Instead of reading an entire news article, watching an entire television show or listening to an entire speech, growing numbers of people are happy to jump to the summary, the video clip, the sound bite — never mind if context and nuance are lost in the process; never mind if it’s our emotions, more than our sense of reason, that are engaged; never mind if statements haven’t been properly vetted and sourced.A lot more goodies where this came from. This may be one of the most important topics and issues of our era.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Essential reading on impact of Web and media shift on thinking, socializing, publishing
From today's NYT:
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Pegasystems doubles-down on winning streak with Chordiant buy
This guest post comes courtesy of Tony Baer’s OnStrategies blog. Tony is a senior analyst at Ovum.
impression of the company about four to five years ago was of an interesting, rather eccentric bunch whose absent-minded professors had great ideas but little business savvy. At the time, the company was marginally profitable
Maybe their professors weren’t that absent-minded and their approach not so pedantic after all, as the company has been on a winning streak for the past 10 quarters, scoring 25 percent growth last year as the rest of the economy (and software industry) tanked.
Tilting against windmills, the company scored big gains among established clients across financial services industries, who used Pega’s process “solution frameworks” covering areas such as loan origination and underwriting, wholesale banking, and retail bank account opening
Pegasystems is on the right side of history, having embraced vertical frameworks. That’s an approach that you also find IBM taking. In business for roughly 25 years, Pega’s sales didn’t take off until it began rolling out a series of templates or frameworks that provided a 60 percent solution, eliminating the need to model commodity processes from scratch.
Either way, Pega’s success belies our observation that vertical templates are the future of enterprise applications — using the framework as a raw template, they will be composed from existing applications and data sources rather than written or implemented as a packaged application from scratch.
Growth last year added $35 million to the company’s cash cushion, leaving it with a nice healthy $200 million in the bank. But cash in a consolidating industry is trash when your rivals are either acquiring or getting acquired left and right. As so the question was, What would Pega do with its cash?
We have the answer
We now have the answer: Pega announced yesterday its intent to acquire Chordiant, whose specialty is dissecting, analyzing, and optimizing a company’s experiences with its customers. The deal, at $167 million in cash, actually nets out to about $116 million when you factor Cordiant’s $51 million cash position.
Pega’s solicited offer trumped an abortive unsolicited $105 million offer back in January from CDC, an aspiring Hong Kong-based enterprise applications provider. Chordiant has come down a few notches over time, with business flattening to $75 million last year, down from $115 million a couple years ago. Pega’s $5 per share bid is about 10 percent of the company’s 2000 dot com peak, but a 30 percent premium over its current valuation.
Pega got a good deal, and Wall St. agreed, as shares of both companies rose on the heels of the announcement. It reflects the fact that Chordiant provides Pega two opportunities: 1) Deepen its presence in financial services accounts by going into the front office, and 2) gain a new beachhead in telecom where it currently has bit a single critical mass client. Although telco could broaden Pega’s addressable market the deal wouldn’t work if the solutions weren’t complementary.
Pegasystems offers a highly sophisticated, rules-driven approach to defining, modeling, and executing business processes. It offers roughly 30 industry specific templates, and well over a dozen cross-industry frameworks such as customer process management, control and compliance, procurement and so on.
On paper, it looks like yin and yan. But there are basic architectural differences between the products.
By contrast Chordiant covers what it calls “customer experience management,” which tracks customer interactions and offers predictive analytics for optimizing cross-selling, upselling, or customer retention strategies, or for predicting risk or churn. It also offers vertical templates for financial services, healthcare, and telecom. Chordiant’s predictive analytics have adaptive capabilities where the rules can change based on trends in customer response; if a promotion offer proves not as attractive as initially forecast, the rules can adjust the algorithm to reflect reality
The potential synergy is where Chordiant optimizes customer-facing front office processes while Pega’s BPM frameworks optimize the corresponding back office processes such as loan origination.
On paper, it looks like yin and yan. But there are basic architectural differences between the products, as decision management consultant and author James Taylor has pointed out. Keep in mind that Taylor has traditionally been skeptical of Pega’s approach to embedding rules inside its process engine, rather than loosely coupling the two.
But he makes valid points that Chordiant handles rules differently from Pega, that the potential synergy between the two is great, but that the company need to take care that technical differences do not “derail the technical integration or cause the merged company to merge its operations without merging its products.”
So on paper, Pega has made a sound deal. As the company is not yet experienced in digesting acquisitions of this size, its success in consummating the Chordiant acquisition will become a predictive indicator of the company’s ability to survive and grow in a consolidating market where it will be expected to make more such deals.
By Tony Baer
We’d be the first to admit our surprise that Pegasystems has thrived as well as it has. Our initialimpression of the company about four to five years ago was of an interesting, rather eccentric bunch whose absent-minded professors had great ideas but little business savvy. At the time, the company was marginally profitableMaybe their professors weren’t that absent-minded and their approach not so pedantic after all, as the company has been on a winning streak for the past 10 quarters, scoring 25 percent growth last year as the rest of the economy (and software industry) tanked.
Tilting against windmills, the company scored big gains among established clients across financial services industries, who used Pega’s process “solution frameworks” covering areas such as loan origination and underwriting, wholesale banking, and retail bank account opening
Pegasystems is on the right side of history, having embraced vertical frameworks. That’s an approach that you also find IBM taking. In business for roughly 25 years, Pega’s sales didn’t take off until it began rolling out a series of templates or frameworks that provided a 60 percent solution, eliminating the need to model commodity processes from scratch.
Either way, Pega’s success belies our observation that vertical templates are the future of enterprise applications — using the framework as a raw template, they will be composed from existing applications and data sources rather than written or implemented as a packaged application from scratch.
Growth last year added $35 million to the company’s cash cushion, leaving it with a nice healthy $200 million in the bank. But cash in a consolidating industry is trash when your rivals are either acquiring or getting acquired left and right. As so the question was, What would Pega do with its cash?
We have the answer
We now have the answer: Pega announced yesterday its intent to acquire Chordiant, whose specialty is dissecting, analyzing, and optimizing a company’s experiences with its customers. The deal, at $167 million in cash, actually nets out to about $116 million when you factor Cordiant’s $51 million cash position.
Pega’s solicited offer trumped an abortive unsolicited $105 million offer back in January from CDC, an aspiring Hong Kong-based enterprise applications provider. Chordiant has come down a few notches over time, with business flattening to $75 million last year, down from $115 million a couple years ago. Pega’s $5 per share bid is about 10 percent of the company’s 2000 dot com peak, but a 30 percent premium over its current valuation.
Pega got a good deal, and Wall St. agreed, as shares of both companies rose on the heels of the announcement. It reflects the fact that Chordiant provides Pega two opportunities: 1) Deepen its presence in financial services accounts by going into the front office, and 2) gain a new beachhead in telecom where it currently has bit a single critical mass client. Although telco could broaden Pega’s addressable market the deal wouldn’t work if the solutions weren’t complementary.
Pegasystems offers a highly sophisticated, rules-driven approach to defining, modeling, and executing business processes. It offers roughly 30 industry specific templates, and well over a dozen cross-industry frameworks such as customer process management, control and compliance, procurement and so on.
On paper, it looks like yin and yan. But there are basic architectural differences between the products.
