August 1, 2008

the cloud’s best-kept secret

grey purpose small.jpg
[“Pos­si­ble Cloud Por­trait”. Click here to enlarge/download/print etc.]
You hear a lot of talk about “The Cloud” nowa­days.
The pre­mise is sim­ple. In the future, we won’t have or even need all our data or soft­ware pro­grams on our own com­pu­ters, they’ll be floa­ting around somewhere on some­body else’s ser­vers, acces­si­ble via the inter­net. A vast, inter­con­nec­ted “nebula” of other people’s data and ser­vers, hence the word, “Cloud”.
Big pla­yers in this game so far inc­lude some fami­liar names like Sun, Mic­ro­soft, Ama­zon, Goo­gle, etc etc.
The way I’m seeing the future com­monly tal­ked about, is all this data and pro­grams spread all over the net­works of all these com­pa­nies, rela­ti­vely pro­por­tio­nal to their current mar­ket caps. Some folk have their stuff with Sun, some with Ama­zon, etc.
But nobody seems to be tal­king about Power Laws. Nobody’s saying that one day a sin­gle com­pany may pos­sibly emerge to domi­nate The Cloud, the way Goo­gle came to domi­nate Search, the way Mic­ro­soft came to domi­nate Soft­ware.
Mono­poly issues aside, could you ima­gine such a com­pany? We wouldn’t be tal­king about a multi-billion dollar busi­ness like today’s Mic­ro­soft or Goo­gle. We’re tal­king about something that could fea­sibly dwarf them. We’re poten­tially tal­king about a multi-trillion dollar com­pany. Pos­sibly the lar­gest com­pany to have ever exis­ted.
I ima­gine many of my friends who work for the afo­re­men­tio­ned com­pa­nies know all about this, and know how VAST the sta­kes are.
Win­dows vs Apple? Who cares? Kid’s stuff. There’s a much big­ger game going on… And for some rea­son, its utter enor­mity seems to be a very well-kept sec­ret, at least to non-combatants like myself.
[UPDATE:] My friend James Gover­nor, who con­sults in this world, left the follo­wing com­ment below:

Totally agree Hugh. As I said on on my blog recently: “Cus­to­mers always vote with their feet, and they tend vote for something somewhat pro­prie­tary — see Sales­force APEX and iPhone apps for exam­ple. Expe­rience always comes before open. Even sup­po­sed open stan­dards dorks these days are rushing head­long into the walled gar­den of gor­geous­ness we like to call Apple Com­pu­ters.“
The pla­yers you men­tion will con­ti­nue with The Great Game, but there is room for a new entrant (The Hun In The Sun).

[Bonus Link:] James also has a nice post on the sub­ject, “Whose Cloud Is It, Any­way?”.
[UPDATE:] JP Ran­gas­wami com­ments over on his blog, advo­ca­ting Open Source as the anti­dote to Cloud Mono­po­lies:

I have always had this sense that there is no lon­ger any room for arti­fi­cial mono­po­lies, that the mar­ket will pro­vide a self-correcting mecha­nism. But I have always been wrong on this. We can argue about why this is so, but not about the fact. Mic­ro­soft, Goo­gle and Apple are facts.
Open stan­dards, open plat­forms and open source are ways to pre­vent this hap­pe­ning. Ways to gua­ran­tee that his­tory won’t repeat itself. But this needs cohe­rent com­mu­nal action, something that is hard to achieve in emer­gent environments.

[PS: That “Power Laws” link is highly, highly, highly recom­men­ded rea­ding. Just so you know.]

"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter. A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.]. A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.

34 Responses to “the cloud’s best-kept secret”

  1. totally agree Hugh. As I said on on my blog recently: “cus­to­mers always vote with their feet, and they tend vote for something somewhat pro­prie­tary — see Sales­force APEX and iPhone apps for exam­ple. Expe­rience always comes before open. Even sup­po­sed open stan­dards dorks these days are rushing head­long into the walled gar­den of gor­geous­ness we like to call Apple Com­pu­ters.“
    the pla­yers you men­tion will con­ti­nue with The Great Game, but there is room for a new entrant (The Hun In The Sun).

