Although some of the furor around the Open Cloud Manifesto has died down, conversations around the industry continue. Rich Miller reports, a face-to-face meeting between many of the key participants was productive, with talks about the possibility of an industry trade association.
Taking a contrarian view, William Hurley asks whether we really need a Manifesto. He questions whether the points outlined are realistic, viable, and worth pursuing. He also wonders whether the IBM driven document was created to be deliberately structured with an anti-Microsoft bias.
And according to this recent post on ComputerWorld, Microsoft clearly has several issues with the Manifesto, but not necessarily the concept. Steven Martin, Microsoft's senior director of platform product management, said in a blog post Microsoft supports the need to create guidelines for cloud interoperability, it was "admittedly disappointed" in the process used to create the manifesto.
Jeff Kaplan of Think IT thinks it is a good idea, but sees it more as a defensive strategy on the part of some of the more established vendors, who are afraid of being left in the dust by the more nimble cloud vendors, as he says: “they are playing catch-up in the cloud computing market, and are threatened by the ‘game-changing’ nature of this new approach to IT.”
This is an exciting time to be involved in cloud computing. My assumption is the debate will continue for quite awhile, but I hope the open debate will allow us as an industry to move forward to a future platform which allows us to deliver more value to our user community.
Taking a contrarian view, William Hurley asks whether we really need a Manifesto. He questions whether the points outlined are realistic, viable, and worth pursuing. He also wonders whether the IBM driven document was created to be deliberately structured with an anti-Microsoft bias.
And according to this recent post on ComputerWorld, Microsoft clearly has several issues with the Manifesto, but not necessarily the concept. Steven Martin, Microsoft's senior director of platform product management, said in a blog post Microsoft supports the need to create guidelines for cloud interoperability, it was "admittedly disappointed" in the process used to create the manifesto.
Jeff Kaplan of Think IT thinks it is a good idea, but sees it more as a defensive strategy on the part of some of the more established vendors, who are afraid of being left in the dust by the more nimble cloud vendors, as he says: “they are playing catch-up in the cloud computing market, and are threatened by the ‘game-changing’ nature of this new approach to IT.”
This is an exciting time to be involved in cloud computing. My assumption is the debate will continue for quite awhile, but I hope the open debate will allow us as an industry to move forward to a future platform which allows us to deliver more value to our user community.
Comments for Open Cloud Manifesto Discussions continue