Virtualization, Cloud Computing and Mobile: 05/17/10

2010년 5월 17일 월요일

Thumbnail image for guest_cloudhole_main.jpg The complexities that come with cloud computing go way beyond interoperability issues.

Cost is a significant factor as is performance.

What's emerging from these forces are new services such as Digital Fuel and Nimsoft that are designed to bring meaning to the costs and the performance issues that come with cloud computing.

Digital Fuel is launching a a SaaS platform called IT Cloud Cost Management that provides a view into the costs that comes with cloud computing. Nimsoft, recently acquired by CA, provides performance management of a company's cloud infrastructure and on-premise environments.

Digital Fuel CEO Yisrael Dancziger says people are looking at cloud computing in a similar way to how they viewed outsourcing. They see it as a cheaper alternative.

But over time, the costs to operate a cloud infrastructure will become increasingly complex as more factors become part of the equation. A company may have multiple cloud environments. Costs associated with security, compliance and other issues increasingly become factors to consider.

Digital Fuel provides a dashboard environment to give visibility and predictability of the costs to a business. The service is intended to provide a method for billing business units for the costs of specific services. For instance, it calculates "what if" analysis of the costs associated with cloud computing.

Nimsoft provides a performance a dashboard environment to view the actual performance of a cloud-based infrastructure and how it compares to on-premise systems. In April, the company launched an on-demand service for IT administrators to see a full view of services running in datacenters, hosted, remote and cloud based infrastructures.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/cloud/2010/05/managing-the-costs-and-complex.php

Why the iPhone Platform is Still the Best Game in Town

How quickly we forget our very recent history. On January 9, 2007 Steve Jobs announced the iPhone at the Macworld convention. The original iPhone was to be serviced exclusively by Cingular. Also in January of 2007 we learned that Cingular, originally a joint venture between SBC and BellSouth, would be re-branded as AT&T. We then slowly learned as the iPhone’s official release date drew closer, that the iPhone would continue to be exclusive to AT&T, would not be subsidized by AT&T, and you could purchase phones directly from Apple Retail Stores.

As the layers of this onion were pealed back even further, we learned that Cingular (or was that AT&T?) agreed to pay Apple nearly eighteen dollars per month per subscriber for the privilege of being exclusive. Apple was also in control of the activation process which required an iTunes account. Moving forward Apple was also responsible for distributing all updates to the iPhone, not the carrier, not AT&T. Apple was completely in charge, completely. Oh, and there was one more thing, no third-party native apps, only web apps. In fact, Steve Jobs was at that time quite adamant that there would never be natively developed applications for the iPhone and that web 2.0 applications would be all that developers would ever need.

Who Owns the Relationship with the Customer?

What this fundamentally did was change the dynamics of whose customers were they first. The carrier’s or the device manufacture’s? A question that, until this point in time, was never asked. The point that Apple was making, was that consumers would choose Apple products before they would choose a cell phone carrier. And Apple was right. For the first time, a device manufacturer was in control of the relationship with the customer ahead of the carrier. If you owned an iPhone, you belonged to Apple first, then perhaps to the cell phone carrier. This change in the fundamental relationship with the consumer was cemented by large numbers. Very large numbers. Some of the largest numbers in the history of mobile computing.

Then it happened, the App Store opened on July 10, 2008 and the next day the iPhone 3G was launched with iPhone OS 2.0. All existing iPhones and iPod touches were able to update to iPhone OS 2.0 as well. A new player was introduced into the equation, the third-party developer. Apple may have won the battle with the carrier in establishing its position with the customer, there was no question there. Apple came first in that relationship. But where does this third wheel fit in? A distant fourth place in line would be the manufactures of development tools and technologies that third-party developers choose to use. Companies like Adobe that manufacture these tools and technologies are even further removed from the mobile customer. Their focus is on making life easier for developers, not better products for mobile customers. It only makes sense since their customers are the developers. But just how important would this new iPhone development platform be to third-party developers and companies that build solutions that these third-party developers use? As only time would tell, and that all depended on what was at stake. And in the beginning, what was at stake was not yet known. That is, not until the numbers started rolling in. Quarter over quarter record-breaking sales of iPhones and iPod touches, and quarter over quarter record-breaking sales of Apps and unimaginable download statistics. Now everyone wants to own the customer. The only player that was clearly out of the race was the carrier, they were just along for the ride.