By contrast Chordiant covers what it calls “customer experience management,” which tracks customer interactions and offers predictive analytics for optimizing cross-selling, upselling, or customer retention strategies, or for predicting risk or churn. It also offers vertical templates for financial services, healthcare, and telecom. Chordiant’s predictive analytics have adaptive capabilities where the rules can change based on trends in customer response; if a promotion offer proves not as attractive as initially forecast, the rules can adjust the algorithm to reflect reality
The potential synergy is where Chordiant optimizes customer-facing front office processes while Pega’s BPM frameworks optimize the corresponding back office processes such as loan origination.
On paper, it looks like yin and yan. But there are basic architectural differences between the products, as decision management consultant and author James Taylor has pointed out. Keep in mind that Taylor has traditionally been skeptical of Pega’s approach to embedding rules inside its process engine, rather than loosely coupling the two.
But he makes valid points that Chordiant handles rules differently from Pega, that the potential synergy between the two is great, but that the company need to take care that technical differences do not “derail the technical integration or cause the merged company to merge its operations without merging its products.”
So on paper, Pega has made a sound deal. As the company is not yet experienced in digesting acquisitions of this size, its success in consummating the Chordiant acquisition will become a predictive indicator of the company’s ability to survive and grow in a consolidating market where it will be expected to make more such deals.
This guest post comes courtesy of Tony Baer’s OnStrategies blog. Tony is a senior analyst at Ovum.You may also be interested in:
Friday, March 12, 2010
Virtual conference speakers focus on cloud, value to enterprises, how to get started
One of the biggest questions facing companies today is what to make of cloud computing. Does it signal a major shift in how we approach IT -- and the business -- or is it just another ride on the hype wave that will disappear if we just wait it out?
HP tackled this question this month with a series of virtual conferences, "Cloud: Practical Advice for Taking the Next Steps," whose aim was to cut through the fog and to try and point business leaders and IT executives in the value-oriented direction.
A panel of industry analysts, practitioners, and HP experts outlined the value proposition of moving to the cloud, the danger of inaction, and how companies can get started on their cloud journey. [Disclosure: HP is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
For those who didn't catch the virtual conference live, HP has made the replays available.
Tom Kolopolous, president and founder, of The Delphi Group, opened the series as keynote speaker by stressing the opportunities cloud model provide for innovation, especially during an economic downturn.
Cloud, Kolopoulos said, is a key enabler of innovation. For those who might question the ability to innovate during an economic crisis, Kolopolous had some sage advice: "When you tighten the belt, innovation becomes more of an issue . . . you can’t innovate if your stomach is full. You only innovate when you’re hungry."
Tom Bittman, vice president and distinguished analyst of Gartner echoed similar themes in his closing keynote, in which he stressed that the risk of inaction was the greatest risk enterprises face today: "The only choice that’s a really bad choice is to do nothing with cloud computing at this point. Having a strategy and moving forward is very important."
Other speakers included Ken Hamilton, director of Data Center Synergy and Cloud Computing for HP; Tim van Ash, HP director of Products for SaaS; Archie Reed, who is HP’s Chief Technologist for Cloud Security and the author of several publications, including The Definitive Guide to Identity Management; Jim Reavis, Executive Director of the Cloud Security Alliance and president and founder of the Reavis Consulting Group, Chris Whitener, HP Chief Security Strategist; Duncan Campbell, VP Worldwide Marketing, HP; Chris Rence, a CIO from FICO, and Alan Wain, VP Solutions Infrastructure Practice, HP.
Some highlights:
HP tackled this question this month with a series of virtual conferences, "Cloud: Practical Advice for Taking the Next Steps," whose aim was to cut through the fog and to try and point business leaders and IT executives in the value-oriented direction.
A panel of industry analysts, practitioners, and HP experts outlined the value proposition of moving to the cloud, the danger of inaction, and how companies can get started on their cloud journey. [Disclosure: HP is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
The only choice that’s a really bad choice is to do nothing with cloud computing at this point. Having a strategy and moving forward is very important.
For those who didn't catch the virtual conference live, HP has made the replays available.
Tom Kolopolous, president and founder, of The Delphi Group, opened the series as keynote speaker by stressing the opportunities cloud model provide for innovation, especially during an economic downturn.
Cloud, Kolopoulos said, is a key enabler of innovation. For those who might question the ability to innovate during an economic crisis, Kolopolous had some sage advice: "When you tighten the belt, innovation becomes more of an issue . . . you can’t innovate if your stomach is full. You only innovate when you’re hungry."
Tom Bittman, vice president and distinguished analyst of Gartner echoed similar themes in his closing keynote, in which he stressed that the risk of inaction was the greatest risk enterprises face today: "The only choice that’s a really bad choice is to do nothing with cloud computing at this point. Having a strategy and moving forward is very important."
Other speakers included Ken Hamilton, director of Data Center Synergy and Cloud Computing for HP; Tim van Ash, HP director of Products for SaaS; Archie Reed, who is HP’s Chief Technologist for Cloud Security and the author of several publications, including The Definitive Guide to Identity Management; Jim Reavis, Executive Director of the Cloud Security Alliance and president and founder of the Reavis Consulting Group, Chris Whitener, HP Chief Security Strategist; Duncan Campbell, VP Worldwide Marketing, HP; Chris Rence, a CIO from FICO, and Alan Wain, VP Solutions Infrastructure Practice, HP.
Some highlights:
Koulopoulos: My advice is that number one, don’t look at the cloud simply by looking atFor those who didn't catch the virtual conference live, HP is making the replays available.what’s available today. Think of it as a long-term trend that you will have to adapt to, and you have to begin that adaptation now. You can’t wait until it’s fully evolved.
Begin moving down that road with non-core applications, applications and services that maybe aren’t as critical to the regulatory aspects of your business, to those aspects that would involve more security concerns, and in that way, you acclimate yourself to the cloud. You begin to understand what it means to work, to live, to run a business in the cloud, and the rest of these issues will resolve themselves, and they’ll resolve themselves for the same reason that they always do -- because of pure economics.
When the cloud becomes important enough that we rest enough our economic value on it, we will invest enough to make sure that the security issues have been addressed, but it’s an evolution. So don’t look at the cloud and say, “Well, it’ll never work because today, here’s what exists.” Look at the cloud and say, “I have to evolve with it.”
Bittman: There really are three major benefits. One is cost, the idea of sharing, the idea ofeconomies of scale definitely can reduce cost. But this one, I think, is often overstated and companies that are looking at cloud computing primarily as a cost benefit are probably missing some of the bigger benefits. Another benefit that is very important is quality of service.
In other words, it's the ability to specify explicitly what your service requirements are through a services-oriented interface to set your service levels high or low, to set your performance requirements high or low, depending on what you need, and base your price based on the service levels you need. That quality of service is something that might be very valuable to a business to adjust over time based on changing business dynamic cloud services.
Another part of that that’s important is the ability to change quickly. That gets to the third benefit which I think is the most important, and that’s agility -- the ability to spin up a new business, to spin up a start-up requirement in an enterprise, the ability to change your service level requirements or to change your scale very quickly.
This not only helps the bottom line in a typical company but it helps the top line. It can help a business grow. It can provide a competitive advantage to be able to react to a business change very, very quickly at the speed of business instead of at the speed of IT.
Reed: Security, just like cloud, is hard to define. It’s a very broad term when we think about. Itcan be many different things for different people. When you get to cloud security, first off, you’ve got to define which part of the cloud you’re talking about -- which cloud service, which cloud computing model you’re talking about. Then we can talk about which specific security aspects apply to that part of the model.
