I don't have a fraction of the IT experience that most of you do. I don't pretend otherwise. However, as a tech journalist, I've been covering enterprise IT for 20 years. I interview dozens of major corporate CIOs every year. Pretty much ALL medium/large corporations -- the Fortune 1,000 -- spend thousands or even millions of dollars annually on cloud services/storage. There are many reasons why they do it. None of those reasons include, "Because they're stupid." I chuckle a little when I read comments from people who think they know better than all the massive international conglomerates whose budgets fuel the many-billion-dollar cloud computing industry. On Fri, Nov 30, 2018, 1:22 AM Laura S. Reinhard via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org wrote:
While I am beginning to doubt my “belonging” in this group, primarily because my experience in IT has been limited to individual artists and their Macs and developing databases for them in FileMaker to keep up mailing lists (when people used to use mail).
I often sound like I know less than I do, because I am more interested in big pictures than technical terminology (which is why Apple Store hired me... my ability to “plain speak” technology. However many true tech folk think I am an idiot when they first talk to me about it.
Why say all of this? Two reasons. First, I didn’t formally introduce myself to this list and since I will be at Festivus am worried that “they’re all gonna laugh at me”. Second, I replied to this particular post because of my complete distrust in cloud storage. There is no way to even pretend they can be “safe”. Ever since I bought my 2010 iMac and had no disc to boot from and had to rely on everything being web-based, I have had nothing but horrible experiences, primarily because of my early Mac user ignorance about viruses and malware. I realize that was not the clouds fault, but the concept of “everything wireless” is mind-boggling naive and this post seems to agree? Also, confirmed my thought that this shift to such insecure methods of data management/storage is because young “bros” are in charge lol.
Hope this meandering response made sense and doesn’t serve to make me appear even less tech nerdy to you all. Hopefully Festivus won’t be like a middle school dance I have to call my mom from haha!
See you all there.
Laura On Nov 30, 2018, 12:42 AM -0500, Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org>, wrote:
On 11/29/18 11:40 PM, W2HX via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I dunno, Dave. Some pretty damn big companies like Netflix, AirBNB, Atlassian, et. al., all seem to think its the right thing to use someone else's toothbrush. Fact is, thousands of companies use AWS. Almost 100% of start ups, my own included, with tens of millions of investment use cloud systems (aws and azure - another toothbrush, not our own) all seem to think it is a better idea to use someone else's toothbrush rather than using their own.
And of course they're free to do so. I would never deny that it's common, but I'm not too worried about that, as I've never been much of a "follower". I do (and recommend) what's right in my judgment, not what others tell me to do.
That said, though, I don't build Netflix-sized networks. Netflix seldom asks for my advice. ;) If Netflix came asking, I'd have to say "I'm sorry, you're talking to the wrong guy, I cannot do what you need." I've built Netflix-sized networks, but that was a long time ago, and it's no longer in my area of expertise. But small organizations of 1-30 people with specialized needs do solicit my advice, and what I tell them in most cases is "keep your own data". In the present context, we're talking about an inventory database for a club, to keep track of a few thousand items. There is no earthly need to farm that out to a timesharing provider. Further, such a small organization is a lot more likely to be hurt by a hosting provider's outage than a company like Atlassian, which will have SLAs with big penalties, offsite backups, and DR plans to cover their asses. Is VCF prepared to set up all of that? If not, are they prepared to periodically start over from scratch?
As a CTO myself with 39 years in IT, if I were to go on a job interview and insist that purchasing, depreciating, maintaining and staffing my own data center (24x7) was a better idea than using a cloud infrastructure (because that would be stupid), I don't think that would be a winning interview 9 times out of 10.
If you have 39 years in IT, that's six or seven years more than me, and that means both of us separately have been doing this longer than Netflix, AirBNB, and Atlassian, combined, have existed. In my experience, the vast majority of the kids managing those networks have no idea of what they're doing, and it shows in the downtime. I'm grateful that I, for any of MY important data, don't have to rely on them for anything. Most of the data stored on my network is generated, not downloaded (and thus easily replaced). I can't just start over when AWS burps and files disappear, and I can't afford to just take the afternoon off when the "cloud" service blows up. You can take that risk if you want, but I won't. For my work, there is zero benefit to farming it out. That's actually true of many small organizations, but most people have fallen for the "cloud" hype.
(For added fun, ask Matt Patoray how well that works for the support department's cloud-hosted VoIP phone system at his place of work. Better get some popcorn, in case you get him started.)
About job interviews...I generally don't go on job interviews, so I'm not too worried about what the right HR buzzwords are. My singular focus is uptime and data preservation, not "sounding right" to someone who has fallen for the hype in order to get a job.
