor when it comes to previous experiences. >> So tell me about some of the trends that you're seeing across the board with the folks that you're helping. >> Yeah, so trends wise like I said, I feel like the low hanging fruit has been already done in the last 10 years. We're seeing very critical like mission critical applications that are typically 10, 20 years old that need to get into the the cloud. Because that term data gravity is what's preventing them from moving into the cloud. And it's usually a large older what we would call monolithic application that's preventing them from moving. And trying to identify the ways that we can take that apart and strategically move it into the cloud. And we had a customer survey that went out to a few hundred different people that were using Konveyor. And the feedback we got was about 50% of them are currently migrating like have large migrations going on like this. And then another 30, 40% have that targeted next two years. >> So it's happening. >> It's happening now. This is a problem, this isn't a problem that we're trying to future proof, it is happening now for most corporations. They are focused on finding ways to be cost optimized and especially in the way our market is working in this post-COVID world, it's more critical than ever. And a lot of people are pouring even though they're cutting back expenses, they're still putting focus their IT for these type of migrations. >> What's the persona of people that you're trying to talk to about Konveyor? Who is out there? >> What's the community like? >> What's the community makeup and why should someone join the team? Why should someone come in and work on the project? >> So someone who is interested or trying to start their journey or someone who's already like going through a journey and someone who has went through the journey, right? They have the most experience of like what went wrong and where it could be improved. So we cater to like everyone out there pretty much, right? Because some point of the time right now it's cloud native right now this is a ecosystem. In five years it would be like totally different thing. So the mission of the project is going to be like similar or like probably same, help someone replatform and rehost things into the next generation of whatever that's going to come. So we need everyone. So that is the focus area or like the targeted audience. Right now we have interest from people who are actually actively ongoing the migration and the challenges that they are facing right now. >> So legacy enterprises that up and running, full workloads, multiple productions, hundreds and hundreds of apps, whose boss has said, "We're going to the cloud." And they go, oh boy. How do we do this? Lift and shift, get re-platform? There's a playbook, there's a method. You lift and shift, you get it in there, get the core competency, use some manage service restitch it together, go cloud native. So this is the cloud native roadmap. >> And the beauty of Konveyor is that it also gives you like plans. So like once it assists and analyzed it, it comes up with plans and reports so that you can actually take it to your management and say like, well, let's just target these, these and many application, X number of application in like two weeks. Now let's just do it in waves. So that is some feature that we are looking forward to in conveyor three which is going to be released in the first quarter of 2023. So it's exciting, right? >> It is exciting and it makes a lot of sense. >> It makes everyone happy, it makes the engineers happy. Don't have to be overworked. It also like makes the architects like Chris happy and it also makes- >> Pretty much so. >> As exemplified right here, love that. >> It makes the management happy because they see that there is like progress going on and they can like ramp it up or wrap it down holiday season. Do not touch prediction, right? Do not touch prediction. >> You hear that manager, do not touch production. >> It's also friendships too 'cause people want to be in a tribe that's experiencing the same things over and over again. I think that is really the comradery and the community data sharing. >> Yeah, that's the beauty of community, right? You can be on any number of teams but you are on the same team. Like any number of companies but on the same team. It also like reflected in the keynotes I think yesterday someone mentioned it. Sorry, I cannot recall the name of who mentioned it but it's like different companies, same team, similar goal. We all go through the journey together. >> Water level rises together too. We learn from each other and that's what community is really all about. You can tell folks at home might not be able to feel it but I can. You can tell how community first you both are. Last question for you before we wrap up, is there anything that you wish the world knew about Konveyor that they don't know right now, or more people knew? And if not, your marketing team is nailing it and we'll just give them a high five. >> I think it goes with just what we were talking about. It's not just a tool for individual applications and how to move it, it's how do we see things from a bigger picture? And this is what this tool ultimately is also trying to solve is how do we work together to move hundreds if not thousands of applications? Because it takes a village. >> Quite literally with that volume size. >> My biggest advice to people who are considering this who are in large enterprise or even smaller enterprise. Make sure that you understand this is a team effort. Make sure you're communicating and lessons learned on one team is going to be lessons learned for another team. So share that information. When you're doing migrations make sure that all that knowledge is spread because you're just going to end up repeating the same mistakes over and over again. >> That is a beautiful way to close the show. Savitha, Christopher, thank you so much for being with us. John, always a pleasure. And thank you for tuning into theCUBE live from Detroit. We'll be back with our next interview in just a few. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> The technology spending outlook is not pretty and very much unpredictable right now. The negative sentiment is of course being driven by the macroeconomic factors in earnings forecasts that have been coming down all year in an environment of rising interest rates. And what's worse, is many people think earnings estimates are still too high. But it's understandable why there's so much uncertainty. I mean, technology is still booming, digital transformations are happening in earnest, leading companies have momentum and they got cash runways. And moreover, the CEOs of these leading companies are still really optimistic. But strong guidance in an environment of uncertainty is somewhat risky. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights Powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we share takeaways from ETR'S latest spending survey, which was released to their private clients on October 21st. Today, we're going to review the macro spending data. We're going to share where CIOs think their cloud spend is headed. We're going to look at the actions that organizations are taking to manage uncertainty and then review some of the technology companies that have the most positive and negative outlooks in the ETR data set. Let's first look at the sample makeup from the latest ETR survey. ETR captured more than 1300 respondents in this latest survey. Its highest figure for the year and the quality and seniority of respondents just keeps going up each time we dig into the data. We've got large contributions as you can see here from sea level executives in a broad industry focus. Now the survey is still North America centric with 20% of the respondents coming from overseas and there is a bias toward larger organizations. And nonetheless, we're still talking well over 400 respondents coming from SMBs. Now ETR for those of you who don't know, conducts a quarterly spending intention survey and they also do periodic drilldowns. So just by the way of review, let's take a look at the expectations in the latest drilldown survey for IT spending. Before we look at the broader technology spending intentions survey data, followers of this program know that we reported on this a couple of weeks ago, spending expectations that peaked last December at 8.3% are now down to 5.5% with a slight uptick expected for next year as shown here. Now one CIO in the ETR community said these figures could be understated because of inflation. Now that's an interesting comment. Real GDP in the US is forecast to be around 1.5% in 2022. So these figures are significantly ahead of that. Nominal GDP is forecast to be significantly higher than what is shown in that slide. It was over 9% in June for example. And one would interpret that survey respondents are talking about real dollars which reflects inflationary factors in IT spend. So you might say, well if nominal GDP is in the high single digits this means that IT spending is below GDP which is usually not the case. But the flip side of that is technology tends to be deflationary because prices come down over time on a per unit basis, so this would be a normal and even positive trend. But it's mixed right now with prices on hard to find hardware, they're holding more firms. Software, you know, software tends to be driven by lock in and competition and switching costs. So you have those countervailing factors. Services can be inflationary, especially now as wages rise but certain sectors like laptops and semis and NAND