  2. and as the Ama­zon S3 cloud-crash sho­wed recently, put­ting “all your eggs in one cloud” still ends up resul­ting in having a “sin­gle point of fai­lure”.
    jeffs

  3. Diana Georgescu says:

    To me, this sounds somewhat like The Matrix. Maybe it will be the big­gest cha­llenge in the his­tory of huma­nity OR maybe its decay. One thing I’m curious of: who’s going to *willingly* let their best kept sec­rets float around in Mic­ro­soft Mesh or Goo­gle Grid etc.?

  4. I’m not as gung ho as others on this. There’s room for mul­ti­ple pla­yers. If anything, I’d be worried if there were not mul­ti­ple pla­yers. As to scale? Hmmm…that’s a very dif­fe­rent ques­tion.
    You are right that there are plenty of con­ver­sa­tions going on behind the sce­nes on this. But at many levels.

  5. anonyme says:

    1. Total inte­ro­pe­ra­bi­lity of the cloud might make it irre­le­vant which “brand” one went with.
    2. Do you not trust your own insight that you have to quote com­ments upon it?

  6. hugh macleod says:

    1. “Total inte­ro­pe­ra­bi­lity of the cloud”. I’ll believe it when I see it.
    2. “Do you not trust… upon it?” Sta­te­ments like that will only get you laughed at. ;-)

  7. MarillaAnne says:

    What I keep in the cloud, is what I choose to share with the cloud or what the cloud is willing to share with me.
    The cloud might think it knows me. But it doesn’t. The cloud might think it owns me. But it doesn’t. … Unless I for­get … Unless I for­get the cloud’s big sec­ret …
    The cloud wants to own me … the all in all of me … and … all of my nutri­tion … and it is very seduc­tive in the pro­cess. You are totally right.
    I’m also pon­de­ring over this … how the cloud wants me to think that there are “big pla­yers” and “big voi­ces” in the cloud … and that these are the “big“
    It feels like many of the social media net­work star­tups are run­ning around collec­ting a bas­ket of ticks that are busy fee­ding off of each other … aka “the bigs“
    But it’s star­ting to sound like a great huge “me too” echo cham­ber …
    Hugh, I reread your paper on crea­ti­vity this mor­ning … it’s been about two years since I last loo­ked at it … I think … it feels that way any­way …
    You know what … I miss the inti­mate … the idea of collec­ting friends and con­tacts because of oh … mutual affec­tion, admi­ra­tion.
    What good is a social net­work cram­med full of peo­ple writhing about just to get atten­tion? And so few are truly inte­res­ting. Why do peo­ple with this sort of “friend” collec­tion think they have a net­work?
    Any­way … not my blog … rethin­king my methods of com­mu­ni­ca­tions and all my chan­nels … so I had to say “me too” on your blog. Thanks for the loan.

  8. hugh macleod says:

    Den­nis, I agree there is room for mul­ti­ple pla­yers in this space. But I would also say the same is just as true for Search, yet Google’s mar­ket sha­res still con­ti­nues to top 70+ per­cent…
    To the Vic­tor go The Spoils. Same as it ever was… ;-)

  9. =8)-DX says:

    » who’s going to *willingly* let their best kept sec­rets float around in Mic­ro­soft Mesh or Goo­gle Grid etc.?
    I think peo­ple just wouldn’t think about it. Pro­prie­tary sys­tems will still exist(even if sto­ring encryp­ted data in the cloud). Nor­mal (non IT) peo­ple would have no pro­blem trus­ting them I think. Millions of peo­ple have email accounts on GMail, Hot­mail, etc, etc. and I bet there are many sec­rets on the web already, loc­ked up in pri­vate fol­ders, pri­vate galle­ries etc.
    What would be scary with the Cloud is that you’d never know whether the govern­ments are in a posi­tion to view and sift through all that.

  10. Tim O'Reilly says:

    Actually, Hugh, I’m not sure I agree with regard to cloud com­pu­ting. Unlike higher level web apps, which get their domi­nance from net­work effects in user con­tri­bu­tion (and thus demons­trate power laws), uti­lity com­pu­ting (which is the end of the cloud that most peo­ple talk about when they say “cloud com­pu­ting”) is really just that: a uti­lity.
    And if we get inte­ro­pe­ra­bi­lity (e.g. with Eucalyp­tus crea­ting an open source API-compatible EC2 clone that could be ins­ta­lled by any hos­ting pro­vi­der), we should get some com­pe­ti­tion.
    I’m not saying that there won’t be some big pla­yers, but I don’t think you’ll get to one, unless someone starts buil­ding appli­ca­tions that, as I say in my “web 2.0″ defi­ni­tion, get bet­ter the more peo­ple use them. For exam­ple, if I put my app in the cloud, does it get bet­ter because other peo­ple are using the same app?
    Do cloud *plat­forms* have this cha­rac­te­ris­tic today? Maybe force.com does a bit, but I don’t think Ama­zon has exploi­ted this idea with AWS, nor Goo­gle with AppEn­gine. Paul Maritz over at EMC unders­tands this, but they aren’t a pla­yer yet.
    That being said, I do think that there are rea­sons for con­cern, which is why I have long been urging open source deve­lo­pers to tar­get the cloud. See my post Open Source and Cloud Com­pu­ting. The pos­si­bi­li­ties for lock-in are huge.

