IBM fires WebSphere CloudBurst at McKinsey heretics
Iron rainmaker machine
When consultant McKinsey & Co recently warned that cloud computing would cost you money rather help you than save it, IBM took the unusual step of responding.
IBM wasn't the company singled out in the report - it was Amazon's fluffy Web Services. But IBM is working with Amazon to make its software available through the Elastic Compute Cloud
IBM was clearly rattled. McKinsey is influential among the kinds of thinkers IBM likes to impress, and cloud is the latest take on what IBM does best - data center systems and big, complicated software. IBM responded to McKinsey by producing its own numbers to claim companies can save on floor space, power, and cooling and deliver "triple asset utilization".
In a show of how much IBM has bought into the cloud, the company has announced something that it calls the culmination of more than 10 years of software management best practices.
IBM has announced a hardware appliance featuring a version of its battle-ship class WebSphere Java application server tuned virtualized data center environment, which features a new version of the Rational Framework and - yes - plugs into IBM's Tivoli systems management framework.
It's the WebSphere CloudBust that stores and secures images and patterns from WebSphere Application Server Hypervisor Edition, IBM said. This edition of IBM's Java application server has been tuned for VMware's ESX and supports the Open Virtualization Format.
CloudBust features the Rational Automation Framework for WebSphere to configure and tune application using 400 automated tasks in WebSphere Application Server environments. Integration with the Tivoli Service Automation Manager provides the ability to request and manage tasks using pattern-based deployment.
CoudBurst is promised for the second-quarter of 2009.
IBM, meanwhile, has announced the availability of IBM Mashup Center and Lotus Forms Turbo to develop and test applications for Amazon EC2. IBM said it would add WebSphere Application Server and WebSphere eXtreme Scale to Mashup Center and Forms Turbo. ®
"Another uninformed comment."
I doubt it :-)
"Cloud computing, which IBM actually invented back in the 50's and 60's under another name, IS centralized computing"
Duh. That's why I used the phrase. Trust me, Mr. JOhnson, I was probably speaking SNA before you were out of three cornered pants. I own functional examples of IBM 1401 and System/360-20 computers, and an IBM 650 that I'm in the process of restoring (I also have functional examples of a Honeywell 316, a Burroughs B2000, and the next project, an Amdahl 470 V5, if I ever get all the parts together). I understand mainframes. I know what they are, and what they are good at.
That said, the business model of the mainframe shop is a dinosaur. YES, there are places where centralized computing makes sense. But for the vast majority of home users and small businesses? Nope. Costs too much, and adds over-all complexity to the situation, neither of which are positives. And for medium to big businesses, it makes sense to keep it all in-house for many more reasons, starting with security.
Today's "cloud computing" is more about marketing droids separating fools from their money than it is about anything else. IMO, anyway.
RE: "IBM was clearly rattled."
"Centralized computing is no longer a valid business model. Get over it."
Another uninformed comment. Cloud computing, which IBM actually invented back in the 50's and 60's under another name, IS centralized computing -- just not necessarily in your center. Most of what we're hearing about cloud computing is nothing more than maketing hype to push cobbled together version of existing solutions.. What most people consider "new and improved" today is really little more than a revisit of past, proven solutions. Cloud, virtulaization, automated provisioning, etc., etc., are all well established mainframe functionalities that have been with us for decades. They're only new to those who got into this business in the days of client-server and afterward.
"IBM was clearly rattled."
I'm not surprised. Upper-middle IBM manglement is still stuck in the '50s & '60s.
Centralized computing is no longer a valid business model. Get over it.
That said, IMO and in general, McKinsey can usually be safely ignored.