are seeing less demand and maybe even some oversupply. So the way to look at this data is on a relative basis. In other words, IT buyers are reporting 280 basis point drop in spending sentiment from the end of last year. Now, something that we haven't shared from the latest drilldown survey which we will now is how IT bar buyers are thinking about cloud adoption. This chart shows responses from 419 IT execs from that drilldown and depicts the percentage of workloads their organizations have in the cloud today and what the expectation is through years from now. And you can see it's 27% today and it's nearly 50% in three years. Now the nuance is if you look at the question, that ETRS, it's they asked about IaaS and PaaS, which to some could include on-prem. Now, let me come back to that. In particular, financial services, IT, telco and retail and services industry cited expectations for the future for three years out that we're well above the average of the mean adoption levels. Regardless of how you interpret this data there's most certainly plenty of public cloud in the numbers. And whether you believe cloud is an operating environment or a place out there in the cloud, there's plenty of room for workloads to move into a cloud model well beyond mid this decade. So you know, as ho hum as we've been toward recent as-a-service models announced from the likes of HPE with GreenLake and Dell with APEX, the timing of those offerings may be pretty good actually. Now let's expand on some of the data that we showed a couple weeks ago. This chart shows responses from 282 execs on actions their organizations are taking over the next three months. And the Deltas are quite traumatic from the early part of this charter than the left hand side. The brown line is hiring freezes, the black line is freezing IT projects, and the green line is hiring increases and that red line is layoffs. And we put a box around the sort of general area of the isolation economy timeframe. And you can see the wild swings on this chart. By mid last summer, people were kickstarting things and more hiring was going on and the black line shows IT project freezes, you know, came way down. And now, or on the way back up as our hiring freezes. So we're seeing these wild swings in organizational actions and strategies which underscores the lack of predictability. As with supply chains around the world, this is likely due to the fact that organizations, pre pandemic they were optimized for efficiency, not a lot of waste rather than business resilience. Meaning, you know, there's again not a lot of fluff in the system or if there was it got flushed out during the pandemic. And so the need for productivity and automation is becoming increasingly important, especially as actions that solely rely on headcount changes are very, very difficult to manage. Now, let's dig into some of the vendor commentary and take a look at some of the names that have momentum and some of the others possibly facing headwinds. Here's a list of companies that stand out in the ETR survey. Snowflake, once again leads the pack with a positive spending outlook. HashiCorp, CrowdStrike, Databricks, Freshworks and ServiceNow, they round out the top six. Microsoft, they seem to always be in the mix, as do a number of other security and related companies including CyberArk, Zscaler, CloudFlare, Elastic, Datadog, Fortinet, Tenable and to a certain extent Akamai, you can kind of put them sort of in that group. You know, CDN, they got to worry about security. Everybody worries about security, but especially the CDNs. Now the other software names that are highlighted here include Workday and Salesforce. On the negative side, you can see Dynatrace saw some negatives in the latest survey especially around its analytics business. Security is generally holding up better than other sectors but it's still seeing greater levels of pressure than it had previously. So lower spend. And defections relative to its observability peers, that's really for Dynatrace. Now the other one that was somewhat surprising is IBM. You see the IBM was sort of in that negative realm here but IBM reported an outstanding quarter this past week with double digit revenue growth, strong momentum in software, consulting, mainframes and other infrastructure like storage. It's benefiting from the Kyndryl restructuring and it's on track IBM to deliver 10 billion in free cash flow this year. Red Hat is performing exceedingly well and growing in the very high teens. And so look, IBM is in the midst of a major transformation and it seems like a company that is really focused now with hybrid cloud being powered by Red Hat and consulting and a decade plus of AI investments finally paying off. Now the other big thing we'll add is, IBM was once an outstanding acquire of companies and it seems to be really getting its act together on the M&A front. Yes, Red Hat was a big pill to swallow but IBM has done a number of smaller acquisitions, I think seven this year. Like for example, Turbonomic, which is starting to pay off. Arvind Krishna has the company focused once again. And he and Jim J. Kavanaugh, IBM CFO, seem to be very confident on the guidance that they're giving in their business. So that's a real positive in our view for the industry. Okay, the last thing we'd like to do is take 12 of the companies from the previous chart and plot them in context. Now these companies don't necessarily compete with each other, some do. But they are standouts in the ETR survey and in the market. What we're showing here is a view that we like to often show, it's net score or spending velocity on the vertical axis. And it's a measure, that's a measure of the net percentage of customers that are spending more on a particular platform. So ETR asks, are you spending more or less? They subtract less from the mores. I mean I'm simplifying, but that's what net score is. Now in the horizontal axis, that is a measure of overlap which is which measures presence or pervasiveness in the dataset. So bigger the better. We've inserted a table that informs how the dots in the companies are positioned. These companies are all in the green in terms of net score. And that right most column in the table insert is indicative of their presence in the dataset, the end. So higher, again, is better for both columns. Two other notes, the red dotted line there you see at 40%. Anything over that indicates an highly elevated spending momentum for a given platform. And we purposefully took Microsoft out of the mix in this chart because it skews the data due to its large size. Everybody else would cluster on the left and Microsoft would be all alone in the right. So we take them out. Now as we noted earlier, Snowflake once again leads with a net score of 64%, well above the 40% line. Having said that, while adoption rates for Snowflake remains strong the company's spending velocity in the survey has come down to Earth. And many more customers are shifting from where they were last year and the year before in growth mode i.e. spending more year to year with Snowflake to now shifting more toward flat spending. So a plus or minus 5%. So that puts pressure on Snowflake's net score, just based on the math as to how ETR calculates, its proprietary net score methodology. So Snowflake is by no means insulated completely to the macro factors. And this was seen especially in the data in the Fortune 500 cut of the survey for Snowflake. We didn't show that here, just giving you anecdotal commentary from the survey which is backed up by data. So, it showed steeper declines in the Fortune 500 momentum. But overall, Snowflake, very impressive. Now what's more, note the position of Streamlit relative to Databricks. Streamlit is an open source python framework for developing data driven, data science oriented apps. And it's ironic that it's net score and shared in is almost identical to those of data bricks, as the aspirations of Snowflake and Databricks are beginning to collide. Now, however, the Databricks net score has held up very well over the past year and is in the 92nd percentile of its machine learning and AI peers. And while it's seeing some softness, like Snowflake in the Fortune 500, Databricks has steadily moved to the right on the X axis over the last several surveys even though it was unable to get to the public markets and do an IPO during the lockdown tech bubble. Let's come back to the chart. ServiceNow is impressive because it's well above the 40% mark and it has 437 shared in on this cut, the largest of any company that we chose to plot here. The only real negative on ServiceNow is, more large customers are keeping spending levels flat. That's putting a little bit pressure on its net score, but that's just conservatives. It's kind of like Snowflakes, you know, same thing but in a larger scale. But it's defections, the ServiceNow as in Snowflake as well. It's defections remain very, very low, really low churn below 2% for ServiceNow, in fact, within the dataset. Now it's interesting to also see Freshworks hit the list. You can see them as one of the few ITSM vendors that has momentum and can potentially take on ServiceNow. Workday, on this chart, it's the other big app player that's above the 40% line and we're only showing Workday HCM, FYI, in this graphic. It's Workday Financials, that offering, is below the 40% line just for reference. Now let's talk about CrowdStrike. We attended Falcon last month, CrowdStrike's user conference and we're very impressed with the product visio, the company's execution, it's growing partnerships. And you can see in this graphic, the ETR survey data confirms the