Please understand that this isn't a case of hiding one's head in the sand or not being aware of what's cool and trendy in I.T. this year. I'm not a hobbyist...I assure you that I know exactly what AWS is, and rare is a day when I'm not logged into a couple of AWS-hosted servers. My experience tells me that it is a colossally bad idea. If your experience has been better, that's great. I respect your opinion, but I do not share it.
For years, we've all seen a great push to get rid of all internal I.T. infrastructure, datacenters in particular. This is driven primarily by economics, rather than technical merit. Being able to write it off as an operating expense for the tax benefit is a lot more palatable than shelling out the money for a big purchase and putting it on a depreciation schedule, and then there's having to employ all those inconvenient technical people who aren't team players, don't play golf, and aren't even decent enough to wear ties. There are no such concerns in the context of VCF's inventory database.
I dunno. Hard to swim against the tide on this one but YMMV.
I have no need to swim against any tide. It's just that I learned very early on not to depend on other peoples' computers for any of my operations, and I don't recommend that others do it either.
I realize that this is not a commonly-held opinion, but I'm not too worried about that. My clients do not come to me for commonly-held opinions. They can Google for those.
With respect, -Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
On Nov 30, 2018, at 1:43 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I don't have a fraction of the IT experience that most of you do. I don't pretend otherwise.
Nor do I!
However, as a tech journalist, I've been covering enterprise IT for 20 years. I interview dozens of major corporate CIOs every year.
Just to play devils advocate, in this context that’s somewhat akin to saying “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on tv.” :p Or more on point, that’s like the people who sail on the ferries every day, hundreds of times a year, and from observing and talking to the crew and captains begin to feel they “know” as enough to debate the topic of operating a large passenger vessel with those that do it. (I’m not doubting you’ve gleaned far more info on the topic than myself, again I’m playing devils advocate but still making a real world comparison, one I’ve dealt with first hand in my career)
Pretty much ALL medium/large corporations -- the Fortune 1,000 -- spend thousands or even millions of dollars annually on cloud services/storage.
There are many reasons why they do it. None of those reasons include, "Because they're stupid."
And we all know the fortune 1000 have never made collectively bad decisions yes? I also have a family member who was in the upper echelon of two of those Fortune 500 companies for nearly 4 decades....ohh the stories he can tell!!
I chuckle a little when I read comments from people who think they know better than all the massive international conglomerates whose budgets fuel the many-billion-dollar cloud computing industry.
See my previous response. But to expand, like the decisions made by one or more multi billion dollar companies to back certain technologies that failed in spectacular fashion? Or those that followed the leaders right down the tube say in banking or manufacturing choices or internet bubble.....I’m sure you get the point. Many massively stupid decisions in multi billion dollar industries (and those other multi billion dollar industries that either supported or relied on them) have been widely publicized throughout modern history. I like to fall back to “mom’s” favorite saying. Just because your friends are doing it doesn’t mean you should.” Tony
Just to play devils advocate, in this context that’s somewhat akin to saying “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on tv.” :p Or more on point, that’s like the people who sail on the ferries every day, hundreds of times a year, and from observing and talking to the crew and captains begin to feel they “know” as enough to debate the topic of operating a large passenger vessel with those that do it.
No, those are terrible analogies. It is my JOB to learn what, why, and how these companies' IT departments operate.
And we all know the fortune 1000 have never made collectively bad decisions yes?
No. Dude ... do you understand how big cloud computing is? Gartner found that it was a $260 BILLION industry in 2017. For emphasis: TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS. But by all means, feel free to think you know better. :) On Fri, Nov 30, 2018, 1:55 PM Tony Bogan <thebogans@mac.com wrote:
On Nov 30, 2018, at 1:43 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I don't have a fraction of the IT experience that most of you do. I don't pretend otherwise.
Nor do I!
However, as a tech journalist, I've been covering enterprise IT for 20 years. I interview dozens of major corporate CIOs every year.
Just to play devils advocate, in this context that’s somewhat akin to saying “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on tv.” :p
Or more on point, that’s like the people who sail on the ferries every day, hundreds of times a year, and from observing and talking to the crew and captains begin to feel they “know” as enough to debate the topic of operating a large passenger vessel with those that do it. (I’m not doubting you’ve gleaned far more info on the topic than myself, again I’m playing devils advocate but still making a real world comparison, one I’ve dealt with first hand in my career)
Pretty much ALL medium/large corporations -- the Fortune 1,000 -- spend thousands or even millions of dollars annually on cloud services/storage.
There are many reasons why they do it. None of those reasons include, "Because they're stupid."