What we do is look to standards, taxonomies; ways of talking about this that make sense both to the business people as well as the technology people . . . Cloud computing represents phase 2 of the internet where we’re actually leveraging the internet connectivity to create this utility of computing. It changes everything.
Van Ash: HP’s approach with Cloud Assure is really about enabling business confidence in thecloud. It’s about mitigating risk and you talked about risk management earlier. We’re really attacking four key categories. We’re attacking security, performance, availability and service levels, and controlling the ongoing cost. Now, why do we go after those four elements? Well, they’re consistently the top four elements that we see from both analysts and customers alike and they map pretty well to the seven deadly sins that Jim talked about right upfront.
Reavis: Don’t read the research in and of itself and assume you’re going to get all the answers. Use it with partners and consultants that you trust, that you know you can work with. Use it in conjunction with our broader guidance of best practices. Use good risk management practices and with that, you can be pretty confident that you’ll come up with a good strategy for how you should adopt cloud.
Campbell: Number one is to make your services shareable. So yes, that makes sense. It’s veryintuitive and a first step in that, of course, is really, to think about it from the point of view of the audience. The audience being your application guys, your testers. Having your services available to them in a shared service environment is really the first step and to be able to provision that in a much more rapid fashion.
Second is to make your services more consumable . . . You want to be able to consume that service very importantly and intuitively like in a monthly type of fashion. You’re paying for what you use. What’s also very important is that not only are you presenting it in a consumable fashion, but then also that resource is then returned to the pool.
Third point is to make those services more valuable. It’s really tied to a very critical and relevant business outcome and also very importantly then how we can improve upon that. These three points really speak to a pragmatic evolutionary approach. It’s not a rip in replace. It’s not like you’re going to turn the switch and jump to a private cloud, but I think these are three great suggestions in terms of how to really make that evolution in a very pragmatic way.
Rence: VMs and the cloud are kind of like candy. They’re easily consumed but that doesn’t mean they’re all being used. That’s where the management tools really come in handy, to make sure that a group that’s leveraging the cloud, what you’ve basically taken and given to them to use – are they truly using it or is it something that they needed but they’re not sure when they’re going to get to it.
BriefingsDirect contributor Carlton Vogt provided editorial assistance and research on this post.You may also be interested in:
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
TIBCO rolls out Spotfire 3.1 with spotlight on predictive analytics
In a move to mainstream predictive analytics, TIBCO Software today rolled out the latest version of its Spotfire platform.
Dubbed Spotfire 3.1, the latest iteration promises a natural language statistical experience. Spotfire
3.1 aims to help anyone in an organization get fact-based answers to questions that help drive revenue.
The company says its software is not just for analytics gurus but also marketing professionals, business development managers and others who need forward-looking business intelligence in a hurry. [TIBCO Software is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
"Unlike traditional business intelligence tools, which for the most part aggregate historical trends only, Spotfire 3.1 projects them forward with what-if scenarios," says Mark Lorion, vice president of marketing for TIBCO Spotfire. "Anyone in the company can ask questions on demand and our analytics will provide future predictions based on behind-the-scenes data-driven methods. Users don't have to understand the methods. They just have to ask the questions – and they get answers instantly rather than waiting days like you would with today's business intelligence (BI) tools."
Spotfire 3.1 in action
Let’s say you’re trying to promote a new product in the consumer goods market. Spotfire 3.1 lets you choose input variables based on what you suspect might be driving the advertisement response, such as price, discounts, packaged offers, age of the respondent or length of time as a customer. You would then press a button that asks, "Are these related?"
After you push that button, Spotfire 3.1 works behind the scenes to run predictive models, using analytics and statistics to compile sensitivity analysis and correlations, then return a colorful graph that shows the response rate and which factors are most closely correlated to people clicking on your advertisement.
While BI gives you historical data, the predictive analytics aspect of Spotfire 3.1 offers insights into what could happen next time you run a similar promotion. It can also help you fine-tune your promotions by targeting the customers that clicked on your ad, or offering different promotions to different audiences – and it does it almost instantly.
Unlike traditional BI or static spreadsheets, Lorion says Spotfire 3.1 also includes conditional coloring and lasso and axis marking that allow for better data analysis of patterns, clusters and correlations among sets of variables. The software's multiple scale bar charts and combination bar and line plots offer analysis of unstructured, "free-dimensional" data to identify key outliers and trends amongst the data.
“IT organization and statistician groups aren’t able to respond quickly enough to the many questions that arise from business users, so they go to their gut,” Lorion says. “Spotfire lets you make fact-based decisions rather than gut-based decisions.”
Predictive analytics challenges
Of course, predictive analytics software is not a new concept, and Lorion admits that the predictions are only as good as the quality and breadth of the available data. But predictive analytics is gaining momentum in the enterprise marketplace.
IBM bought predictive analytics firm SPSS last July for $1.2 billion. And IDC predicts the $1.4 billion market for advanced analytics, of which predictive analytics is a subset, will grow 10 percent annually through 2011. Despite tight IT budgets, Lorion is optimistic about the space and the company’s offering.
“The economic downturn has been good for the analytics space because customers need to make reductions and predictions – but they need to be smart about it,” Lorion says. “Companies don’t want to hire PhDs to make sense of their statistics. But we need to drive awareness of our product and educate the market that the power of predictive analytics isn’t in the hands of only a couple of statisticians.”
Spotfire 3.1 works in tandem with Spotfire Application Data Services to let companies analyze data from various sources, including SAP NetWeaver BI, SAP ERP, Salesforce.com, Siebel eBusiness Applications, and the Oracle E-Business Suite.
Dubbed Spotfire 3.1, the latest iteration promises a natural language statistical experience. Spotfire
3.1 aims to help anyone in an organization get fact-based answers to questions that help drive revenue.The company says its software is not just for analytics gurus but also marketing professionals, business development managers and others who need forward-looking business intelligence in a hurry. [TIBCO Software is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
"Unlike traditional business intelligence tools, which for the most part aggregate historical trends only, Spotfire 3.1 projects them forward with what-if scenarios," says Mark Lorion, vice president of marketing for TIBCO Spotfire. "Anyone in the company can ask questions on demand and our analytics will provide future predictions based on behind-the-scenes data-driven methods. Users don't have to understand the methods. They just have to ask the questions – and they get answers instantly rather than waiting days like you would with today's business intelligence (BI) tools."
Spotfire 3.1 in action
Let’s say you’re trying to promote a new product in the consumer goods market. Spotfire 3.1 lets you choose input variables based on what you suspect might be driving the advertisement response, such as price, discounts, packaged offers, age of the respondent or length of time as a customer. You would then press a button that asks, "Are these related?"
After you push that button, Spotfire 3.1 works behind the scenes to run predictive models, using analytics and statistics to compile sensitivity analysis and correlations, then return a colorful graph that shows the response rate and which factors are most closely correlated to people clicking on your advertisement.
The software's multiple scale bar charts and combination bar and line plots offer analysis of unstructured, ‘free-dimensional’ data to identify key outliers and trends amongst the data.
While BI gives you historical data, the predictive analytics aspect of Spotfire 3.1 offers insights into what could happen next time you run a similar promotion. It can also help you fine-tune your promotions by targeting the customers that clicked on your ad, or offering different promotions to different audiences – and it does it almost instantly.
Unlike traditional BI or static spreadsheets, Lorion says Spotfire 3.1 also includes conditional coloring and lasso and axis marking that allow for better data analysis of patterns, clusters and correlations among sets of variables. The software's multiple scale bar charts and combination bar and line plots offer analysis of unstructured, "free-dimensional" data to identify key outliers and trends amongst the data.