company's stellar performance with a net score at 50%, well above the 40% mark. And importantly, more than 300 mentions. That's second only to ServiceNow, amongst the 12 companies that we've chosen to highlight here. Only Microsoft, which is not shown here, has a higher net score in the security space than CrowdStrike. And when it comes to presence, CrowdStrike now has caught up to Splunk in terms of pervasion in the survey. Now CyberArk and Zscaler are the other two security firms that are right at that 40% red dotted line. CyberArk for names with over a hundred citations in the security sector, is only behind Microsoft and CrowdStrike. Zscaler for its part in the survey is seeing strong momentum in the Fortune 500, unlike what we said for Snowflake. And its pervasion on the X-axis has been steadily increasing. Again, not that Snowflake and CrowdStrike compete with each other but they're too prominent names and it's just interesting to compare peers and business models. Cloudflare, Elastic and Datadog are slightly below the 40% mark but they made the sort of top 12 that we showed to highlight here and they continue to have positive sentiment in the survey. So, what are the big takeaways from this latest survey, this really quick snapshot that we've taken. As you know, over the next several weeks we're going to dig into it more and more. As we've previously reported, the tide is going out and it's taking virtually all the tech ships with it. But in many ways the current market is a story of heightened expectations coming down to Earth, miscalculations about the economic patterns and the swings and imperfect visibility. Leading Barclays analyst, Ramo Limchao ask the question to guide or not to guide in a recent research note he wrote. His point being, should companies guide or should they be more cautious? Many companies, if not most companies, are actually giving guidance. Indeed, when companies like Oracle and IBM are emphatic about their near term outlook and their visibility, it gives one confidence. On the other hand, reasonable people are asking, will the red hot valuations that we saw over the last two years from the likes of Snowflake, CrowdStrike, MongoDB, Okta, Zscaler, and others. Will they return? Or are we in for a long, drawn out, sideways exercise before we see sustained momentum? And to that uncertainty, we add elections and public policy. It's very hard to predict right now. I'm sorry to be like a two-handed lawyer, you know. On the one hand, on the other hand. But that's just the way it is. Let's just say for our part, we think that once it's clear that interest rates are on their way back down and we'll stabilize it under 4% and we have clarity on the direction of inflation, wages, unemployment and geopolitics, the wild swings and sentiment will subside. But when that happens is anyone's guess. If I had to peg, I'd say 18 months, which puts us at least into the spring of 2024. What's your prediction? You know, it's almost that time of year. Let's hear it. Please keep in touch and let us know what you think. Okay, that's it for now. Many thanks to Alex Myerson. He is on production and he manages the podcast for us. Ken Schiffman as well is our newest addition to the Boston Studio. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight, they help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hoff is our EIC, editor-in-chief over at SiliconANGLE. He does some wonderful editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes, they are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search breaking analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @dvellante. Or feel free to comment on our LinkedIn posts. And please do check out etr.ai. They've got the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. If you haven't checked that out, you should. It'll give you an advantage. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights Powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. Be well and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (soft upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Hello everyone, welcome to this special Cube conversation here in Palo Alto, California. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE in theCUBE Studios. We've got a special video here. We love when we have startups that are launching. It's an exclusive video of a hot startup that's launching. Got great reviews so far. You know, word on the street is, they got something different and unique. We're going to' dig into it. Amit Govrin who's the CEO and co-founder of Kubiya, which stands for Cube in Hebrew, and they're headquartered in Bay Area and in Tel Aviv. Amit, congratulations on the startup launch and thanks for coming in and talk to us in theCUBE >> Thank you, John, very nice to be here. >> So, first of all, a little, 'cause we love the Cube, 'cause theCUBE's kind of an open brand. We've never seen the Cube in Hebrew, so is that true? Kubiya is? >> Kubiya literally means cube. You know, clearly there's some additional meanings that we can discuss. Obviously we're also launching a KubCon, so there's a dual meaning to this event. >> KubCon, not to be confused with CubeCon. Which is an event we might have someday and compete. No, I'm only kidding, good stuff. I want to get into the startup because I'm intrigued by your story. One, you know, conversational AI's been around, been a category. We've seen chat bots be all the rage and you know, I kind of don't mind chat bots on some sites. I can interact with some, you know, form based knowledge graph, whatever, knowledge database and get basic stuff self served. So I can see that, but it never really scaled or took off. And now with Cloud Native kind of going to the next level, we're starting to see a lot more open source and a lot more automation, in what I call AI as code or you know, AI as a service, machine learning, developer focused action. I think you guys might have an answer there. So if you don't mind, could you take a minute to explain what you guys are doing, what's different about Kubiya, what's happening? >> Certainly. So thank you for that. Kubiya is what we would consider the first, or one of the first, advanced virtual assitants with a domain specific expertise in DevOps. So, we respect all of the DevOps concepts, GitOps, workflow automation, of those categories you've mentioned, but also the added value of the conversational AI. That's really one of the few elements that we can really bring to the table to extract what we call intent based operations. And we can get into what that means in a little bit. I'll save that maybe for the next question. >> So the market you're going after is kind of, it's, I love to hear starters when they, they don't have a Gartner Magic quadrant, they can fit nicely, it means they're onto something. What is the market you're going after? Because you're seeing a lot of developers driving a lot of the key successes in DevOps. DevOps has evolved to the point where, and DevSecOps, where developers are driving the change. And so having something that's developer focused is key. Are you guys targeting the developers, IT buyers, cloud architects? Who are you looking to serve with this new opportunity? >> So essentially self-service in the world of DevOps, the end user typically would be a developer, but not only, and obviously the operators, those are the folks that we're actually looking to help augment a lot of their efforts, a lot of the toil that they're experiencing in a day to day. So there's subcategories within that. We can talk about the different internal developer tools, or platforms, shared services platforms, service catalogs are tangential categories that this kind of comes on. But on top of that, we're adding the element of conversational AI. Which, as I mentioned, that's really the "got you". >> I think you're starting to see a lot of autonomous stuff going on, autonomous pen testing. There's a company out there doing I've seen autonomous AI. Automation is a big theme of it. And I got to ask, are you guys on the business side purely in the cloud? Are you born in the cloud, is it a cloud service? What's the product choice there? It's a service, right? >> Software is a service. We have the classic, Multi-Tenancy SAAS, but we also have a hybrid SAAS solution, which allows our customers to run workflows using remote runners, essentially hosted at their own location. >> So primary cloud, but you're agnostic on where they could consume, how they want to' consume the product. >> Technology agnostic. >> Okay, so that's cool. So let's get into the problem you're solving. So take me through, this will drive a lot of value here, when you guys did the company, what problems did you hone in on and what are you guys seeing as the core problem that you solve? >> So we, this is a unique, I don't know how unique, but this is a interesting proposition because I come from the business side, so call it the top down. I've been in enterprise sales, I've been in a CRO, VP sales hat. My co-founder comes from the bottom up, right? He ran DevOps teams and SRE teams in his previous company. That's actually what he did. So, we met each other halfway, essentially with me seeing a lot of these problems of self-service not being so self-service after all, platforms hitting walls with adoption. And he actually created his own self-service platform, within his last company, to address his own personal pains. So we essentially kind of met with both perspectives. >> So you're absolutely hardcore on self-service. >> We're enabling self-service. >> And that basically is what everybody wants. I mean, the developers want self-service. I mean, that's kind of like, you know, that's the nirvana. So take us through what you guys are offering, give us an example of use cases and who's buying your product, why, and take us through that whole piece. >> Do you mind if I take a step back and say why we believe self-service has somewhat failed or not gotten off. