open source cloud platforms grain of salt

Last December, I gave a presentation very similar to the Enterprise + Cloud + Open one at Gartner Data Center. During the session, I asked some polling questions about how much the audience cared about "openness" and for which part of their cloud platforms. Taking a cue from Chris Wolf, here they are.

I have to assume that the audience might have been a little self selecting, since they chose to attend a session focused on open source cloud issues. There were probably some vendors or promotors of open source cloud stuff in the mix, as well. So take these with a grain of salt.

I asked about "openness" in general because I wanted to get a sense of how much the current hype around open had penetrated. The idea has taken hold amongst even the mainstream enterprise that's the bread and butter of analyst firms.

Then, more specifically, open source code and for what. Cloud management platforms and config tools being at the head are not surprising given that that's where the most options and noise are. Note that 20% didn't care.

Then a step deeper on cloud platforms. Again, pretty much in line with market noise, and arguably, momentum--OpenStack then CloudStack then Eucalyptus then OpenNebula. I was surprised that as many as 14 people had heard of and were considering OpenCloudWare, Nimbus, or OpenNode--all of which are fairly obscure.

And finally, a question about APIs because I wanted to get a sense of what people thought open APIs got them. The top response is the most reasonable. I don't think much of the portability argument, though. As I said in the presentation:

The API is not the implementation. 

 Just because you can write to it doesn't mean it will actually work

enterprise + cloud + open

Last December, I gave a brief presentation at the first CloudStack Collaboration Conference on the open source cloud stuff in the enterprise.

Some salient points:

• Things that work trump things that don't
• Picking a winner is more important than picking the winner
• Speed and cost matter more than open or closed
• There are (and will be) private "clouds"
• There are (and will be) "hybrid" clouds
• Tech is easy, people and process are hard
• "Openness" can be measured, if you care to
• "Open" has been turned into a feature and marketing term
• Open doesn't save you from lock-in or vendors
• Open doesn't automagically solve portability and interoperability challenges
• Any,  some, maybe all, parts of a given cloud can be open