Advertisement
Promo

Become a member of the ZDNet UK community

Adrian Bridgwater

View blog's RSS Feed

Software application development

This blog is intended to provoke discussion and exchange between like minded software application developers, engineers, architects, project managers - and keen hobbyists too.

Sunday 17 August 2008, 4:04 PM

Hey! You! Get off of my cloud – computing structure

Posted by Adrian Bridgwater

Two’s a crowd on the cloud by all accounts – well it is if you want security and backup functionality out of your apps; they just don’t fit on right now. Current postulating and pontificating as to what does and does not fit on the cloud is rife - and everyone seems to have their own opinion as to how many enterprise applications we could or should be able to fit on the cloud without causing a crowd.

So, is the cumulus nimbus too fluffy to support real world cloud computing structures right now?

IMAGE DESCRIPTION'

Commentators have suggested that cloud computing really doesn’t break the mould to quite the degree that the technology publicists would have us believe. In the same way that Intel’s multi-core parallelism mantra has been cited as something of a throwback to the parallel computing processes that IBM was talking about in the sixties – so cloud computing is, arguably, just another way of extending the on-demand nature of those applications and services available to us in the post web 2.0 era. (Obvious comparisons with grid and utility computing probably don’t even bear mentioning here.)

Whether you buy the arguments for cloud computing or harbour a healthy degree of scepticism, it won’t stop the ‘cloud converts’ talking about how suitable the fluffy white stuff is for a whole range of computing scenarios. Good for the cloud, allegedly, are software downloads where multiple repositories exist, particularly where there is a distribution of data to multiple geographies.

Before you mist up and get all overcast with this idea, proponents argue that the cloud is ‘effectively becoming just another server’ and that there are identifiable areas where this structure will work with so-called natural efficiency. SOA is next in line for migration to the cloud if you believe companyies like open source ESB company Mulesource.

NB: they have a DEVELOPERS link right on the top of the home page, so that buys them a second look in my humble opinion.

Mulesource is of the opinion that where the cloud gets interesting is when you can “bridge” to the enterprise and make it look like one complete resource. At the moment the cloud is a node that sits outside of the enterprise. It's basically next-generation hosting with some sophisticated scaling abilities. The future state, say the company, is likely to be very different, but we need to start consuming cloud services and applications to see what directions they go in.

… from goofy to ridiculous

I spoke recently to MuleSource CEO Dave Rosenberg about all this theorising and this is what he had to say, “The bigger picture is that right now the cloud is just another computing resource that may or may not be connected to your enterprise. This notion that we are going to move everything in the enterprise to the cloud ranges from goofy to ridiculous. How many people are going to fully deploy a large-scale enterprise system with multiple (let's say 10 or more) applications in the cloud? Probably zero. But putting one or two pieces into the cloud? That’s much more realistic and will have much less disruptive impact on your business.”

Still not convinced? Well, I’m not saying I am either. But this is the kind of way vendors are talking about the cloud right now. The worrying thing perhaps is that there are just as many interpretations of what is and isn’t right for the cloud as there are companies trying to sell us that idea that they have a handle on the way that cloud computing will eventually work once the skies clear.

Perhaps the term ‘cloud’ it’s just a better way for people to understand resources delivered in this on demand way in the post-grid computing world? If it is more palatable to the Internet-generation when presented this way, then perhaps there is fair weather head and we’ll get to a resolution as to what applications should fit on the cloud and when they should be there sooner rather than later.

So there you have it. Tune in this time next week for my blog on “Atmosphere Computing” and read all about how we’ll soon be able to harness the power of the sun to make our online shopping applications run with extra zing ☺

Comments on this post

Xwindowsjunkie

Yeah buddy. Sounds like the BS being shoveled out now about "virtualisation".

Posted by Xwindowsjunkie on Aug 17, 2008 6:35 PM

Adrian Bridgwater

Oops and yikes!

Virtualisation... you're right mate - that reminds me.

I forgot to draw parallels with, or even use the term, "clustered computing" in that blog.

Very naughty of me.

Can you imagine that the IT industry would re-purpose (their term, not mine) some previous iterations of various technology layers and re-label (my term, not theirs) what we already had with a new moniker and a renewed marketing and PR focus to make us buy into a ground-breaking new development without anything new having actually been brought to the table?

No no no and thrice no - it can not be so. Can it?

Cynical moi?

Updated by Adrian Bridgwater on Aug 17, 2008 7:17 PM

J.A. Watson

Cynical? Certainly not! Realist? I hope so, that is what I, and many other I suspect, have come to depend on you for.

Here's a question from someone who has been around this stuff way too long, and seen way too many "re-purposing" and "re-labeling" iterations. How does this "cloud" concept compare with AT&T/Bell Labs "Plan 9" concept from the'80s?

jw

Updated by J.A. Watson on Aug 19, 2008 6:14 PM

Adrian Bridgwater

Kind words JW - thank ye kindly sir,

Plan 9, hmm, makes you wonder if all the hype will always exist until we finally build Deep Thought and find that it really is all down to the number 42.

Ed Wood's Plan 9 from Outer Space was in 1959, so Plan 9 I presume was a homage more than a coincidence right?

Anyway - being serious: I think this aspect is interesting, "Plan 9's components are connected by various kinds of networks, including Ethernet, specially-built fiber networks, ordinary modem connections, and ISDN."

Number 1) Surely the above 'connectivity solution' is not good - all things to everyone in this form is a jack of all trades approach isn't it?

Number 2) Plan 9 was surely going to become outdated by the scale of processing power upgrades that were (and I suppose still are) happening at the time in the early 1990s no?

It would be a great topic to dig back into, but that's the trouble - I don't think the developer audience is interested in history in that way as, in general, people are too busy/concerned/enthused about what's around the next corner.

Good stuff though!

Adrian

Posted by Adrian Bridgwater on Aug 18, 2008 2:42 PM

Adrian Bridgwater

This member is ranked #4 in our top 100

  • Adrian Bridgwater
  • Applications Development, London, UK
  • Member since: July 2007

Site Activity Rating 6

CoreTechs

Contacts' Latest Discussions

Number of Tracked Discussions: 2,065

ator1940 ator1940

Chrome-OS download

Monday 30 November 2009, 12:59 AM

6 comments
ator1940 ator1940

Chrome-OS download

Friday 27 November 2009, 3:30 PM

6 comments
ator1940 ator1940

The real Chrome-OS

Friday 27 November 2009, 2:06 AM

6 comments
alex65 alex65

Does 10x faster development dumb down...

Friday 27 November 2009, 12:45 AM

28 comments

Contacts' Latest Blogs

Number of Contacts Blogs: 5

Avatar Jake Rayson

How I create a blog entry

Thursday 26 November 2009, 1:00 PM

2 comments
Avatar manek

Cloud computing guzzles juice: officia...

Thursday 26 November 2009, 12:36 PM

0 comments

Skip Sub Navigation Links to CNET Brand Links

Help

Become part of the ZDNet community.

Newsletters