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> So look, this is essentially how we're looking at it. All the analysts and the industry insiders are talking about self-service platforms as being what's going to' remove the dependency of the operator in the loop the entire time, right? Because the operator, that scarce resource, it's hard to hire, hard to train, hard to retain those folks, Developers are obviously dependent on them for productivity. So the operators in this case could be a DevOps, could be a SecOps, it could be a platform engineer. It comes in different flavors. But the common denominator, somebody needs an access request, provisioning a new environment, you name it, right? They go to somebody, that person is operator. The operator typically has a few things on their plate. It's not just attending and babysitting platforms, but it's also innovating, spinning up, and scaling services. So they see this typically as kind of, we don't really want to be here, we're going to' go and do this because we're on call. We have to take it on a chin, if you may, for this. >> It's their child, they got to' do it. >> Right, but it's KTLOs, right, keep the lights on, this is maintenance of a platform. It's not what they're born and bred to do, which is innovate. That's essentially what we're seeing, we're seeing that a lot of these platforms, once they finally hit the point of maturity, they're rolled out to the team. People come to serve themselves in platform, and low and behold, it's not as self-service as it may seem. >> We've seen that certainly with Kubernetes adoption being, I won't say slow, it's been fast, but it's been good. But I think this is kind of the promise of what SRE was supposed to be. You know, do it once and then babysit in the sense of it's working and automated. Nothing's broken yet. Don't call me unless you need something, I see that. So the question, you're trying to make it easier then, you're trying to free up the talent. >> Talent to operate and have essentially a human, like in the loop, essentially augment that person and give the end users all of the answers they require, as if they're talking to a person. >> I mean it's basically, you're taking the virtual assistant concept, or chat bot, to a level of expertise where there's intelligence, jargon, experience into the workflows that's known. Not just talking to chat bot, get a support number to rebook a hotel room. >> We're converting operational workflows into conversations. >> Give me an example, take me through an example. >> Sure, let's take a simple example. I mean, not everyone provisions EC2's with two days (indistinct). But let's say you want to go and provision new EC2 instances, okay? If you wanted to do it, you could go and talk to the assistant and say, "I want to spin up a new server". If it was a human in the loop, they would ask you the following questions: what type of environment? what are we attributing this to? what type of instance? security groups, machine images, you name it. So, these are the questions that typically somebody needs to be armed with before they can go and provision themselves, serve themselves. Now the problem is users don't always have these questions. So imagine the following scenario. Somebody comes in, they're in Jira ticket queue, they finally, their turn is up and the next question they don't have the answer to. So now they have to go and tap on a friend, or they have to go essentially and get that answer. By the time they get back, they lost their turn in queue. And then that happens again. So, they lose a context, they lose essentially the momentum. And a simple access request, or a simple provision request, can easily become a couple days of ping pong back and forth. This won't happen with the virtual assistant. >> You know, I think, you know, and you mentioned chat bots, but also RPA is out there, you've seen a lot of that growth. One of the hard things, and you brought this up, I want to get your reaction to, is contextualizing the workflow. It might not be apparent, but the answer might be there, it disrupts the entire experience at that point. RPA and chat bots don't have that contextualization. Is that what you guys do differently? Is that the unique flavor here? Is that difference between current chat bots and RPA? >> The way we see it, I alluded to the intent based operations. Let me give a tangible experience. Even not from our own world, this will be easy. It's a bidirectional feedback loop 'cause that's actually what feeds the context and the intent. We all know Waze, right, in the world of navigation. They didn't bring navigation systems to the world. What they did is they took the concept of navigation systems that are typically satellite guided and said it's not just enough to drive down the 280, which typically have no traffic, right, and to come across traffic and say, oh, why didn't my satellite pick that up? So they said, have the end users, the end nodes, feed that direction back, that feedback, right. There has to be a bidirectional feedback loop that the end nodes help educate the system, make the system be better, more customized. And that's essentially what we're allowing the end users. So the maintenance of the system isn't entirely in the hands of the operators, right? 'Cause that's the part that they dread. And the maintenance of the system is democratized across all the users that they can teach the system, give input to the system, hone in the system in order to make it more of the DNA of the organization. >> You and I were talking before you came on this camera interview, you said playfully that the Siri for DevOps, which kind of implies, hey infrastructure, do something for me. You know, we all know Siri, so we get that. So that kind of illustrates kind of where the direction is. Explain why you say that, what does that mean? Is that like a NorthStar vision that you guys are approaching? You want to' have a state where everything's automated in it's conversational deployments, that kind of thing. And take us through why that Siri for DevOps is. >> I think it helps anchor people to what a virtual assistant is. Because when you hear virtual assistant, that can mean any one of various connotations. So the Siri is actually a conversational assistant, but it's not necessarily a virtual assistant. So what we're saying is we're anchoring people to that thought and saying, we're actually allowing it to be operational, turning complex operations into simple conversations. >> I mean basically they take the automate with voice Google search or a query, what's the score of the game? And, it also, and talking to the guy who invented Siri, I actually interviewed on theCUBE, it's a learning system. It actually learns as it gets more usage, it learns. How do you guys see that evolving in DevOps? There's a lot of jargon in DevOps, a lot of configurations, a lot of different use cases, a lot of new technologies. What's the secret sauce behind what you guys do? Is it the conversational AI, is it the machine learning, is it the data, is it the model? Take us through the secret sauce. >> In fact, it's all the above. And I don't think we're bringing any one element to the table that hasn't been explored before, hasn't been done. It's a recipe, right? You give two people the same ingredients, they can have complete different results in terms of what they come out with. We, because of our domain expertise in DevOps, because of our familiarity with developer workflows with operators, we know how to give a very well suited recipe. Five course meal, hopefully with Michelin stars as part of that. So a few things, maybe a few of the secret sauce element, conversational AI, the ability to essentially go and extract the intent of the user, so that if we're missing context, the system is smart enough to go and to get that feedback and to essentially feed itself into that model. >> Someone might say, hey, you know, conversational AI, that was yesterday's trend, it never happened. It was kind of weak, chat bots were lame. What's different now and with you guys, and the market, that makes a redo or a second shot at this, a second bite at the apple, as they say. What do you guys see? 