This is all well and good for the device manufacturer, cellular carrier, and third-party developers. But there was another quite player out there whose battle was already over. The music and movie industries. What everyone seems to have missed was that the explosion of the iPhone into the hands of consumers was more of a play of convergence than its ability to surf the web, respond to e-mail and play games. A cell phone, and an iPod in one device (not just a phone with iTunes installed). Forget everything else. Everyone had a cell phone, and everyone had an iPod. And in June of 2009, when the price dropped to $99, absolutely everyone started thinking about using their iPod to answer phone calls. This is an important factor to consider. Everyone who had (or still has) an iPod is utilizing iTunes to manage and even purchase their music. Once you have a sizable music library in iTunes, and you have grown accustomed to purchasing musing from the iTunes Music Store, you are pretty much hooked. And the numbers on this side of the equation are not too shabby either. In April of 2008, Apple finally passed Walmart and iTunes became the #1 Music retailer currently representing more than 25 percent of all music sales in the U.S.

Consumers have a relationship with their music, not their device and certainly not their cellular carrier. What has always defined the relationship has been the music. And Apple was and still is in control of that. It really had nothing to do with how great the iPhone was or was not. The fact that the iPhone is great only strengthens the bond, but it did not create the bond. That bond between consumers and Apple began with the iPod and remains intact due to the consumers owning and maintaining sizable music libraries via Apple’s software, hardware and online services. Every so often the music industry has tried to wrestle control of the customers away from Apple, but has thus far been unsuccessful.

So now we can come to understand why developers are flocking to the iPhone platform and developing applications for Apple’s iPhone. There is a huge install base of customers purchasing apps that seems to increase quarter over quarter. And these customers have proven time and time again that they are willing to pay for music, movies, apps and connectivity. Focusing on the Apps, for the most part, since its debut on the market, Apple has maintained a single platform. The variations between the iPod touch and iPhone has remained subtle. Each being able to host the latest version of the iPhone SDK. Making the current total of units an astounding 50 million units. 50 million units all on basically the same device, running basically the same OS, and all able to access the same software from the same App Store. With the device manufacturer owning the relationship, and in control of software updates and distribution of third-party applications. What’s more is the length of time that this particular situation has been stable. Three years running on a stable platform (which also includes iPod touch devices) to a growing number of users that now totals 85 million customers. Never before has such a consistent mobile platform been available to as many users for this length of time.

Multi-Platform Investment

That brings us to the value proposition. There is a cost associated with supporting additional platforms when developing mobile applications. And that cost will be balanced against the total opportunity there is to be gained. Each splinter in the platform, be it screen resolution, device capabilities, of operating system difference all increase the cost of targeting and maintaining software on that platform. These costs are not only related to writing code specific to each platform. The way that a Blackberry user expects to interact with an application is different from that of an Android user and different again from an iPhone user. Each platform has its own Human Interface Guidelines. This requires modifications in the design of the application as well as the support of variations in the testing cycle. And depending on how great the variances between devices are within a given platform, the approach to on device quality testing may vary as well.

Looking at the current competition, RIM may still outnumber based on the total number of units sold to date, but if one takes a closer look, one will quickly discover not only a seriously fragmented collection of device profiles to test against, but also some rather low numbers of individuals downloading and using third-party applications. The “Crackberry” does one thing better than any other device on the market, and that is e-mail. The problem is that times change and most consumers are not utilizing e-mail as their primary means of electronic communication. Twitter and Facebook are replacing SMS and e-mail. So much so that in a recent survey, 40 percent of all existing Blackberry owners claim that they will switch over to iPhone when they replace their current device. What would be interesting to know is how many of those same Blackberry customers already have an iPod and an established iTunes music library. RIM’s only fault is that they have been a player for a long time. And over time, a device manufacture’s will ultimately start to splinter, and their customer base will fragment making the maintenance of applications for third-party develops across all fragments more and more expensive.