  11. hugh macleod says:

    Good points, Tim. Though who could’ve pre­dic­ted Google’s rise, even 5 years ago? Maybe something ran­domly mas­sive will hap­pen in The Cloud, maybe it won’t. It all depends on “Ran­dom Acts of Trac­tion” etc.
    We live in inte­res­ting times…

  12. Mike Gowen says:

    I think this is a pretty good vision for things to come. As far as “put­ting all your eggs in one cloud”…I think we’ll approach that the same way humans approach everything.…run head first into it until a catas­trophe occurs, then scram­ble to do what we should have been done in the first place. We love put­ting all our eggs in one bas­ket, then tur­ning a blind eye on the risk. It’s all fun and games until some­body gets hurt :)

  13. John Dodds says:

    All the more rea­son for see­king to con­trol and main­tain our own data in our own per­so­nal sec­tion of the cloud.

  14. Brian Hayes says:

    Science fic­tion author Fre­dric Brown wrote a very, very short story (1954 I think) entit­led “Ans­wer” that replies to ‘mons­ter com­pu­ting machi­nes’ and offers a fairly bright idea of what we might expect from the cloud some future day. :-)

  15. bonnie says:

    Hugh, it ama­zes me how many peo­ple scream and whine about the govern­ment (US) stea­ling their pri­vacy but remain pee­pless when it comes to Big Brother-like com­pa­nies a la Goo­gle and Expe­rian.
    Read the Power Laws post at your urgent request. Rants-o-plenty about web­site influence, not against authors or publishers, but against those who take their words as gos­pel.
    Par­ti­cu­larly pee­vish are so-called research stu­dies done to do nothing more than inc­rease ad sales in a par­ti­cu­lar maga­zine. Trac­ked one down and found the entire study was based on the ans­wers of 165 women!
    It is scary, Hugh. No won­der they call it The Cloud. Surely there are ways to fix it. when do we start?
    best,
    bon­nie
    Rich­mond, VA
    USA

  16. Jake Edwards says:

    A hard rain‘s gonna fall.
    and flush us all
    down the pan.