'Cause you know, I would argue that it's, you know, it's still early, real early. >> Certainly. >> How do you guys view that? How would you handle that objection? >> It's a fair question. I wasn't around the first time around to tell you what didn't work. I'm not afraid to share that the feedback that we're getting is phenomenal. People understand that we're actually customizing the workflows, the intent based operations to really help hone in on the dark spots. We call it last mile, you know, bottlenecks. And that's really where we're helping. We're helping in a way tribalize internal knowledge that typically hasn't been documented because it's painful enough to where people care about it but not painful enough to where you're going to' go and sit down an entire day and document it. And that's essentially what the virtual assistant can do. It can go and get into those crevices and help document, and operationalize all of those toils. And into workflows. >> Yeah, I mean some will call it grunt work, or low level work. And I think the automation is interesting. I think we're seeing this in a lot of these high scale situations where the talented hard to hire person is hired to do, say, things that were hard to do, but now harder things are coming around the corner. So, you know, serverless is great and all this is good, but it doesn't make the complexity go away. As these inflection points continue to drive more scale, the complexity kind of grows, but at the same time so is the ability to abstract away the complexity. So you're starting to see the smart, hired guns move to higher, bigger problems. And the automation seems to take the low level kind of like capabilities or the toil, or the grunt work, or the low level tasks that, you know, you don't want a high salaried person doing. Or I mean it's not so much that they don't want to' do it, they'll take one for the team, as you said, or take it on the chin, but there's other things to work on. >> I want to add one more thing, 'cause this goes into essentially what you just said. Think about it's not the virtual system, what it gives you is not just the intent and that's one element of it, is the ability to carry your operations with you to the place where you're not breaking your workflows, you're actually comfortable operating. So the virtual assistant lives inside of a command line interface, it lives inside of chat like Slack, and Teams, and Mattermost, and so forth. It also lives within a low-code editor. So we're not forcing anyone to use uncomfortable language or operations if they're not comfortable with. It's almost like Siri, it travels in your mobile phone, it's on your laptop, it's with you everywhere. >> It makes total sense. And the reason why I like this, and I want to' get your reaction on this because we've done a lot of interviews with DevOps, we've met at every CubeCon since it started, and Kubernetes kind of highlights the value of the containers at the orchestration level. But what's really going on is the DevOps developers, and the CICD pipeline, with infrastructure's code, they're basically have a infrastructure configuration at their disposal all the time. And all the ops challenges have been around that, the repetitive mundane tasks that most people do. There's like six or seven main use cases in DevOps. So the guardrails just need to be set. So it sounds like you guys are going down the road of saying, hey here's the use cases you can bounce around these use cases all day long. And just keep doing your jobs cause they're bolting on infrastructure to every application. >> There's one more element to this that we haven't really touched on. It's not just workflows and use cases, but it's also knowledge, right? Tribal knowledge, like you asked me for an example. You can type or talk to the assistant and ask, "How much am I spending on AWS, on US East 1, on so and so customer environment last week?", and it will know how to give you that information. >> Can I ask, should I buy a reserve instances or not? Can I ask that question? 'Cause there's always good trade offs between buying the reserve instances. I mean that's kind of the thing that. >> This is where our ecosystem actually comes in handy because we're not necessarily going to' go down every single domain and try to be the experts in here. We can tap into the partnerships, API, we have full extensibility in API and the software development kit that goes into. >> It's interesting, opinionated and declarative are buzzwords in developer language. So you started to get into this editorial thing. So I can bring up an example. Hey cube, implement the best service mesh. What answer does it give you? 'Cause there's different choices. >> Well this is actually where the operator, there's clearly guard rails. Like you can go and say, I want to' spin up a machine, and it will give you all of the machines on AWS. Doesn't mean you have to get the X one, that's good for a SAP environment. You could go and have guardrails in place where only the ones that are relevant to your team, ones that have resources and budgetary, you know, guidelines can be. So, the operator still has all the control. >> It was kind of tongue in cheek around the editorialized, but actually the answer seems to be as you're saying, whatever the customer decided their service mesh is. So I think this is where it gets into as an assistant to architecting and operating, that seems to be the real value. >> Now code snippets is a different story because that goes on to the web, that goes onto stock overflow, and that's actually one of the things. So inside the CLI, you could actually go and ask for code snippets and we could actually go and populate that, it's a smart CLI. So that's actually one of the things that are an added value of that. >> I was saying to a friend and we were talking about open source and how when I grew up, there was no open source. If you're a developer now, I mean there's so much code, it's not so much coding anymore as it is connecting and integrating. >> Certainly. >> And writing glue layers, if you will. I mean there's still code, but it's not, you don't have to build it from scratch. There's so much code out there. This low-code notion of a smart system is interesting 'cause it's very matrix like. It can build its own code. >> Yes, but I'm also a little wary with low-code and no code. I think part of the problem is we're so constantly focused on categories and categorizing ourselves, and different categories take on a life of their own. So low-code no code is not necessarily, even though we have the low-code editor, we're not necessarily considering ourselves low-code. >> Serverless, no code, low-code. I was so thrown on a term the other day, architecture-less. As a joke, no we don't need architecture. >> There's a use case around that by the way, yeah, we do. Show me my AWS architecture and it will build the architect diagram for you. >> Again, serverless architect, this is all part of infrastructure's code. At the end of the day, the developer has infrastructure with code. Again, how they deploy it is the neuron. That's what we've been striving for. >> But infrastructure is code. You can destroy, you know, terraform, you can go and create one. It's not necessarily going to' operate it for you. That's kind of where this comes in on top of that. So it's really complimentary to infrastructure. >> So final question, before we get into the origination story, data and security are two hot areas we're seeing fill the IT gap, that has moved into the developer role. IT is essentially provisioned by developers now, but the OP side shifted to large scale SRE like environments, security and data are critical. What's your opinion on those two things? >> I agree. Do you want me to give you the normal data as gravity? >> So you agree that IT is now, is kind of moved into the developer realm, but the new IT is data ops and security ops basically. >> A hundred percent, and the lines are so blurred. Like who's what in today's world. I mean, I can tell you, I have customers who call themselves five different roles in the same day. So it's, you know, at the end of the day I call 'em operators 'cause I don't want to offend anybody because that's just the way it is. >> Architectural-less, we're going to' come back to that. Well, I know we're going to' see you at CubeCon. >> Yes. >> We should catch up there and talk more. I'm looking forward to seeing how you guys get the feedback from the marketplace. It should be interesting to hear, the curious question I have for you is, what was the origination story? Why did you guys come together, was it a shared problem? Was it a big market opportunity? Was it an itch you guys were scratching? Did you feel like you needed to come together and start this company? What was the real vision behind the origination? Take a take a minute to explain the story. >> No, absolutely. So I've been living in Palo Alto for the last couple years. Previous, also a founder. So, you know, from my perspective, I always saw myself getting back in the game. Spent a few years in AWS essentially managing partnerships for tier one DevOps partners, you know, all of the known players. Some in public, some of them not. And really the itch was there, right. I saw what everyone's doing. I started seeing consistency in the pains that I was hearing back, in terms of what hasn't been solved. So I already had an opinion where I wanted to go. And when I was visiting actually Israel with the family, I was introduced by a mutual friend to Shaked, Shaked Askayo, my co-founder and CTO. Amazing guy, unbelievable technologists, probably one the most, you know, impressive folks I've had a chance to work with. And he actually solved a very similar problem, you know, in his own way in a previous company, BlueVine, a FinTech company where he was head of SRE, having to, essentially, oversee 200 developers in a very small team. The ratio was incongruent to what the SRE guideline would tell. >> That's more than 10 x rate developer. >> Oh, absolutely. Sure enough. And just imagine it's four different time zones. He finishes day shift and you already had the US team coming, asking for a question. He said, this is kind of a, >> Got to' clone himself, basically. >> Well, yes. He essentially said to me, I had no day, I had no life, but I had Corona, I had COVID, which meant I could work from home. And I essentially programed myself in the form of a bot. Essentially, when people came to him, he said, "Don't talk to me, talk to the bot". Now that was a different generation. >> Just a trivial example, but the idea was to automate the same queries all the time. There's an answer for that, go here. And that's the benefit