Then there is Android. Can anyone honestly deny that Google will help Android become the dominate licensed operating system across portable devices? The problem that third-party developers face is that right out of the gate Google fragmented the market. With the OS divided into almost equal thirds presently (1.5, 1.6 and 2.1), the number of new Androids coming to market is mind numbing. Buyers remorse with a locked in two-year contract has become par for the course. The support costs for third-party developers on the barley one year only Android platform is that it is actually in worse condition than Blackberry. The number of variances based on-screen resolution, device capabilities and operating system versions is a nightmare to manage. And at the rate to which new devices are coming out, it is impossible to test on device across all variations, simply impossible. What is worse still is that each device manufacture can decide whether or not to include the “Google Experience” with their device, and decide on their own when to provide updates for the carrier to push out to the carrier’s customers. This will prove to be problematic for those responsible for identifying testing scenarios, budgeting time, and scheduling regression tests to ensure consistent quality.

http://theappleblog.com/2010/05/14/why-the-iphone-platform-is-still-the-best-game-in-town/

AdMob Keeps Growing, No Thanks To Apple

Yesterday, Admob served its 200 billionth mobile ad, only nine months after serving its 100 billionth ad. The mobile ad network is still growing strong, with 160 employees and an annualized revenue run-rate above $100 million.

But ever since Google outbid Apple with its $750 million bid to buy AdMob, the original growth engine for AdMob—iPhone app ads—has been stalling. As you can see by the chart above showing share of worldwide ad impressions across the AdMob network by operating systems, the iPhone peaked as the biggest smartphone source of AdMob ads in November, 2009, right before the Google deal was announced. Since then, it’s been a slow but steady decline from 54 percent to 46 percent in March, 2010. Fortunately for AdMob, Android is picking up the slack, rising from 16 percent of ads served to 25 percent, during the same period. In the U.S., Android is already contributing more ad impressions than the iPhone for AdMob.

Of course, ever since Apple was spurned by AdMob, it’s made it more difficult for AdMob to compete on the iPhone. Apple went on to acquire AdMob rival Quattro Wireless, and plans to introduce its own iAds, which will tie into iTunes in unique ways. Apple may further hobble AdMob by blocking its ability to collect data from the apps which serve its ads.

So you can expect that iPhone percentage to keep on dropping (even if the absolute number of impressions keeps rising, also note that the iPhone figures above do not include the iPod Touch). The question is, can Android keep growing fast enough to make up for it?

Google’s Nexus One Store Is Going Out Of Business

When Google launched its Nexus One Android phone, it also launched alongside it an online phone store where the Nexus One and future Android phones would be for sale. It was a slightly disruptive play to de-link the purchase of a phone from an actual carrier. The idea was, you could pick your phone, pick your plan, and mix and match.

Well, it didn’t turn out that way. Carriers don’t like to give up control. In fact, Verizon decided not to sell the Nexus One at all, and instead opt for its own more Incredible Android phone. The phone store turned out to be a flop, and Google just announced that it will be closing up shop online:

While the global adoption of the Android platform has exceeded our expectations, the web store has not. It’s remained a niche channel for early adopters, but it’s clear that many customers like a hands-on experience before buying a phone, and they also want a wide range of service plans to chose from.

The Nexus One phone will still be available through carrier partners. But Google’s online phone store will become an “online store window” showcasing Android phones available globally—directly from the carriers. Google has enough on its hands going up against Apple. It needs the carriers on its side if it wants to win the bigger battle.

http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/14/googles-nexus-one-store/

Unsealed iPhone 4G Affidavit: Phone’s Sellers Allegedly Tried To Hide Evidence

Earlier today, at the insistence of a coalition of media organizations including Wired and Cnet, a judge unsealed an affidavit the iPhone 4G leak case that has uncovered many more details about the case. The documents, which contain the affidavit of Detective Matthew Broad of the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, affirm that it was Apple that sparked the police investigation, and offers a timeline of events leading up to the police raid of Gizmodo editor’s Jason Chen’s house. We’ve embedded the full document below, via Cnet.