And we all know the fortune 1000 have never made collectively bad decisions yes? I also have a family member who was in the upper echelon of two of those Fortune 500 companies for nearly 4 decades....ohh the stories he can tell!!
I chuckle a little when I read comments from people who think they know better than all the massive international conglomerates whose budgets
fuel
the many-billion-dollar cloud computing industry.
See my previous response. But to expand, like the decisions made by one or more multi billion dollar companies to back certain technologies that failed in spectacular fashion? Or those that followed the leaders right down the tube say in banking or manufacturing choices or internet bubble.....I’m sure you get the point.
Many massively stupid decisions in multi billion dollar industries (and those other multi billion dollar industries that either supported or relied on them) have been widely publicized throughout modern history.
I like to fall back to “mom’s” favorite saying. Just because your friends are doing it doesn’t mean you should.”
Tony
When VCF does go and put snipe-it into AWS please tell us that you've decided to use the new Quantum Ledger product just announced! https://aws.amazon.com/qldb <https://aws.amazon.com/qldb> https://bitcoinist.com/amazon-aws-qldb-blockchain/ <https://bitcoinist.com/amazon-aws-qldb-blockchain/> The QLDB: "Amazon QLDB is a fully managed ledger database that provides a transparent, immutable, and cryptographically verifiable transaction log owned by a central trusted authority. Amazon QLDB tracks each and every application data change and maintains a complete and verifiable history of changes over time." I ask you pay for this service so that we all can know that each and very asset managed by your new system is transparent, immutable, and cryptographically verifiable. I know I will start to sleep better at night with this information, even if it's in the cloud. -andy ps. I'm new, so let me say I hope you realize I'm kidding. Or am I. pps - plus it's Quantum Cloud Computing I think.
On 11/30/18 2:06 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
And we all know the fortune 1000 have never made collectively bad decisions yes?
No. Dude ... do you understand how big cloud computing is? Gartner found that it was a $260 BILLION industry in 2017.
For emphasis: TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS.
But by all means, feel free to think you know better. :)
And everyone knows that he who has more money is automatically right, right? There are a lot of things that are "big" and make a lot of money. Drug dealers, pimps, and "influencable" politicians come to mind. What great pillars of trust those people are, just because they're "big". -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
There are a lot of things that are "big" and make a lot of money. Drug dealers, pimps, and "influencable" politicians come to mind. What great pillars of trust those people are, just because they're "big".
Dave, now you are just being silly. I'm en route to Festivus prep. It will be a fun politics-free weekend, and hopefully tech wars will be the worst of it. Happy Festivus my hard-headed friend. :) On Fri, Nov 30, 2018, 2:20 PM Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org wrote:
On 11/30/18 2:06 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
And we all know the fortune 1000 have never made collectively bad decisions yes?
No. Dude ... do you understand how big cloud computing is? Gartner found that it was a $260 BILLION industry in 2017.
For emphasis: TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS.
But by all means, feel free to think you know better. :)
And everyone knows that he who has more money is automatically right, right?
There are a lot of things that are "big" and make a lot of money. Drug dealers, pimps, and "influencable" politicians come to mind. What great pillars of trust those people are, just because they're "big".
-Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
No. Dude ... do you understand how big cloud computing is? Gartner found that it was a $260 BILLION industry in 2017. For emphasis: TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS.
Indeed. Also, when it comes to skillsets at my prior employer one of the managers said it was more difficult to hire people as we didn't use cloud stuff much. Potential candidates look at the skillsets they will gain and maintain. AWS (and I suppose GCP and Azure) are hot, pick up the skills if possible! AWS is so crazy big it's not funny. What they offer is crazy powerful. Companies like IBM are dust. AWS has their own silicon in production now that sits next to the Intel CPUs for a bunch of crazy customized support. So each virtual machine sees it's own NVME storage but that is really tied to a SAN outside of the silicon to NVME over IP or whatever. Way more isolation than relying on VMs. In my research on AWS Glacier it appears they use special hard drives that spin at lower speeds, and then power down the disks when full? The disks are connected to custom multiplexors. But there might be optical or tape in the mix somehow? Another service that makes me wonder how they do it.
On 11/30/18 2:23 PM, Ethan O'Toole via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
In my research on AWS Glacier it appears they use special hard drives that spin at lower speeds, and then power down the disks when full? The disks are connected to custom multiplexors. But there might be optical or tape in the mix somehow? Another service that makes me wonder how they do it.