“IT organization and statistician groups aren’t able to respond quickly enough to the many questions that arise from business users, so they go to their gut,” Lorion says. “Spotfire lets you make fact-based decisions rather than gut-based decisions.”
Predictive analytics challenges
Of course, predictive analytics software is not a new concept, and Lorion admits that the predictions are only as good as the quality and breadth of the available data. But predictive analytics is gaining momentum in the enterprise marketplace.
The economic downturn has been good for the analytics space because customers need to make reductions and predictions – but they need to be smart about it
IBM bought predictive analytics firm SPSS last July for $1.2 billion. And IDC predicts the $1.4 billion market for advanced analytics, of which predictive analytics is a subset, will grow 10 percent annually through 2011. Despite tight IT budgets, Lorion is optimistic about the space and the company’s offering.
“The economic downturn has been good for the analytics space because customers need to make reductions and predictions – but they need to be smart about it,” Lorion says. “Companies don’t want to hire PhDs to make sense of their statistics. But we need to drive awareness of our product and educate the market that the power of predictive analytics isn’t in the hands of only a couple of statisticians.”
Spotfire 3.1 works in tandem with Spotfire Application Data Services to let companies analyze data from various sources, including SAP NetWeaver BI, SAP ERP, Salesforce.com, Siebel eBusiness Applications, and the Oracle E-Business Suite.
BriefingsDirect contributor Jennifer LeClaire provided editorial assistance and research on this post. She can be reached at http://www.linkedin.com/in/jleclaire and http://www.jenniferleclaire.com.You may also be interested in:
Cast Iron launches integration platform to help pull hybrid cloud models together
In a move to tackle a persistent cloud computing challenge, Cast Iron Systems just rolled out a new platform that aims to help companies large and small securely integrate public clouds, private clouds and on-premise applications.
Dubbed OmniConnect, the cloud integration solution offers a single platform rather than
multiple products or on-premise tools to accomplish cloud integrations.
Five pillars undergird OmniConnect: complete integrations, a complete cloud experience, reusability of connectivity and processes, and portable, embeddable, and brandable environments, and centralized cloud management.
"Cloud application use is exploding, but just because you like Salesforce.com doesn't mean you are going to throw out SAP, Oracle or other applications you have on-premise. It's a hybrid world where companies have a combination of cloud and on-premise locations," says Chandar Pattabhiram, vice president of Channel and Product Marketing for Cast Iron Systems. "You don't maximize the value of your cloud applications unless you get all the data into it – so you need integration."
Complete integrations
Integration can get complex in a hurry with a growing number of applications in the enterprise, such as Salesforce, Google Apps, WebEx and ADP. Companies could take a do-it-yourself approach but it won't scale over time. Companies could also use an on-demand vendor for cloud-to-cloud scenarios, or hire an on-premise integration firm. Cast Iron Systems, though, is pushing OmniConnect as a better solution.
"Fifty-six percent of CIOs in a Gartner survey said they are transitioning away from the cloud because too many choices make it too difficult," Pattabhiram says. "Our new platform is meant to solve this problem by bridging the on-premise and cloud worlds. We offer complete integrations that include data migration, process integration, and UI mashup capabilities."
OmniConnect, for example, lets SaaS applications access, cleanse, and synchronize data stored in legacy systems in real-time and completes processes such as quote-to-order, purchase-to-pay, and order-to-cash without leaving the Cast Iron OmniConnect environment. The platform can also mash up the data from disparate sources and display them in a single view without taking the data out of one application and putting it into another.
Users can configure their integration processes in the cloud, run them in a multi-tenant cloud-based environment, and monitor all integrations from a single cloud-based console. And the Cast Iron Secure Connector aims to overcome data security issues by offering a secure channel that exchanges encrypted or firewalled data between enterprise applications and Cast Iron’s multi-tenant cloud service.
Reusability, portability and management
Cast Iron also announced a new Connector Development Kit that works to streamline building connections to new applications and data sources. The kit allows IT gurus to re-use connectivity created in OmniConnect to snap in connections to public clouds, private clouds, and on-premise applications. OmniConnect also offers reusable templates of the most common processes.
Portability is another feature that Cast Iron is boasting about. The software lets users make integrations or the entire OmniConnect portable into any public cloud, private cloud or on-premise data center environment. Infrastructure providers can also embed and brand the platform as their own integration-as-a-service offering. ADP, Dell and Cisco are already reselling the service.
Finally, a cloud-based management console makes it possible for users to monitor multiple integrations across customer deployments in a single location. Management APIs are available for IT and SaaS providers to view the monitoring data within their private or public clouds. Cast Iron also announced support for Amazon Web Services customers through integration-as-a-service.
"Security and integration are the two biggest concerns cited in Gartner's study," says Pattabhiram. "That's why you see mega-brands partnering with us. They want to have an enterprise grade solution to help their customers adopt their cloud applications. There is significant value in having one platform rather than multiple solutions to bridge private cloud, public cloud and on-premise applications."
Dubbed OmniConnect, the cloud integration solution offers a single platform rather than
multiple products or on-premise tools to accomplish cloud integrations.Five pillars undergird OmniConnect: complete integrations, a complete cloud experience, reusability of connectivity and processes, and portable, embeddable, and brandable environments, and centralized cloud management.
"Cloud application use is exploding, but just because you like Salesforce.com doesn't mean you are going to throw out SAP, Oracle or other applications you have on-premise. It's a hybrid world where companies have a combination of cloud and on-premise locations," says Chandar Pattabhiram, vice president of Channel and Product Marketing for Cast Iron Systems. "You don't maximize the value of your cloud applications unless you get all the data into it – so you need integration."
Complete integrations
Integration can get complex in a hurry with a growing number of applications in the enterprise, such as Salesforce, Google Apps, WebEx and ADP. Companies could take a do-it-yourself approach but it won't scale over time. Companies could also use an on-demand vendor for cloud-to-cloud scenarios, or hire an on-premise integration firm. Cast Iron Systems, though, is pushing OmniConnect as a better solution.
"Fifty-six percent of CIOs in a Gartner survey said they are transitioning away from the cloud because too many choices make it too difficult," Pattabhiram says. "Our new platform is meant to solve this problem by bridging the on-premise and cloud worlds. We offer complete integrations that include data migration, process integration, and UI mashup capabilities."
Fifty-six percent of CIOs in a Gartner survey said they are transitioning away from the cloud because too many choices make it too difficult.
OmniConnect, for example, lets SaaS applications access, cleanse, and synchronize data stored in legacy systems in real-time and completes processes such as quote-to-order, purchase-to-pay, and order-to-cash without leaving the Cast Iron OmniConnect environment. The platform can also mash up the data from disparate sources and display them in a single view without taking the data out of one application and putting it into another.
Users can configure their integration processes in the cloud, run them in a multi-tenant cloud-based environment, and monitor all integrations from a single cloud-based console. And the Cast Iron Secure Connector aims to overcome data security issues by offering a secure channel that exchanges encrypted or firewalled data between enterprise applications and Cast Iron’s multi-tenant cloud service.
Reusability, portability and management
Cast Iron also announced a new Connector Development Kit that works to streamline building connections to new applications and data sources. The kit allows IT gurus to re-use connectivity created in OmniConnect to snap in connections to public clouds, private clouds, and on-premise applications. OmniConnect also offers reusable templates of the most common processes.