of it. >> Yes, so he was able to see how easy it was to solve, I mean, how effective it was solving 70% of the toil in his organization. Scaling his team, froze the headcount and the developer team kept on going. So that meant that he was doing some right. >> When you have a problem, and you need to solve it, the creativity comes out of the woodwork, you know, invention is the mother of necessity. So final question for you, what's next? Got the launch, what are you guys hope to do over the next six months to a year, hiring? Put a plug in for the company. What are you guys looking to do? Take a minute to share the future vision and get a plug in. >> A hundred percent. So, Kubiya, as you can imagine, announcing ourselves at CubeCon, so in a couple weeks. Opening the gates towards the public beta and NGA in the next couple months. Essentially working with dozens of customers, Aston Martin, and business earn in. We have quite a few, our website's full of quotes. You can go ahead. But effectively we're looking to go and to bring the next operator, generation of operators, who value their time, who value the, essentially, the value of tribal knowledge that travels between organizations that could be essentially shared. >> How many customers do you guys have in your pre-launch? >> It's above a dozen. Without saying, because we're actually looking to onboard 10 more next week. So that's just an understatement. It changes from day to day. >> What's the number one thing people are saying about you? >> You got that right. I know it's, I'm trying to be a little bit more, you know. >> It's okay, you can be cocky, startups are good. But I mean they're obviously, they're using the product and you're getting good feedback. Saving time, are they saying this is a dream product? Got it right, what are some of the things? >> I think anybody who doesn't feel the pain won't know, but the folks who are in the trenches, or feeling the pain, or experiencing this toil, who know what this means, they said, "You're doing this different, you're doing this right. You architected it right. You know exactly what the developer workflows," you know, where all the areas, you know, where all the skeletons are hidden within that. And you're attending to that. So we're happy about that. >> Everybody wants to clone themselves, again, the tribal knowledge. I think this is a great example of where we see the world going. Make things autonomous, operationally automated for the use cases you know are lock solid. Why wouldn't you just deploy? >> Exactly, and we have a very generous free tier. People can, you know, there's a plugin, you can sign up for free until the end of the year. We have a generous free tier. Yeah, free forever tier, as well. So we're looking for people to try us out and to give us feedback. >> I think the self-service, I think the point is, we've talked about it on the Cube at our events, everyone says the same thing. Every developer wants self-service, period. Full stop, done. >> What they don't say is they need somebody to help them babysit to make sure they're doing it right. >> The old dashboard, green, yellow, red. >> I know it's an analogy that's not related, but have you been to Whole Foods? Have you gone through their self-service line? That's the beauty of it, right? Having someone in a loop helping you out throughout the time. You don't get confused, if something's not working, someone's helping you out, that's what people want. They want a human in the loop, or a human like in the loop. We're giving that next best thing. >> It's really the ratio, it's scale. It's a scaling. It's force multiplier, for sure. Amit, thanks for coming on, congratulations. >> Thank you so much. >> See you at KubeCon. Thanks for coming in, sharing the story. >> KubiyaCon. >> CubeCon. Cube in Hebrew, Kubiya. Founder, co-founder and CEO here, sharing the story in the launch. Conversational AI for DevOps, the theory of DevOps, really kind of changing the game, bringing efficiency, solving a lot of the pain points of large scale infrastructure. This is theCUBE, CUBE conversation, I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching. (upbeat electronic music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR, this is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> This past week we saw two of the Big 3 cloud providers present the latest update on their respective cloud visions, their business progress, their announcements and innovations. The content at these events had many overlapping themes, including modern cloud infrastructure at global scale, applying advanced machine intelligence, AKA AI, end-to-end data platforms, collaboration software. They talked a lot about the future of work automation. And they gave us a little taste, each company of the Metaverse Web 3.0 and much more. Despite these striking similarities, the differences between these two cloud platforms and that of AWS remains significant. With Microsoft leveraging its massive application software footprint to dominate virtually all markets and Google doing everything in its power to keep up with the frenetic pace of today's cloud innovation, which was set into motion a decade and a half ago by AWS. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights, powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we unpack the immense amount of content presented by the CEOs of Microsoft and Google Cloud at Microsoft Ignite and Google Cloud Next. We'll also quantify with ETR survey data the relative position of these two cloud giants in four key sectors: cloud IaaS, BI analytics, data platforms and collaboration software. Now one thing was clear this past week, hybrid events are the thing. Google Cloud Next took place live over a 24-hour period in six cities around the world, with the main gathering in New York City. Microsoft Ignite, which normally is attended by 30,000 people, had a smaller event in Seattle, in person with a virtual audience around the world. AWS re:Invent, of course, is much different. Yes, there's a virtual component at re:Invent, but it's all about a big live audience gathering the week after Thanksgiving, in the first week of December in Las Vegas. Regardless, Satya Nadella keynote address was prerecorded. It was highly produced and substantive. It was visionary, energetic with a strong message that Azure was a platform to allow customers to build their digital businesses. Doing more with less, which was a key theme of his. Nadella covered a lot of ground, starting with infrastructure from the compute, highlighting a collaboration with Arm-based, Ampere processors. New block storage, 60 regions, 175,000 miles of fiber cables around the world. He presented a meaningful multi-cloud message with Azure Arc to support on-prem and edge workloads, as well as of course the public cloud. And talked about confidential computing at the infrastructure level, a theme we hear from all cloud vendors. He then went deeper into the end-to-end data platform that Microsoft is building from the core data stores to analytics, to governance and the myriad tooling Microsoft offers. AI was next with a big focus on automation, AI, training models. He showed demos of machines coding and fixing code and machines automatically creating designs for creative workers and how Power Automate, Microsoft's RPA tooling, would combine with Microsoft Syntex to understand documents and provide standard ways for organizations to communicate with those documents. There was of course a big focus on Azure as developer cloud platform with GitHub Copilot as a linchpin using AI to assist coders in low-code and no-code innovations that are coming down the pipe. And another giant theme was a workforce transformation and how Microsoft is using its heritage and collaboration and productivity software to move beyond what Nadella called productivity paranoia, i.e., are remote workers doing their jobs? In a world where collaboration is built into intelligent workflows, and he even showed a glimpse of the future with AI-powered avatars and partnerships with Meta and Cisco with Teams of all firms. And finally, security with a bevy of tools from identity, endpoint, governance, et cetera, stressing a suite of tools from a single provider, i.e., Microsoft. So a couple points here. One, Microsoft is following in the footsteps of AWS with silicon advancements and didn't really emphasize that trend much except for the Ampere announcement. But it's building out cloud infrastructure at a massive scale, there is no debate about that. Its plan on data is to try and provide a somewhat more abstracted and simplified solutions, which differs a little bit from AWS's approach of the right database tool, for example, for the right job. Microsoft's automation play appears to provide simple individual productivity tools, kind of a ground up approach and make it really easy for users to drive these bottoms up initiatives. We heard from UiPath that forward five last month, a little bit of a different approach of horizontal automation, end-to-end across platforms. So quite a different play there. Microsoft's angle on workforce transformation is visionary and will continue to solidify in our view its dominant position with Teams and Microsoft 365, and it will drive cloud infrastructure consumption by default. On security as well as a cloud player, it has to have world-class security, and Azure does. There's not a lot of debate about that, but the knock on Microsoft is Patch Tuesday becomes Hack Wednesday because Microsoft releases so many patches, it's got so much Swiss cheese in its legacy estate and patching frequently, it becomes a