  17. Hey all,
    VERY inte­res­ting dis­cus­sion, a bit para­noid though :) Let’s try and leave the 1984 sce­na­rio for a while and follow me down Uto­pia lane, just for a while. I’m from Den­mark så bare with my English skills.
    I believe that “The Cloud” (uuuhhhh) will not be a an online cloud, it’s not all that online, cross refe­rred data sit­ting their for someone to eat. Not exc­lu­si­vely any­way.
    Ima­gine that a com­pany (Let’s call it WFU Inc.) came along, a com­pany made of peo­ple who’s favo­rite movie was “Pay it For­ward”, the peo­ple behind it wan­ted to make a dif­fe­rence, wan­ted to make life easier for as many peo­ple as pos­si­ble, they did not set out to be rich on money but rather enjo­yed their con­tri­bu­tion to this world. The star­ted a lot of ser­vi­ces which human beings bene­fit­ted from, they lis­te­ned to their tribe when they com­plai­ned and asked for bet­ter ser­vi­ces. They knew that if they lis­te­ned to the human beings making up their users, they would be extre­mely suc­ces­full. Because their users were not used to that kind of “ser­vice” and tal­ked, tal­ked and tal­ked to their friends and fami­lies about it and soon ever­yone wan­ted to a part of this com­pany (lifestyle). In this pro­cess the big­ger cor­po­ra­tions broke down because they couldn’t com­pete with a com­pany made up from users loving each other, hel­ping each other, set­ting the other users before the money.
    As the huge, and well men­tio­ned above, cor­po­ra­tions were blee­ding like crazy WFU Inc pic­ked up the pie­ces crea­ting all kinds of new ser­vi­ces, never ima­gi­ned to be part of “The Cloud” — They went 360 and took offline with their attit­tu­des. They launched phone/internet com­pa­nies, super­mar­kets, car dea­lers, cafés, trans­por­ta­tion com­pa­nies, search engi­nes, real estate agen­cies etc. etc. Basi­cally they moved in to every busi­ness where human beings (con­su­mers) were trea­ted poorly and like cattle with a Visa. And once they arri­ved they put the user first and THEN the money. (let’s keep in mind that the mana­ge­ment of WFU were very com­pe­tent busi­ness peo­ple so of course they made money, it was just not their num­ber one goal)
    After twenty years the had 30.000 emplo­yees on the salary list glo­bally and 300.000 (and rising) volun­teers trying to make new pro­ducts all bene­fit­ting the human race as whole, but still thin­king like a cor­po­ra­tion. They had to live and the­re­fore would make money in the pro­cess.
    At one point they had 80 % of the worlds popu­la­tion as clients and some­body said: “OH MY GOD, they own me, they know everything, they own my flat, my inter­net­line, the super­mar­ket on the cor­ner, my cre­dit­card, everything”, and there were a small panic for a while and the con­su­mers, human beings and users called and mai­led WFU and aired their con­cerns. As WFU had always lis­tend and taking their tri­bes nocerns and wishes seriously they did waht they should do, they became even more trans­pa­rent, asked ever­yone in their to go to the WFU.com and fill out a form where the tribe, off course, could leave all the ser­vi­ces they wished (this was actually not new but peo­ple were used to slave like con­tracts from other ser­vi­ces), they could see all infor­ma­tion had about them (even when they “Google’d” last, they could delete what sca­red them, they coudl see every little emplo­yee of WFU and what they had been doing and what they ear­ned etc, etc.
    The tribe finally figu­red out that this com­pany actually was a way of life, a way of thin­king and the tribe felt safe again. Felt like they were part of a huge village where ever­yone tried to help each other as much, or little, as they could. The WFU mana­ge­ment and foun­ders, became very rich. Not only finan­cially but also in their heart and mind. They now had a legacy.
    Ok, I’ll stop now as I’m SURE you get my point. The cloud, will it ever arrive, is more a childs dra­wing; a cloud in the sky, a sun, a house, a car, a tree, a mom, a dad, chil­dren and life. “The Cloud” can’t be online only — it has to evolve into every aspect of life but it HAVE to stay vigi­lant and ethi­cal as the con­su­mers will always have feet to vote with. No mat­ter hpw nice you have to be, you need to be nicer the next day.
    My ques­tion is this: Do you believe this is pos­si­ble? What should we need to do this? And what’s stop­ping you? You are the dif­fe­rence as I am, as we are.
    (fic­tio­nal) WFU (not fic­tio­nal) Love :)
    Joac­kim Penti

  18. Mary H. Ruth says:

    Hugh, Another ama­zing post and I’m gra­te­ful as well for your push to read the Shirky article. Seems like most com­ments here are mis­sing the point. It’s not so much about mega­po­wer at the top as it’s about the the inc­rea­singly vast ocean of middle ground. That’s where most of us are, and as that ocean swells our hope of exce­lling, being noti­ced, beco­ming remar­ka­ble dimi­nishes. The Stars we envy and love, but the Long Tail is our rea­lity. Maybe it is no lon­ger pos­si­ble to get more than your fair share of the pie. Such a sus­pi­cion gnaws at the roots of capi­ta­lism, and is a fear­some thing.

  19. DunCAN says:

    All good — love the image.. it makes an awe­some desk­top image, thanks
    D

  20. schuyler says:

    this whole con­ver­sa­tion stri­kes me as awfully pretentious.…

  21. Great post Hugh — you’re brought some of my favou­rite com­men­ta­tors out with this one.…though I still pre­fer the cloud card you drew that is now my busi­ness card :)
    http://blogs.msdn.com/stevecla01/archive/2007/11/05/my-new-gig.aspx
    I agree with Den­nis and Tim — there is room and likely to be more than one pla­yer and whilst I take your point that the same is true for search they’re dif­fe­rent busi­nes­ses.
    The suc­cess of Mic­ro­soft and Goo­gle over the years requi­red rela­ti­vely small capi­tal invest­ment as ini­tially it was just sofw­tare. 1’s and 0’s don’t cost a great deal com­pa­red to buil­ding a uti­lity of the scale we’re tal­king of here — to pro­vide a uti­lity cloud that could be used by anyone and ever­yone. That will require big up front capi­tal invest­ments that I think only a few have the desire and abi­lity to make. Iro­ni­cally, they’ll pro­bably be soft­ware com­pa­nies and pro­bably not too far from home :)
    You’re right though, there is a very big game going on and I sus­pect a trend line of artic­les published on “cloud com­pu­ting” will show a huge inc­rease over the last 6 months. iden­tif­ying the win­ners is going to require a loooooong time yet.

  22. JP says:

    The funny wars begin. Dell files a patent on “cloud com­pu­ting”. See below:
    http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=77139082

  23. Alan Buxton says:

    Enjo­yed the Clay Shirky article, thanks.
    Got to the end of the dis­cus­sion on the ine­vi­ta­bi­lity of ine­qua­lity (fine, I can appre­ciate that). But then was inte­res­ted to see that Tech­no­rati were trying a way of addres­sing this ine­vi­ta­ble ine­qua­lity via “inte­res­ting new­co­mers”. Guess what — the link is dead (and goo­gles, or cuils, for “tech­no­rati inte­res­ting new­co­mers” are equally unpro­mi­sing).
    I sup­pose this pro­ves a point — any attempt to iden­tify “inte­res­ting new­co­mers” would itself soo­ner or later suf­fer from the same power law ine­qua­li­ties that Clay Shirky’s article desc­ri­bes.
    Regar­ding blogs it’s back to Goo­gle Rea­der recom­men­da­tions to help me find inte­res­ting new blogs worth rea­ding, so not the end of the world.
    But it does point to the power of the power law, and the dif­fi­culty with which you can cha­llenge it — even with open source. Don’t you think?

  24. alan p says:

    I agree with your sen­ti­memts, in fact i wrore simi­lar on my own blog after mulling this all over for a con­fe­rence 2 weeks ago (saw an article on Clouds on Tech­meme today which pro­vi­ded the spur to write up that event).
    Not sure that JP is right though, I think this game will be a net­work law game — OS will just be a tool used.
    My post here fwiw:
    http://broadstuff.com/archives/1121-Clouding-over-the-issues..html

  25. @High — Power Laws and all that, yep I get that and also that com­pu­ting his­tory only gets slightly re-written each time BUT — Goo­gle is only domi­nant in con­su­mer search, barely a pla­yer in enterpr4ise search (and I WILL defend that one vigo­rously having seen them tos­sed out in seve­ral pro­jects etc).
    The ‘cloud’ thing is SO huge that it’s incon­cei­va­ble to see a sin­gle pla­yer. It would make who­me­ver lar­ger than all oil com­pa­nies put together and then some.
    Plus — the broad oppor­tu­nity hits so many dif­fe­rent ‘pie­ces’ of the enter­prise that I can’t see any sin­gle pla­yer rea­lis­ti­cally having the com­pu­ting power to make it their own turf.
    BUT — I am pre­pa­red top be per­sua­ded. In maybe 5 – 10 years’ time.

  26. i would say clearly hugh is tal­king about tren­ding toward one, a la the current search mar­ket, rather than saying there will just be one com­pany offe­ring anything rela­ted to cloud ser­vi­ces. being a little bit– you know, whatcha­ma­ca­lit– rhe­to­ri­cal.
    JP basi­cally arti­cu­la­tes my views per­fectly.
    I have only been in the busi­ness 13 years, but my first job was trac­king the “dead” IBM main­frame busi­ness, which was being “killed” by “open” Unix plat­forms. Open is awe­some, but its not a binary state. In IT the Great Pac­ka­gers win by unders­tan­ding open stan­dards are there to be mana­ged and pla­ying The Great Game accor­dingly.
    “Who can get my family onto the net­work, without nee­ding my little brother to set the dar­ned thing up…” — these days that’s your win­ner.
    In the ente­prise: its been com­pa­nies like Oracle (SQL), Cisco (TCP-IP rou­ting), Mic­ro­soft (desk­top OS, desk­top appli­ca­tions), Dell (the PC, PC ser­vers), BEA+IBM(J2EE), IBM (main­frame), Sun (Unix), Goo­gle (link eco­no­mies) etc.