Portability is another feature that Cast Iron is boasting about. The software lets users make integrations or the entire OmniConnect portable into any public cloud, private cloud or on-premise data center environment. Infrastructure providers can also embed and brand the platform as their own integration-as-a-service offering. ADP, Dell and Cisco are already reselling the service.
There is significant value in having one platform rather than multiple solutions to bridge private cloud, public cloud and on-premise applications.
Finally, a cloud-based management console makes it possible for users to monitor multiple integrations across customer deployments in a single location. Management APIs are available for IT and SaaS providers to view the monitoring data within their private or public clouds. Cast Iron also announced support for Amazon Web Services customers through integration-as-a-service.
"Security and integration are the two biggest concerns cited in Gartner's study," says Pattabhiram. "That's why you see mega-brands partnering with us. They want to have an enterprise grade solution to help their customers adopt their cloud applications. There is significant value in having one platform rather than multiple solutions to bridge private cloud, public cloud and on-premise applications."
BriefingsDirect contributor Jennifer LeClaire provided editorial assistance and research on this post. She can be reached at http://www.linkedin.com/in/jleclaire and http://www.jenniferleclaire.com.You may also be interested in:
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Cloud Security Alliance research defines top threats and best paths to secure cloud computing
Security. It's one of the major issues that keeps cloud computing from working its way deeper and more quickly into the enterprise IT mainstream.
But what are the potential threats around using cloud services? How can companies make sure business processes and data remain secured in the cloud? And how can CIOs accurately assess the risks and benefits of cloud adoption strategies?
Hewlett-Packard (HP) and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) answer these and other questions in a new research report entitled, "Top Threats to Cloud Computing Report."
The report, which was highlighted during the Cloud Security Summit at the RSA conference this week, taps the knowledge of information security experts at 29 enterprises, solutions providers and consulting firms that deal with demanding and complex cloud environments. [Disclosure: HP is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
Mastering next-gen IT
As Cloud Security Alliance Founder Jim Reavis sees it, cloud services are the next generation of IT that enterprises must master – and it's imperative that companies understand and mitigate security threats that accompany the cloud.
"The objective of this report was to not only identify those threats which are most germane to IT organizations but also help organizations understand how to proactively protect themselves," Reavis said. "This is the first deliverable in our cloud threat research initiative, which will feature regular updates to reflect participation from a greater number of experts and to keep pace with the dynamic nature of new threats."
Cloud computing abuse
The Top Threats to Cloud Computing Report shines a light on vulnerabilities that threaten to hinder cloud service offerings from reaching their full potential. HP and the Cloud Security Alliance warn companies to be aware of the abuse and nefarious use of cloud computing. The report specifically points to the Zeus botnet and InfoStealing Trojan horses as a prime examples of malicious software that has compromised sensitive private resources in cloud environments.
Beyond malicious software, the report pegs sites that rely on multiple application programming interfaces (APIs) as typically representing the weakest security link. That's because one insecure API can impact a larger set of members using the evolving social Web, which presents data from disparate sources.
Rounding out the list of common cloud threats covered in the report are malicious insiders, shared technology vulnerabilities, data loss and leakage and account/service and traffic hijacking.
I'll be moderating a panel in San Francisco in conjunction with RSA later this week on the very subject of cloud security with Jeremiah Grossman, founder and Chief Technology Officer of WhiteHat Security; Chris Hoff, Director of Cloud & Virtualization Solutions at Cisco Systems and a Founding Member of the CSA, and Andy Ellis, Chief Security Architect at Akamai Technologies. [Disclosure Akamai is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
We'll be rebroadcasting the panel "live" with call-in for questions and answer at noon ET on March 31. More details to come.
For now, the RSA-debuted full report is available on the CSA Web site: http://cloudsecurityalliance.org/topthreats/csathreats.v1.0.pdf.
But what are the potential threats around using cloud services? How can companies make sure business processes and data remain secured in the cloud? And how can CIOs accurately assess the risks and benefits of cloud adoption strategies?
Hewlett-Packard (HP) and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) answer these and other questions in a new research report entitled, "Top Threats to Cloud Computing Report."
The report, which was highlighted during the Cloud Security Summit at the RSA conference this week, taps the knowledge of information security experts at 29 enterprises, solutions providers and consulting firms that deal with demanding and complex cloud environments. [Disclosure: HP is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
Mastering next-gen IT
As Cloud Security Alliance Founder Jim Reavis sees it, cloud services are the next generation of IT that enterprises must master – and it's imperative that companies understand and mitigate security threats that accompany the cloud.
"The objective of this report was to not only identify those threats which are most germane to IT organizations but also help organizations understand how to proactively protect themselves," Reavis said. "This is the first deliverable in our cloud threat research initiative, which will feature regular updates to reflect participation from a greater number of experts and to keep pace with the dynamic nature of new threats."
Cloud computing abuse
The Top Threats to Cloud Computing Report shines a light on vulnerabilities that threaten to hinder cloud service offerings from reaching their full potential. HP and the Cloud Security Alliance warn companies to be aware of the abuse and nefarious use of cloud computing. The report specifically points to the Zeus botnet and InfoStealing Trojan horses as a prime examples of malicious software that has compromised sensitive private resources in cloud environments.
Cloud services are the next generation of IT that enterprises must master – and it's imperative that companies understand and mitigate security threats that accompany the cloud.
Beyond malicious software, the report pegs sites that rely on multiple application programming interfaces (APIs) as typically representing the weakest security link. That's because one insecure API can impact a larger set of members using the evolving social Web, which presents data from disparate sources.
Rounding out the list of common cloud threats covered in the report are malicious insiders, shared technology vulnerabilities, data loss and leakage and account/service and traffic hijacking.
I'll be moderating a panel in San Francisco in conjunction with RSA later this week on the very subject of cloud security with Jeremiah Grossman, founder and Chief Technology Officer of WhiteHat Security; Chris Hoff, Director of Cloud & Virtualization Solutions at Cisco Systems and a Founding Member of the CSA, and Andy Ellis, Chief Security Architect at Akamai Technologies. [Disclosure Akamai is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
We'll be rebroadcasting the panel "live" with call-in for questions and answer at noon ET on March 31. More details to come.
For now, the RSA-debuted full report is available on the CSA Web site: http://cloudsecurityalliance.org/topthreats/csathreats.v1.0.pdf.
BriefingsDirect contributor Jennifer LeClaire provided editorial assistance and research on this post. She can be reached at http://www.linkedin.com/in/jleclaire and http://www.jenniferleclaire.com.You may also be interested in:
Monday, March 1, 2010
Open source solutions for SOA: Check your bias at the door
This guest post comes courtesy of Ronald Schmelzer, senior analyst at Zapthink.
By Ronald Schmelzer
Most experienced practitioners in Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) and Enterprise
Architecture (EA), including ourselves, would assert that architecture and implementation are not interdependent. That is to say that architecture expresses means for describing ways of doing things whereas implementations are specific ways of doing those things.
Doing any particular architecture doesn’t require using any particular implementation, and vice versa, implementing something a particular way doesn’t imply or require any specific architecture. As such, any good architect should know that the best solutions are always context specific – give the business, users, whomever the constituency is, the best solution based upon their needs rather than any particular assumption ahead of time.
Getting this truism out of the way, why is it then that so many IT organizations prematurely discard Open Source Software (OSS) from their SOA implementations? While OSS may not be suitable for all implementations all the time, they are increasingly becoming suitable and feasible for an increasing number of SOA implementations.