roadmap and a trigger for hackers. Hey, patch Tuesday, these are all the exploits that you can go after so you can act before the patches are implemented. And so it's really become a problem for users. As well Microsoft is competing with many of the best-of-breed platforms like CrowdStrike and Okta, which have market momentum and appear to be more attractive horizontal plays for customers outside of just the Microsoft cloud. But again, it's Microsoft. They make it easy and very inexpensive to adopt. Now, despite the outstanding presentation by Satya Nadella, there are a couple of statements that should raise eyebrows. Here are two of them. First, as he said, Azure is the only cloud that supports all organizations and all workloads from enterprises to startups, to highly regulated industries. I had a conversation with Sarbjeet Johal about this, to make sure I wasn't just missing something and we were both surprised, somewhat, by this claim. I mean most certainly AWS supports more certifications for example, and we would think it has a reasonable case to dispute that claim. And the other statement, Nadella made, Azure is the only cloud provider enabling highly regulated industries to bring their most sensitive applications to the cloud. Now, reasonable people can debate whether AWS is there yet, but very clearly Oracle and IBM would have something to say about that statement. Now maybe it's not just, would say, "Oh, they're not real clouds, you know, they're just going to hosting in the cloud if you will." But still, when it comes to mission-critical applications, you would think Oracle is really the the leader there. Oh, and Satya also mentioned the claim that the Edge browser, the Microsoft Edge browser, no questions asked, he said, is the best browser for business. And we could see some people having some questions about that. Like isn't Edge based on Chrome? Anyway, so we just had to question these statements and challenge Microsoft to defend them because to us it's a little bit of BS and makes one wonder what else in such as awesome keynote and it was awesome, it was hyperbole. Okay, moving on to Google Cloud Next. The keynote started with Sundar Pichai doing a virtual session, he was remote, stressing the importance of Google Cloud. He mentioned that Google Cloud from its Q2 earnings was on a $25-billion annual run rate. What he didn't mention is that it's also on a 3.6 billion annual operating loss run rate based on its first half performance. Just saying. And we'll dig into that issue a little bit more later in this episode. He also stressed that the investments that Google has made to support its core business and search, like its global network of 22 subsea cables to support things like, YouTube video, great performance obviously that we all rely on, those innovations there. Innovations in BigQuery to support its search business and its threat analysis that it's always had and its AI, it's always been an AI-first company, he's stressed, that they're all leveraged by the Google Cloud Platform, GCP. This is all true by the way. Google has absolutely awesome tech and the talk, as well as his talk, Pichai, but also Kurian's was forward thinking and laid out a vision of the future. But it didn't address in our view, and I talked to Sarbjeet Johal about this as well, today's challenges to the degree that Microsoft did and we expect AWS will at re:Invent this year, it was more out there, more forward thinking, what's possible in the future, somewhat less about today's problem, so I think it's resonates less with today's enterprise players. Thomas Kurian then took over from Sundar Pichai and did a really good job of highlighting customers, and I think he has to, right? He has to say, "Look, we are in this game. We have customers, 9 out of the top 10 media firms use Google Cloud. 8 out of the top 10 manufacturers. 9 out of the top 10 retailers. Same for telecom, same for healthcare. 8 out of the top 10 retail banks." He and Sundar specifically referenced a number of companies, customers, including Avery Dennison, Groupe Renault, H&M, John Hopkins, Prudential, Minna Bank out of Japan, ANZ bank and many, many others during the session. So you know, they had some proof points and you got to give 'em props for that. Now like Microsoft, Google talked about infrastructure, they referenced training processors and regions and compute optionality and storage and how new workloads were emerging, particularly data-driven workloads in AI that required new infrastructure. He explicitly highlighted partnerships within Nvidia and Intel. I didn't see anything on Arm, which somewhat surprised me 'cause I believe Google's working on that or at least has come following in AWS's suit if you will, but maybe that's why they're not mentioning it or maybe I got to do more research there, but let's park that for a minute. But again, as we've extensively discussed in Breaking Analysis in our view when it comes to compute, AWS via its Annapurna acquisition is well ahead of the pack in this area. Arm is making its way into the enterprise, but all three companies are heavily investing in infrastructure, which is great news for customers and the ecosystem. We'll come back to that. Data and AI go hand in hand, and there was no shortage of data talk. Google didn't mention Snowflake or Databricks specifically, but it did mention, by the way, it mentioned Mongo a couple of times, but it did mention Google's, quote, Open Data cloud. Now maybe Google has used that term before, but Snowflake has been marketing the data cloud concept for a couple of years now. So that struck as a shot across the bow to one of its partners and obviously competitor, Snowflake. At BigQuery is a main centerpiece of Google's data strategy. Kurian talked about how they can take any data from any source in any format from any cloud provider with BigQuery Omni and aggregate and understand it. And with the support of Apache Iceberg and Delta and Hudi coming in the future and its open Data Cloud Alliance, they talked a lot about that. So without specifically mentioning Snowflake or Databricks, Kurian co-opted a lot of messaging from these two players, such as life and tech. Kurian also talked about Google Workspace and how it's now at 8 million users up from 6 million just two years ago. There's a lot of discussion on developer optionality and several details on tools supported and the open mantra of Google. And finally on security, Google brought out Kevin Mandian, he's a CUBE alum, extremely impressive individual who's CEO of Mandiant, a leading security service provider and consultancy that Google recently acquired for around 5.3 billion. They talked about moving from a shared responsibility model to a shared fate model, which is again, it's kind of a shot across AWS's bow, kind of shared responsibility model. It's unclear that Google will pay the same penalty if a customer doesn't live up to its portion of the shared responsibility, but we can probably assume that the customer is still going to bear the brunt of the pain, nonetheless. Mandiant is really interesting because it's a services play and Google has stated that it is not a services company, it's going to give partners in the channel plenty of room to play. So we'll see what it does with Mandiant. But Mandiant is a very strong enterprise capability and in the single most important area security. So interesting acquisition by Google. Now as well, unlike Microsoft, Google is not competing with security leaders like Okta and CrowdStrike. Rather, it's partnering aggressively with those firms and prominently putting them forth. All right. Let's get into the ETR survey data and see how Microsoft and Google are positioned in four key markets that we've mentioned before, IaaS, BI analytics, database data platforms and collaboration software. First, let's look at the IaaS cloud. ETR is just about to release its October survey, so I cannot share the that data yet. I can only show July data, but we're going to give you some directional hints throughout this conversation. This chart shows net score or spending momentum on the vertical axis and overlap or presence in the data, i.e., how pervasive the platform is. That's on the horizontal axis. And we've inserted the Wikibon estimates of IaaS revenue for the companies, the Big 3. Actually the Big 4, we included Alibaba. So a couple of points in this somewhat busy data chart. First, Microsoft and AWS as always are dominant on both axes. The red dotted line there at 40% on the vertical axis. That represents a highly elevated spending velocity and all of the Big 3 are above the line. Now at the same time, GCP is well behind the two leaders on the horizontal axis and you can see that in the table insert as well in our revenue estimates. Now why is Azure bigger in the ETR survey when AWS is larger according to the Wikibon revenue estimates? And the answer is because Microsoft with products like 365 and Teams will often be considered by respondents in the survey as cloud by customers, so they fit into that ETR category. But in the insert data we're stripping out applications and SaaS from Microsoft and Google and we're only isolating on IaaS. The other point is when you take a look at the early October returns, you see downward pressure as signified by those dotted arrows on every name. The only exception was Dell, or Dell and IBM, which showing slightly improved momentum. So the survey data generally confirms what we know that AWS and Azure have a massive lead and strong momentum in the marketplace. But the real story is below the line. Unlike Google Cloud, which is on pace to lose well over 3 