I'm sure a lot of it is based on hierarchical storage based on access patterns. On some of my clients' systems we've seen some odd (bot not problematic) delays in accessing some seldom-accessed datasets that can only be explained by something having been spun down, or migrated off to higher-capacity, lower-speed storage. They do have some damn impressive technology there. (of course we were doing that in 1993, but the WAY they'd have to be doing it, on that scale, is mind-blowing) -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Ditto, about all of the stuff about not knowing as much as everybody on all the different issues related to cloud computing and why one IT department or C-level executive may make one decision over another. I think there are a few things we can probably agree on: 1) "cloud computing" is a silly buzzword for saying "their computing (server) environment and equipment" as an alternative to. "your computing (server) environment and equipment". (I personally think silly buzzwords like this enforce magical thinking and a lack of understanding.) 2) There are pros and cons for both maintaining in-house servers, as well as using online cloud services. Probably some combination of both is ideal for many organizations. 3) hosting all our data elsewhere gives many of us pause for many reasons. That being said, I've got a server rack and a large stack of older servers burning a hole in my pocket looking for something good to do with them. Any suggestions? Any interest? --MS
Sent from my iPhone On Nov 30, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Ethan O'Toole via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
No. Dude ... do you understand how big cloud computing is? Gartner found that it was a $260 BILLION industry in 2017. For emphasis: TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS.
Yep. One third the valuation of a single large corporation. One. Not two or three or a hundred. One. And barely more than the revenue generated by a single large corporation. It’s big, but in reality it’s not when a single company earns more than the INDUSTRY spends. Big for a given expenditure, but not big like the big boys yet. I find it’s rapid growth more impressive than its actual size to date. I don’t pretend to know better. I also don’t research what other people do and decisions that other people make about topics and things of which I know little to nothing personally and decide I know better. I’m not saying you do, but I’ve dealt first hand with reporters and researchers in both maritime and fisheries management issues that I’ve been actually doing for over 30 years yet they felt competent to debate the topics with myself and others far more knowledgeable than I (that list is HUGE!) because they had “done the research.” They found out quickly to the contrary. Since I’ve come to know you, I don’t put you in that category, but the comment was made so I am merely addressing it from first hand experience in a different industry. Hence the reason I know I don’t know what I never thought I knew! And the analogy is closer than you think. I’ve had plenty of “experts in the field” who had done the legwork and reading and study and even internships. Spent years doing it on the level just below actually doing it. And had I not taken the wheel and fixed their rookie mistakes that many unschooled people wouldn’t make we would have been injured or dead. Simplest answer is there’s often more than one “right answer” depending on the circumstances and there’s often only one right answer, depending on the circumstances! The “doctor on tv” remark was cleary a joke, and labeled as such by the way. You left that door open so I jumped through! :-) Tony
Just my opinion but this sounds like a great topic to discuss at the festivities!! Sent from: My extremely complicated, hand held electronic device. On Nov 30, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Ethan O'Toole via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
No. Dude ... do you understand how big cloud computing is? Gartner found that it was a $260 BILLION industry in 2017. For emphasis: TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS.
Indeed. Also, when it comes to skillsets at my prior employer one of the managers said it was more difficult to hire people as we didn't use cloud stuff much. Potential candidates look at the skillsets they will gain and maintain. AWS (and I suppose GCP and Azure) are hot, pick up the skills if possible!
AWS is so crazy big it's not funny. What they offer is crazy powerful. Companies like IBM are dust. AWS has their own silicon in production now that sits next to the Intel CPUs for a bunch of crazy customized support. So each virtual machine sees it's own NVME storage but that is really tied to a SAN outside of the silicon to NVME over IP or whatever. Way more isolation than relying on VMs.
In my research on AWS Glacier it appears they use special hard drives that spin at lower speeds, and then power down the disks when full? The disks are connected to custom multiplexors. But there might be optical or tape in the mix somehow? Another service that makes me wonder how they do it.
I have this friendly argument on a regular basis, though mostly with people in vintage computing/gaming who have more "hardcore" ways of doing things. I know for me, cloud-based services like Dropbox, Evernote, etc., have made my computing life better, more productive, and safer than it ever was in any form in the decades prior. The beauty part with these services is that you have both local- and network-based copies of every file, which means not only do I have access to my stuff in the cloud, but also on every computing device I own. I make one change on one of my computers, the local copy is backed up to the cloud, then it's replicated on any other computer that I have that happens to be on or logged in (at that time or in the future). That also gives me multiple copies of my files I can revert back to, so I have a full revision history should I ever need it. All that, without me doing anything other than working like normal. That to me is the best of all worlds. This way of doing things came in particularly handy within only the past six months, when three of our new household computers went down (requiring in one case an exchange, and in the other two other cases multiple services with HP and Alienware/Dell, respectively). Both my wife and I work from home with our own editorial businesses, so being without our files/access to our stuff is not an option. When one of our computers go down, it's trivial to pick up right where we left on another computer. So yeah, I have nothing bad to say about cloud services. ======================================================== Bill Loguidice, Managing Director; Armchair Arcade, Inc. <http://www.armchairarcade.com> ======================================================== Authored Books <http://www.amazon.com/Bill-Loguidice/e/B001U7W3YS/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_1> and Film <http://www.armchairarcade.com/film>; About me and other ways to get in touch <http://about.me/billloguidice> ======================================================== On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 1:43 PM Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I don't have a fraction of the IT experience that most of you do. I don't pretend otherwise.