Open source, free software, and community development
First, it is important to get our definitions straight. As is very aptly defined in Wikipedia, open source software is “computer software for which the source code and certain other rights normally reserved for copyright holders are provided under a software license that meets the Open Source Definition or that is in the public domain. OSS licenses permit users to use, change, and improve the software, and to redistribute it in modified or unmodified forms.” OSS differs from commercial software in that the ownership, maintenance, and rights to change the software are not owned by a specific company or group of companies.
The term open source is frequently, although not always, used in conjunction with the idea of free software. In this terminology, free sometimes means that it costs nothing to acquire the license, but that’s not exactly how it’s defined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF). The FSF defines Free and open source software (F/OSS or FOSS) as the freedom to copy and re-use the software, or in other words, “free as in free speech, not as in free beer”. This means that FOSS licenses gives users the rights to copy, modify, share, redistribute, and otherwise contribute to the advancement of the technology, but doesn’t necessarily imply anything about total cost.
Muddying the waters is the idea of Commercial Open Source Software (COSS). In COSS, the community has rights to certain aspects of modifying, sharing, and enhancing the software whereas others are reserved for the company. We’ve seen many instances of COSS in the SOA landscape in particular, from firms who wish to have a “freemium” model or “Community Edition” products which are offered for free as an entry point, and commercially licensed and maintained products offered as a premium. So what’s the problem with OSS? Simply put, three big issues: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD).
OSS SOA FUD
Let’s start with uncertainty. From a SOA perspective, the big uncertainty on OSS rests on two main issues: Are there a sufficient number of OSS offerings to cover the scope of things we need for our SOA implementations, and are those OSS projects of sufficient quality to meet our needs? If only companies did indeed start with this question, they would quickly find that there are an increasing number of widely implemented, tested OSS solutions for a wide range of SOA development, infrastructure, and management needs.
For certain, if you are looking for products that offer so-called Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) functionality, then there are a plethora of Open Source solutions. Companies have successfully implemented Mule ESB, Apache Axis2, Apache Synapse and Apache ServiceMix.
For SOA development, there are a wide variety of OSS options, most notably the Eclipse project. Not only has IBM’s OSS contribution of Eclipse made major inroads throughout IT development, it has spawned many associated development frameworks, such as the Swordfish SOA framework and the Equinox OSGi bundling framework.
Many open source projects are integrated or built on top of the Eclipse platform. There are now even open source SOA registry and management solutions including Mule Galaxy, SOPERA, WSO2’s open source registry offering, and the Membrane SOA Management tool. There are a wide range of OSS Business Process Management (BPM) and BPEL runtime engines including ActiveBPEL, Apache ODE, Orchestra, and a plethora of others.
As a sum total, these tools have had tens of million downloads and hundreds of thousands of implementations. Furthermore, individuals and companies have poured tens of thousands of hours of development time and maintenance into these tools.
Are these of the same quality as tools from vendors with decades of product development history? You can’t make the blanket statement that implementations based on OSS are less robust than vendor solutions.
Many open source tools build upon the experience of users who have previously used commercial offerings and thus aim to mimic or improve the functionality and performance of those solutions.
Furthermore, just how stable are those vendor tools anyways? After a decade implementing one vendor’s infrastructure suite, you find that that vendor got acquired not once, but two or even three times as their acquirers in turn got acquired, with the final product set “mish-moshed” amongst a dozen other acquisitions with no firm roadmap, an ill-defined integration plan from the vendor, and license and maintenance fees that make little sense.
In many ways, the simplicity and lack of confusion of the OSS suite is making more sense given the chaos of the product portfolios in the rapidly consolidating vendor marketplace right now.
Early vendor death and consolidation chaos
This brings us to the other two issues raised on OSS solutions: fear and doubt. Brenda Michelson from Elemental Links did a very good job outlining some of the considerations for open source in the enterprise IT environment.
Many architects refuse to even consider OSS solutions out of the often unfounded fear that they are unsupported. While it is true that many good OSS solutions require paid support to achieve the response time and care necessary, we would argue that money is well spent.
With commercial companies providing support for OSS offerings you get the best of both worlds: community development, testing, and enhancement at low or no cost, and professional support whose time and value are known quantities.
Even if you chose a commercial vendor, you’re going to be paying for support anyways. In what respect are OSS solutions any worse off in this case? It is ludicrous to assert that a vendor’s solutions are of such a high quality that the need for support is less than that of OSS solutions.
In fact, we find the contrary. When you purchase commercial vendor offerings, you pay for the licenses, maintenance, and support, in addition to your integration costs, and you don’t even get the benefit of getting others’ contributions.
Much of the doubt on OSS is placed by vendors who have vested interests in making sure you continue to feed them millions of dollars of license and maintenance revenue. But given that many enterprise IT vendors are folding, getting acquired, or abandoning their product lines, we see a greater risk in towing a strictly commercial vendor line.
Without the source code and enhancements in the community, when a vendor gives up the ghost, stops developing their product, or gets “mish-moshed”, the code simply disappears. No one is there to support a dead company’s products or a dying product line.
In this regard, OSS presents less of a risk because the code is out there in the community, available for anyone to pick up. From a SOA perspective, you want to have as few dependencies as possible on your infrastructure or a single vendor’s solutions. As such, for many, OSS makes a whole lot of sense.
An OSS and SOA case study (courtesy of the SOA-C)
Recently, the SOA Consortium (SOA-C) had a case study contest to elicit the best SOA implementations and architecture design. One of the winners was BlueStar Energy, which implemented a relatively sizable SOA implementation entirely on OSS solutions.
Some of the lessons they learned were some of the things we often espouse: incremental delivery, standards-based interface, consumer heterogeneity, loose coupling, and, composability. If you read the case study, you can see that the design principles had a decidedly non-vendor bias. They wanted control over their environment, and this meant creating a specification that required implementation neutrality.
The consequence of the way that BlueStar designed their architecture is that they found that OSS solutions best fit the bill for their needs. Their Business Integration Suite consists of open source distributed, scalable and reliable components such as enterprise service bus, business process management system and messaging fabric.
The end result is that between the adoption of SOA, open source and offshore development, the company estimates saving $24 million over the course of five years. For many of our readers, the BlueStar case study probably describes your environment as well. The case study is worthy of a close read!
ZapThink take
We at ZapThink have no vested interest in espousing a particular position that OSS or commercial vendor offerings are inherently better than the other. As mentioned, all good architects need to consider the context for their implementations.
For some companies, a vendor approach is best (especially in mainframe-based legacy environments where OSS simply doesn’t exist). But for others, we believe that biases dominate the discussion. Enterprise architecture does not demand vendor solutions. You can choose to implement aspects of your EA entirely on your own. Or you can buy technology from a handful of vendors. Or you can grab open source solutions online. There’s no bias in the architecture – why do you have bias and why is there bias in the marketplace?
The best place to start is where BlueStar Energy started: focus on the goals and needs of the architecture first. Define your architecture in a vendor-neutral, implementation agnostic way. Then, when it does come time to consider your implementation, start with a gap analysis.
Which tools do you already have that suit the need that you don’t need to buy again? Which infrastructure and tools do you need to acquire to fill the gaps? For those gap fillers, consider OSS and vendor solutions equally and evaluate them on an equal footing. You might be surprised to find what truly fits the bill for your SOA implementation needs.
Check your FUD at the door. Make sure you aren’t losing an advantage by prematurely eliminating OSS from your SOA infrastructure mix.