  27. Harry Lewis says:

    One thing that could put the bra­kes on cloud for­ma­tion is that, wha­te­ver pri­vacy pro­mi­ses clients may get, they are out of the loop if the data are sub­poe­naed. It’s the cloud’s law­yers, not yours, who decide whether to resist a court orde­red disc­lo­sure of “your” data. For all the safety and com­fort the cloud pro­vi­des of relia­ble, brand-name data sto­rage, the legal pro­blem of the chan­ged mea­ning of “ownership” seems insur­moun­ta­ble. And the cloud ser­vice pro­vi­der doesn’t even have to tell you that it has tur­ned over your records in res­ponse to a warrant. We have some more thoughts in Busi­ness Week today, but for some rea­son the edi­tor snip­ped that cru­cial one out.

  28. The Cloud’s already here, or rather, the cloud bank is gathe­ring, and we’re all par­ti­ci­pa­ting on mul­ti­ple storm fronts that will collide a la Kevin Kelly’s the one machine.
    The Cloud con­cept is fas­ci­na­ting for com­pu­ta­tio­nal biologists/sociobiologists/evolutionary bio­lo­gists as well — or it should be.
    Let’s look at pro­gres­sive evo­lu­tio­nary sta­ges of ‘machi­nes’ or things that repli­cate:
    1. CHON (early C, H, Oxy­gen, Ni mole­cule chains that led to for­ma­tion of eukar­yo­tes and pro­kar­yo­tes).
    2. RNA (if you subsc­ribe to the RNA World theory) — with bac­te­ria as allies/enemies and viruses/pathogens as competitors/enemies — so they build…us. Soft spa­ce­suits for RNA. But they pro­gram, in essence, us to learn — DNA is the code. We do. We’re the next evo­lu­tio­nary stage, but not the epoch, the pin­nacle of life on the pla­net.
    3. Really trixsy part comes about when we pro­gram our own repla­ce­ments to learn, deve­lop semi-sentient decision-making abilities…to adapt. To pro­cess exter­nal envi­ron­men­tal inputs and make deci­sions based on a hie­rarchy of pre­pro­gram­med ‘needs,’ at which point some level of sub­jec­tive choice enters into the race for indi­vi­dual sur­vi­val. Sound fami­liar to anyone in com­pu­ting? It should. So com­pu­ters are the next stage. And the cloud is the pri­mor­dial ooze we’re crea­ting that will ena­ble them to mea­sure, pro­cess, analyze, and engage in decision-making for self repli­ca­tion. When we have com­pu­ta­tio­nal pro­grams and apps ‘spon­ta­neously’ deve­lo­ping solu­tions we’ll really be in trou­ble. Maybe it’s already hap­pe­ning, who knows.
    Sounds like sci-fi right?
    Sure does, and so what if it is? The Clouds buil­ding and our ‘see­ding’ of the cloud with inc­rea­sing bits of infor­ma­tion and data (and the abi­lity for pro­grams and apps to moni­tor our res­pon­ses and adjust inter­fa­ces accor­dingly without direc­ti­ves straight from programmers)is a lot like sci-fi.
    I’m not capa­ble of con­ve­ying these sorts of theo­ries in an elo­quent and hyper-convincing man­ner, as I’m at best a ‘hobby’ scien­tist. But it sure makes for a good minds­torm.
    And even if this whole pos­tu­la­tion is com­ple­tely off base (a dis­tinct and highly likely pos­si­bi­lity) — it makes for some inte­res­ting cock­tail hour tweets, no?

  29. Pete Steege says:

    The Multi-Trillion Dollar Com­pany is ine­vi­ta­ble. Just look at the trends in com­pany size over history.

  30. friarminor says:

    Just a hunch with open stan­dards… It’s not going to be a rea­lity until quite a num­ber of cloud com­pe­ti­tor emer­ges.
    Much as we’d like open source to stand out from the get go, i don’t see it hap­pe­ning unless there’s one big dra­gon to slay. Even­tually there will be but just not before a real cloud inno­va­tion war begins among pla­yer.
    Best.
    alain
    http://www.mor.ph

  31. […] esc­ri­to­rio a la nube Publi­cado el Noviem­bre 27, 2010 por alb­marco Dice Hugh Mac­Leod que –el cloud com­pu­ting es la ver­da­dera bata­lla impor­tante en este momento en la escena […]