However, as a tech journalist, I've been covering enterprise IT for 20 years. I interview dozens of major corporate CIOs every year.
Pretty much ALL medium/large corporations -- the Fortune 1,000 -- spend thousands or even millions of dollars annually on cloud services/storage.
There are many reasons why they do it. None of those reasons include, "Because they're stupid."
I chuckle a little when I read comments from people who think they know better than all the massive international conglomerates whose budgets fuel the many-billion-dollar cloud computing industry.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018, 1:22 AM Laura S. Reinhard via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org wrote:
On 11/30/18 1:43 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I don't have a fraction of the IT experience that most of you do. I don't pretend otherwise.
And yet you feel you have the knowledge to decide who knows what they're doing and who doesn't, with the sole factor being the size of their employer.
However, as a tech journalist, I've been covering enterprise IT for 20 years. I interview dozens of major corporate CIOs every year.
Pretty much ALL medium/large corporations -- the Fortune 1,000 -- spend thousands or even millions of dollars annually on cloud services/storage.
There are many reasons why they do it. None of those reasons include, "Because they're stupid."
I chuckle a little when I read comments from people who think they know better than all the massive international conglomerates whose budgets fuel the many-billion-dollar cloud computing industry.
It's ok Evan, you can attack me by name, I don't mind. If you recall, the first time you told me that I didn't know what I was talking about because I don't work for a huge corporation was to my face, standing in Building 3, not all that long ago. It's very clear that you equate the size of the business with technical know-how. Everyone here who has worked in this field is probably laughing right now. I'm sure that you do chuckle. But as a journalist, rather than an engineer who has actually worked in that world, you are largely unaware of what the work entails. First, you assume that "massive international conglomerate" means "will always do the right thing". It's clear that being a huge company is really all it takes to earn your respect, but be very careful with that. The larger a company is, the less likely they are to make technical decisions for technical reasons. Do you really think, for example, that Microsoft Windows made inroads into datacenter server roles on its technical merits? Now look at the companies that did it: Almost exclusively huge ones. As an example, when Microsoft came after Digex in the 1990s, for example, knowing that it was a pure-UNIX organization working in a pure-UNIX field, they offered some very enticing bonuses to migrate to Windows in the datacenter. It started out with free OS licensing and discounted support, but then moved on to things like "gifts" for decision-making staff, like island vacations and such. None of their arguments were "this is a better technical solution"; it all amounted to bribes of one sort or another. My point is, in that environment, technical considerations take a back seat to "business" concerns. And business concerns, for very large sales, very frequently involve salesmen schmoozing, bribes, and a bunch of other crap that isn't exactly honorable business behavior. Common, yes...even ubiquitous. But not honorable behavior. Further, massive multinational conglomerates hire people based primarily on H.R. resume keyword searches, and end up with lots of morons. They have to do it that way, on the scale they're operating in. Sure, there are plenty of highly-experienced, knowledgeable people working in those big companies (Dean and Eugene come to mind), but they are far from everyone. Add to that the Peter Principle (people are promoted to their level of incompetence), and you end up knowing why big companies very often make poor technical decisions. Some of them are so laughably bad that they'd destroy a small company, but big companies often end up surviving in spite of themselves, usually on financial inertia alone. I'm explaining this so that you'll understand that your blind faith in the technical astuteness of the staffs of large corporations is misplaced. I know you're not listening. Maybe you'd have listened when I worked for a large corporation. I tried to explain this to you standing in the front of Building 3 a few months ago, and you wouldn't listen then, either. Speaking as someone who was raised by a journalist, a journalist's job involves a lot more listening than making proclamations. I appreciate your point of view, truly I do, but I don't need you to "give me a schoolin'" on how the I.T. industry works or who I should copy my advice from. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
participants (8)
-
Bill Loguidice -
Dave McGuire -
dillera＠gmail.com -
Ethan O'Toole -
Evan Koblentz -
m simons -
Sentrytv -
Tony Bogan