SOA and EA Training, Certification,
and Networking Events
In need of vendor-neutral, architect-level SOA and EA training? ZapThink's Licensed ZapThink Architect (LZA) SOA Boot Camps provide four days of intense, hands-on architect-level SOA training and certification.
Advanced SOA architects might want to enroll in ZapThink's SOA Governance and Security training and certification courses. Or, are you just looking to network with your peers, interact with experts and pundits, and schmooze on SOA after hours? Join us at an upcoming ZapForum event. Find out more and register for these events at http://www.zapthink.com/eventreg.html.
By Ronald Schmelzer
Most experienced practitioners in Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) and Enterprise
Architecture (EA), including ourselves, would assert that architecture and implementation are not interdependent. That is to say that architecture expresses means for describing ways of doing things whereas implementations are specific ways of doing those things.Doing any particular architecture doesn’t require using any particular implementation, and vice versa, implementing something a particular way doesn’t imply or require any specific architecture. As such, any good architect should know that the best solutions are always context specific – give the business, users, whomever the constituency is, the best solution based upon their needs rather than any particular assumption ahead of time.
Getting this truism out of the way, why is it then that so many IT organizations prematurely discard Open Source Software (OSS) from their SOA implementations? While OSS may not be suitable for all implementations all the time, they are increasingly becoming suitable and feasible for an increasing number of SOA implementations.
For more information on virtualization and how it provides a foundation for Private Cloud, plan to attend the HP Cloud Virtual Conference taking place in March. To register for this event, go to:
Asia, Pacific, Japan - March 2
Europe Middle East and Africa - March 3
Americas - March 4
Open source, free software, and community development
First, it is important to get our definitions straight. As is very aptly defined in Wikipedia, open source software is “computer software for which the source code and certain other rights normally reserved for copyright holders are provided under a software license that meets the Open Source Definition or that is in the public domain. OSS licenses permit users to use, change, and improve the software, and to redistribute it in modified or unmodified forms.” OSS differs from commercial software in that the ownership, maintenance, and rights to change the software are not owned by a specific company or group of companies.
The FSF defines Free and open source software (F/OSS or FOSS) as the freedom to copy and re-use the software, or in other words, “free as in free speech, not as in free beer”.
The term open source is frequently, although not always, used in conjunction with the idea of free software. In this terminology, free sometimes means that it costs nothing to acquire the license, but that’s not exactly how it’s defined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF). The FSF defines Free and open source software (F/OSS or FOSS) as the freedom to copy and re-use the software, or in other words, “free as in free speech, not as in free beer”. This means that FOSS licenses gives users the rights to copy, modify, share, redistribute, and otherwise contribute to the advancement of the technology, but doesn’t necessarily imply anything about total cost.
Muddying the waters is the idea of Commercial Open Source Software (COSS). In COSS, the community has rights to certain aspects of modifying, sharing, and enhancing the software whereas others are reserved for the company. We’ve seen many instances of COSS in the SOA landscape in particular, from firms who wish to have a “freemium” model or “Community Edition” products which are offered for free as an entry point, and commercially licensed and maintained products offered as a premium. So what’s the problem with OSS? Simply put, three big issues: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD).
OSS SOA FUD
Let’s start with uncertainty. From a SOA perspective, the big uncertainty on OSS rests on two main issues: Are there a sufficient number of OSS offerings to cover the scope of things we need for our SOA implementations, and are those OSS projects of sufficient quality to meet our needs? If only companies did indeed start with this question, they would quickly find that there are an increasing number of widely implemented, tested OSS solutions for a wide range of SOA development, infrastructure, and management needs.
For certain, if you are looking for products that offer so-called Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) functionality, then there are a plethora of Open Source solutions. Companies have successfully implemented Mule ESB, Apache Axis2, Apache Synapse and Apache ServiceMix.
You can’t make the blanket statement that implementations based on OSS are less robust than vendor solutions.
For SOA development, there are a wide variety of OSS options, most notably the Eclipse project. Not only has IBM’s OSS contribution of Eclipse made major inroads throughout IT development, it has spawned many associated development frameworks, such as the Swordfish SOA framework and the Equinox OSGi bundling framework.
Many open source projects are integrated or built on top of the Eclipse platform. There are now even open source SOA registry and management solutions including Mule Galaxy, SOPERA, WSO2’s open source registry offering, and the Membrane SOA Management tool. There are a wide range of OSS Business Process Management (BPM) and BPEL runtime engines including ActiveBPEL, Apache ODE, Orchestra, and a plethora of others.
As a sum total, these tools have had tens of million downloads and hundreds of thousands of implementations. Furthermore, individuals and companies have poured tens of thousands of hours of development time and maintenance into these tools.
Are these of the same quality as tools from vendors with decades of product development history? You can’t make the blanket statement that implementations based on OSS are less robust than vendor solutions.
Many open source tools build upon the experience of users who have previously used commercial offerings and thus aim to mimic or improve the functionality and performance of those solutions.
Furthermore, just how stable are those vendor tools anyways? After a decade implementing one vendor’s infrastructure suite, you find that that vendor got acquired not once, but two or even three times as their acquirers in turn got acquired, with the final product set “mish-moshed” amongst a dozen other acquisitions with no firm roadmap, an ill-defined integration plan from the vendor, and license and maintenance fees that make little sense.
In many ways, the simplicity and lack of confusion of the OSS suite is making more sense given the chaos of the product portfolios in the rapidly consolidating vendor marketplace right now.
Early vendor death and consolidation chaos
This brings us to the other two issues raised on OSS solutions: fear and doubt. Brenda Michelson from Elemental Links did a very good job outlining some of the considerations for open source in the enterprise IT environment.
Many architects refuse to even consider OSS solutions out of the often unfounded fear that they are unsupported. While it is true that many good OSS solutions require paid support to achieve the response time and care necessary, we would argue that money is well spent.
With commercial companies providing support for OSS offerings you get the best of both worlds: community development, testing, and enhancement at low or no cost, and professional support whose time and value are known quantities.
Even if you chose a commercial vendor, you’re going to be paying for support anyways. In what respect are OSS solutions any worse off in this case? It is ludicrous to assert that a vendor’s solutions are of such a high quality that the need for support is less than that of OSS solutions.
In fact, we find the contrary. When you purchase commercial vendor offerings, you pay for the licenses, maintenance, and support, in addition to your integration costs, and you don’t even get the benefit of getting others’ contributions.
When you purchase commercial vendor offerings, you pay for the licenses, maintenance, and support, in addition to your integration costs, and you don’t even get the benefit of getting others’ contributions.
Much of the doubt on OSS is placed by vendors who have vested interests in making sure you continue to feed them millions of dollars of license and maintenance revenue. But given that many enterprise IT vendors are folding, getting acquired, or abandoning their product lines, we see a greater risk in towing a strictly commercial vendor line.
Without the source code and enhancements in the community, when a vendor gives up the ghost, stops developing their product, or gets “mish-moshed”, the code simply disappears. No one is there to support a dead company’s products or a dying product line.
In this regard, OSS presents less of a risk because the code is out there in the community, available for anyone to pick up. From a SOA perspective, you want to have as few dependencies as possible on your infrastructure or a single vendor’s solutions. As such, for many, OSS makes a whole lot of sense.
An OSS and SOA case study (courtesy of the SOA-C)
Recently, the SOA Consortium (SOA-C) had a case study contest to elicit the best SOA implementations and architecture design. One of the winners was BlueStar Energy, which implemented a relatively sizable SOA implementation entirely on OSS solutions.