In the documents, it’s revealed that Steve Jobs personally contacted Gizmodo about getting the phone back (Gizmodo responded that it wanted Apple to officially state that the phone was theirs). It also reveals that Apple has claimed that Gizmodo damaged the prototype iPhone during the course of taking it apart:

“Sewell said that upon returning to Apple, employees attempted to power the phone and found that it no longer functioned. Upon examining the phone, they found the following damage occurred to it as a result of the phone being disassembling[sic]:
1. Broken ribbon cable
2. One screw was inserted into the wrong location and caused an electrical short
3. Back plate snaps were broken.
4. Stripped Screws.”

At one point in the document, the story of how Gray Powell probably lost the phone is detailed (note that this supports the claims by Gizmodo that it was not actually stolen out of Gray Powell’s possession):

“Powell said he sat at the bar with his uncle. He said the last memory he had of the prototype phone was placing it in his bag, which he then put on the floor by his feet. Powell said that his bag was knocked over at one point in time and it was possible the prototype iPhone fell out of the bag onto the floor.

I asked Powell if it was possible that someone stole the prototype iPhone from his bag. He said he did leave his bag with his uncle at one point during the evening when he went to the bathroom and it was possible, although unlikely, that someone removed the prototype iPhone from his bag”.

But most interesting, at least on our first read-through of the documents, are the bizarre chain of events that took place as the investigation closed in on Brian Hogan and Thomas Warner — the two young men allegedly working together to sell the phone after Hogan found it in a bar. Police were allegedly tipped off about the involvement of the two men by their roommate, a woman named Katherine Martinson, who was concerned that she would be considered an accomplice to the young men because Hogan had used her computer to try syncing the iPhone 4G prototype.

“Orloff said that Witness Martinson contacted him due to the fact that Suspect Hogan connected the stolen iPhone to her computer and she believed that Apple would eventually trace the iPhone back to her via IP address. Therefore she contacted Apple in order to absolve herself of criminal responsibility…”

The documents allege that when Martinson tried to talk Hogan out of selling the iPhone because it would “ruin the carer of Robert ‘Gray’ Powell”, Hogan responded “Sucks for him. He lost his phone. Shouldn’t have lost his phone.”

The documents then go on to detail the night of April 21, when Hogan and Warner allegedly tried to hide evidence that tied them to the phone. It’s a bizarre tale. Warner, who had two outstanding misdemeanor warrants, allegedly tried to hide a laptop at a church, and after saying he didn’t know where a missing thumb drive and flash card were, said that they were hidden in a bush in Redwood City. Here are the passages describing the events of that night:

Steve Jobs Spars With Gawker Blogger Over Revolutions, Freedom, and Porn

For many years, tech fans have known that Steve Jobs will occasionally respond to messages directed to his well-publicized email address. Most of the time his responses consist of snappy one-liners, often containing a nugget of new information. But it’s rare to hear about a full-on debate, with Jobs offering some rationale behind Apple’s highly controversial decisions.

That’s exactly what happened last night, when Gawker writer Ryan Tate got irritated by an Apple ad describing the iPad as “a revolution” and shot off an email to Steve Jobs. Three hours later, at nearly 1AM, Jobs replied, and a passionate email debate ensued. The email exchange is mainly focused on Apple’s stranglehold on the iPhone OS platform, and its decision to force developers to build applications using Apple’s tools.

Tate is clearly agitated throughout the exchange (in his blog post he notes a few things he regrets writing in his email responses). For the most part Jobs seems to be level-headed, though he does take a jab at Tate at the end. Through it all, though, one thing is clear: Jobs is on a mission to reinvent computing. He’s well aware of the controversies, and for better or for worse, it sounds like he genuinely believes that what Apple is doing will lead to a better future.

You can read the entire exchange on Gawker here, but here are a few interesting responses from Jobs:

Tate:

If Dylan was 20 today, how would he feel about your company?

Would he think the iPad had the faintest thing to do with “revolution?”

Revolutions are about freedom.

Jobs:

Yep, freedom from programs that steal your private data. Freedom from programs that trash your battery. Freedom from porn. Yep, freedom. The times they are a changin’, and some traditional PC folks feel like their world is slipping away. It is.

Here’s a later back-and-forth (note the jab Jobs takes at Tate at the end):