billion on an operating basis this year, AWS's operating profit is around $20 billion annually. Microsoft's Intelligent Cloud generated more than $30 billion in operating income last fiscal year. Let that sink in for a moment. Now again, that's not to say Google doesn't have traction, it does and Kurian gave some nice proof points and customer examples in his keynote presentation, but the data underscores the lead that Microsoft and AWS have on Google in cloud. And here's a breakdown of ETR's proprietary net score methodology, that vertical axis that we showed you in the previous chart. It asks customers, are you adopting the platform new? That's that lime green. Are you spending 6% or more? That's the forest green. Is you're spending flat? That's the gray. Is you're spending down 6% or worse? That's the pinkest color. Or are you replacing the platform, defecting? That's the bright red. You subtract the reds from the greens and you get a net score. Now one caveat here, which actually is really favorable from Microsoft, the Microsoft data that we're showing here is across the entire Microsoft portfolio. The other point is, this is July data, we'll have an update for you once ETR releases its October results. But we're talking about meaningful samples here, the ends. 620 for AWS over a thousand from Microsoft in more than 450 respondents in the survey for Google. So the real tell is replacements, that bright red. There is virtually no churn for AWS and Microsoft, but Google's churn is 5x, those two in the survey. Now 5% churn is not high, but you'd like to see three things for Google given it's smaller size. One is less churn, two is much, much higher adoption rates in the lime green. Three is a higher percentage of those spending more, the forest green. And four is a lower percentage of those spending less. And none of these conditions really applies here for Google. GCP is still not growing fast enough in our opinion, and doesn't have nearly the traction of the two leaders and that shows up in the survey data. All right, let's look at the next sector, BI analytics. Here we have that same XY dimension. Again, Microsoft dominating the picture. AWS very strong also in both axes. Tableau, very popular and respectable of course acquired by Salesforce on the vertical axis, still looking pretty good there. And again on the horizontal axis, big presence there for Tableau. And Google with Looker and its other platforms is also respectable, but it again, has some work to do. Now notice Streamlit, that's a recent Snowflake acquisition. It's strong in the vertical axis and because of Snowflake's go-to-market (indistinct), it's likely going to move to the right overtime. Grafana is also prominent in the Y axis, but a glimpse at the most recent survey data shows them slightly declining while Looker actually improves a bit. As does Cloudera, which we'll move up slightly. Again, Microsoft just blows you away, doesn't it? All right, now let's get into database and data platform. Same X Y dimensions, but now database and data warehouse. Snowflake as usual takes the top spot on the vertical axis and it is actually keeps moving to the right as well with again, Microsoft and AWS is dominant in the market, as is Oracle on the X axis, albeit it's got less spending velocity, but of course it's the database king. Google is well behind on the X axis but solidly above the 40% line on the vertical axis. Note that virtually all platforms will see pressure in the next survey due to the macro environment. Microsoft might even dip below the 40% line for the first time in a while. Lastly, let's look at the collaboration and productivity software market. This is such an important area for both Microsoft and Google. And just look at Microsoft with 365 and Teams up into the right. I mean just so impressive in ubiquitous. And we've highlighted Google. It's in the pack. It certainly is a nice base with 174 N, which I can tell you that N will rise in the next survey, which is an indication that more people are adopting. But given the investment and the tech behind it and all the AI and Google's resources, you'd really like to see Google in this space above the 40% line, given the importance of this market, of this collaboration area to Google's success and the degree to which they emphasize it in their pitch. And look, this brings up something that we've talked about before on Breaking Analysis. Google doesn't have a tech problem. This is a go-to-market and marketing challenge that Google faces and it's up against two go-to-market champs and Microsoft and AWS. And Google doesn't have the enterprise sales culture. It's trying, it's making progress, but it's like that racehorse that has all the potential in the world, but it's just missing some kind of key ingredient to put it over at the top. It's always coming in third, (chuckles) but we're watching and Google's obviously, making some investments as we shared with earlier. All right. Some final thoughts on what we learned this week and in this research: customers and partners should be thrilled that both Microsoft and Google along with AWS are spending so much money on innovation and building out global platforms. This is a gift to the industry and we should be thankful frankly because it's good for business, it's good for competitiveness and future innovation as a platform that can be built upon. Now we didn't talk much about multi-cloud, we haven't even mentioned supercloud, but both Microsoft and Google have a story that resonates with customers in cross cloud capabilities, unlike AWS at this time. But we never say never when it comes to AWS. They sometimes and oftentimes surprise you. One of the other things that Sarbjeet Johal and John Furrier and I have discussed is that each of the Big 3 is positioning to their respective strengths. AWS is the best IaaS. Microsoft is building out the kind of, quote, we-make-it-easy-for-you cloud, and Google is trying to be the open data cloud with its open-source chops and excellent tech. And that puts added pressure on Snowflake, doesn't it? You know, Thomas Kurian made some comments according to CRN, something to the effect that, we are the only company that can do the data cloud thing across clouds, which again, if I'm being honest is not really accurate. Now I haven't clarified these statements with Google and often things get misquoted, but there's little question that, as AWS has done in the past with Redshift, Google is taking a page out of Snowflake, Databricks as well. A big difference in the Big 3 is that AWS doesn't have this big emphasis on the up-the-stack collaboration software that both Microsoft and Google have, and that for Microsoft and Google will drive captive IaaS consumption. AWS obviously does some of that in database, a lot of that in database, but ISVs that compete with Microsoft and Google should have a greater affinity, one would think, to AWS for competitive reasons. and the same thing could be said in security, we would think because, as I mentioned before, Microsoft competes very directly with CrowdStrike and Okta and others. One of the big thing that Sarbjeet mentioned that I want to call out here, I'd love to have your opinion. AWS specifically, but also Microsoft with Azure have successfully created what Sarbjeet calls brand distance. AWS from the Amazon Retail, and even though AWS all the time talks about Amazon X and Amazon Y is in their product portfolio, but you don't really consider it part of the retail organization 'cause it's not. Azure, same thing, has created its own identity. And it seems that Google still struggles to do that. It's still very highly linked to the sort of core of Google. Now, maybe that's by design, but for enterprise customers, there's still some potential confusion with Google, what's its intentions? How long will they continue to lose money and invest? Are they going to pull the plug like they do on so many other tools? So you know, maybe some rethinking of the marketing there and the positioning. Now we didn't talk much about ecosystem, but it's vital for any cloud player, and Google again has some work to do relative to the leaders. Which brings us to supercloud. The ecosystem and end customers are now in a position this decade to digitally transform. And we're talking here about building out their own clouds, not by putting in and building data centers and installing racks of servers and storage devices, no. Rather to build value on top of the hyperscaler gift that has been presented. And that is a mega trend that we're watching closely in theCUBE community. While there's debate about the supercloud name and so forth, there little question in our minds that the next decade of cloud will not be like the last. All right, we're going to leave it there today. Many thanks to Sarbjeet Johal, and my business partner, John Furrier, for their input to today's episode. Thanks to Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast and Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight helped get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE, who does some wonderful editing. And check out SiliconANGLE, a lot of coverage on Google Cloud Next and Microsoft Ignite. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcast wherever you listen. Just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. And you can always get in touch with me via email, david.vellante@siliconangle.com or you can DM me at dvellante or comment on my LinkedIn posts. And please do check out etr.ai, the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for the CUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (gentle music)