Some of the lessons they learned were some of the things we often espouse: incremental delivery, standards-based interface, consumer heterogeneity, loose coupling, and, composability. If you read the case study, you can see that the design principles had a decidedly non-vendor bias. They wanted control over their environment, and this meant creating a specification that required implementation neutrality.
The consequence of the way that BlueStar designed their architecture is that they found that OSS solutions best fit the bill for their needs. Their Business Integration Suite consists of open source distributed, scalable and reliable components such as enterprise service bus, business process management system and messaging fabric.
The end result is that between the adoption of SOA, open source and offshore development, the company estimates saving $24 million over the course of five years. For many of our readers, the BlueStar case study probably describes your environment as well. The case study is worthy of a close read!
ZapThink take
We at ZapThink have no vested interest in espousing a particular position that OSS or commercial vendor offerings are inherently better than the other. As mentioned, all good architects need to consider the context for their implementations.
For some companies, a vendor approach is best (especially in mainframe-based legacy environments where OSS simply doesn’t exist). But for others, we believe that biases dominate the discussion. Enterprise architecture does not demand vendor solutions. You can choose to implement aspects of your EA entirely on your own. Or you can buy technology from a handful of vendors. Or you can grab open source solutions online. There’s no bias in the architecture – why do you have bias and why is there bias in the marketplace?
The best place to start is where BlueStar Energy started: focus on the goals and needs of the architecture first. Define your architecture in a vendor-neutral, implementation agnostic way. Then, when it does come time to consider your implementation, start with a gap analysis.
Which tools do you already have that suit the need that you don’t need to buy again? Which infrastructure and tools do you need to acquire to fill the gaps? For those gap fillers, consider OSS and vendor solutions equally and evaluate them on an equal footing. You might be surprised to find what truly fits the bill for your SOA implementation needs.
Check your FUD at the door. Make sure you aren’t losing an advantage by prematurely eliminating OSS from your SOA infrastructure mix.
This guest post comes courtesy of Ronald Schmelzer, senior analyst at Zapthink.
SPECIAL PARTNER OFFER
SOA and EA Training, Certification,
and Networking Events
In need of vendor-neutral, architect-level SOA and EA training? ZapThink's Licensed ZapThink Architect (LZA) SOA Boot Camps provide four days of intense, hands-on architect-level SOA training and certification.
Advanced SOA architects might want to enroll in ZapThink's SOA Governance and Security training and certification courses. Or, are you just looking to network with your peers, interact with experts and pundits, and schmooze on SOA after hours? Join us at an upcoming ZapForum event. Find out more and register for these events at http://www.zapthink.com/eventreg.html.
You may also be interested in:
Friday, February 26, 2010
HP rolls out data center services aimed at boosting IT ROI for global SMBs
For more information on virtualization and how it provides a foundation for Private Cloud, plan to attend the HP Cloud Virtual Conference taking place in March. To register for this event, go to:
Asia, Pacific, Japan - March 2
Europe Middle East and Africa - March 3
Americas - March 4
The portfolio is designed to improve efficiency and increase IT budget
flexibility, while mitigating risks and maximizing return on investment (ROI) from existing IT skills and assets. The services also target dealing with rapid change and the simplifying of management of multi-vendor environments. HP also launched procurement options for custom integration operations and improvement services. [Disclosure: HP is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]“Our new services are based on drivers that impact owners of small- to mid-sized data centers,” said Ian Jagger, worldwide marketing manager of Infrastructure and Operations for HP’s Technology Services Group. “These services help our customers deal with the challenge of managing IT complexity and sprawl, space and infrastructure limitations, and limited IT budgets and staff.”
Improving operational efficiency
Recognizing the SMB organization's requirements around speed, efficiency and 24/7 resource accessibility with shared virtual IT services, HP is delivering four new services designed to help clients gain tighter environment-wide control and broader, deeper visibility into support-related functions.
HP Multivendor Support Services works to help clients increase service levels and reduce the complexity and costs of managing heterogeneous IT environments. By exercising global buying power among vendors and suppliers, HP said it can effectively lower the cost of support contracts.
These services are entirely differentiated because only licensed engineers can deliver these services and HP’s competitors don’t have licensed engineers.
“We have been offering multi-vendor support solutions to our customers,” says Dionne Morgan, worldwide solutions marketing manager for HP’s Technology Services group. “In addition to IBM and Dell servers, we also now support Sun servers and Sun Solaris 10 for HP ProLiant servers. And for HP Integrity servers we’re now supporting Novell, SUSE Linux and Microsoft Windows Server 2008.”
On the operational efficiency front, HP also announced HP Insight Remote Support to monitor a customer’s environment around the clock and provide remote diagnostics, troubleshooting and a support solution. HP added support for VMware virtual environments. Meanwhile, HP Active Chat offers real-time Web chat support for problem and the HP Data Center Training Symposium will move to help companies develop a custom training plan to increase the effectiveness of IT staff.
Increasing computing capacity
HP also announced value assessment services structured for data centers up to 5,000 square feet in size. The services work to help SMBs find ways to increase computing capacity and cut energy costs.
The new services include Basic Capacity Analysis for Smaller Footprints Assessment, Infrastructure Condition and Capacity Analysis for Smaller Footprints Assessment, and Energy Efficiency Analysis for Smaller Footprints Assessment.
“These services are entirely differentiated because only licensed engineers can deliver these services and HP’s competitors don’t have licensed engineers,” Jagger says. “Our competitors have to partner with specialist companies to deliver these services. We’re also restructuring these services to be sold by our channel partners.”
Offering flexible purchase options
Finally, HP promises to make it easier for SMBs to procure value services that will help them better manage limited resources and drive business value from their technology infrastructure through HP Units of Service and HP Proactive Select Services.
“We’ve taken the customized services available from our technical services portfolio and converted them into what we call Units of Service,” Jagger says. “A Unit of Service is a deliverable at a highly granular level. Any given custom service could be made up of multiple Units of Service.”
HP Proactive Select Services let clients move to a variable budget model, acquiring expert resources on-demand to address changing data center needs.
HP Units of Service gives SMBs access to value services from HP through channel partners that aim to maximize ROI and set the stage for business growth. For example, SMBs can tap into HP custom data center consulting services such as relocation, integration, operations and improvement.
HP Proactive Select Services let clients move to a variable budget model, acquiring expert resources on-demand to address changing data center needs. HP has included Server Firmware Update Installation Service, Technical Online Seminars, Virtual Tape Library Health Check and LeftHand SAN/iQ Update Service to its portfolio.
“With these services, companies can focus their IT staff on strategic IT investments that differentiate them in the marketplace,” Jagger says. “What you’re seeing here is more and more services brought to customers at a value level through the channel that allows them to focus where they can drive the greatest ROI from staff.”
The SMB IT services and support market is ripe for efficiency and lower total costs. And the SMB arena is also a prime user for upcoming cloud and hybrid-sourced services. So now everything as a service can go anywhere.
BriefingsDirect contributor Jennifer LeClaire provided editorial assistance and research on this post. She can be reached at http://www.linkedin.com/in/jleclaire and http://www.jenniferleclaire.com.
For more information on virtualization and how it provides a foundation for Private Cloud, plan to attend the HP Cloud Virtual Conference taking place in March. To register for this event, go to:
Asia, Pacific, Japan - March 2
Europe Middle East and Africa - March 3
Americas - March 4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
