Recent Conversation with the Founder of Tolly Group

This morning I had a brief and interesting exchange with the founder of the Tolly Group Kevin Tolly.  Because Kevin sent this exchange to my blogging email account my assumption was that he intended it to be added to the blog.  Kevin was responding to the tweets posted below above the email exchange, he was even kind enough to correct my spelling which was quite convenient, I’ll be sure to send my future emails to him first for editing.  I’ve reordered the emails top to bottom in chronological order following the tweets that prompted the exchange.

Original tweets:

RT @********: New post summarizing a new Tolly Group report http://bit.ly/d1EFaJ < enough with the @TollyGroup #failures Seriously

@jonisick Let me know what specifically you have issues with in this http://bit.ly/d1EFaJ - #analystsprofiling #failure

@******** I haven't even looked yet but thanks to @tollygroups open bias total technical inaccuracy and HP funding I don't have to. #bs

@******** HP makes some great products, go have them tested by a real non-biased analyst. @tollyGroup is an absolute #joke 

The person I was conversing with is extremely technically savvy and I was also not questioning the product.  Instead I’m questioning the value of anything published by Tolly after seeing the recent reports they’ve released on UCS which have been shredded repeatedly by engineers, bloggers, and vendors.  Remember these are my opinions and posted on my personal blog as such.

The exchange with Tolly’s founder:

Dear Sir,

It has come to my attention that you have certain unspecified issues with our recently-published report on HP's X3820 offering. Would you be so kind as to advise me on the specific issues you have with this report?  http://www.tolly.com/DocDetail.aspx?DocNumber=210122

Cordially,

Kevin Tolly

Founder

___________________________________________________________

Kevin,

I have not looked at the specific report yet, and most likely will not. Tolly has proven through a series of recent reports to be extremely biased and technically innacurate. HP is spending quite a bit of money with Tolly to test specific equipment in specific ways to show their strengths and others weaknesses.

After digging through the HP funded UCS reports from Tolly it's obvious that Tolly is willing to be as innacurate as the paying customer would like and test equipment that they have not thoroughly taken the time to understand.

Tests like your recent set completely tarnish any idea of independant accurate testing from Tolly, and because of that I only read the reports when I need to speak to the innacuracies.

Joe

___________________________________________________________

Dear Mr Onisick,

I repeat my request. You have made public comments about a specific report. If you believe there to be inaccurate information in that report, I would be pleased to review your concerns.

Otherwise, I would think it prudent to refrain from criticizing a report that you admit that you have not read. Please also be aware that public comments such as yours can be viewed as libelous.

Cordially,

Kevin Tolly

P.S. Please spell check: independent and inaccurate are spelled inaccurately in your message.

___________________________________________________________

Kevin,

I greatly appreciate the threat, thanks. Please take a look back at my comments and you'll notice I made no specific comments about that particular report. I'm sure both your time and your lawyers time can be best spent elsewhere.

Joe

Summary:

People need to find better things to do with their time.  If you’d like a great overview of what vendor funded independent testing is actually worth take a look at Dave Alexander’s blog on the subject: http://www.unifiedcomputingblog.com/?p=161.

Welcome to the New Site!

Today Define the Cloud officially transfers here to the new hosted site.  It was time for an upgrade from the wordpress.com hosted blog.  Through privately hosting I’ll be able to provide additional site content and functionality as things progress.

If you find any issues, broken links, or links pointing back to wordpress.com please use the contact info on the about the author page to let me know.  Don’t forget to sign up for email and or RSS updates, we won’t be moving again anytime soon.

Learning from FaceBook's failures

In the interest of honesty I’ll start this post by saying I’m not a fan of FaceBook and never have been.  This is based on two major things:

This post however is not that broad in scope, it’s all about what we can learn from FaceBook’s privacy failures and how we can apply that to information and services we decide to place on the web and in the cloud.  I’m also not stating that FaceBook is in any way a cloud provider, the closest cloud definition FaceBook could be provided is FaaS (Failure as a Service.)  That being said FaceBook is a web based service providing an online tool for things you used to do offline (remember the family address book and the yearly holiday card?)

Lately there has been a lot of buzz around FaceBook’s latest major privacy infringement, pushing/selling your data to 3rd party services in the interest of ‘enhancing your user experience.’  The main issue with what FaceBook has done is not the addition of services which may enhance your experience, or even the privacy sacrificed to get those enhancements, it’s about the way they pushed this using an ‘opt-out’ model, rather than an ‘opt-in’ model.

If the advanced personalization features of FaceBook were actually a benefit to the end user than opt-in would have been the way to push them.  FaceBook would have provided you a pop-up window detailing the benefits of the new service and the way in which it was done, and you would have happily accepted.  Because the new features are really just a pretty face on a new way for FaceBook to profit from the information you store in your profile they chose an opt-out model and obscured the ability to disable the feature behind a complex non-documented privacy setting hierarchy that requires a PHD to navigate (the complexity of FaceBook’s privacy policy and options system has been well documented in several other posts, if you have a good link post it in the comments.)

Since this announcement several IT professionals, myself included have publicly deleted their accounts to spread awareness.  The hope is that awareness makes it to the average end-user who has no clue about privacy dangers.  From my perspective it’s even more important that this information reach children and teens and that they learn the issues with too much public data.  Several young people will have a rude awakening when they sit across the desk from a manager during an interview and she/he turns their monitor around to show the job candidate a series of highly unprofessional blogs, pictures, videos, etc from FaceBook and other sites that are the reason the candidate won’t be getting the job.  As a side note to that, marking your profile ‘private’ or deleting it won’t be of any use, FaceBook’s privacy settings won’t help and any information that touches the web can be retrieved in some way regardless of deletion (http://www.archive.org/index.php for instance.)

So what’s this got to do with cloud?

FaceBook is just one example of privacy and security concerns with placing data/information in web based services or moving services to the cloud.  Another great example would be Gmail.  When checking your Gmail through a web browser you’re presented with advertisements targeted at you based on email content.  I’m actually a fan of this on the surface, I get non-intrusive text based ads that are typically somewhat relevant to me, this pays for the free service I’m using.  Now if Google took that one step further and sold keyword lists from my email history to advertisers that would be a different story (I’m not saying they do or don’t, if I was aware that they did I would close my account publicly as well.)  The same could be applied to cloud based business services such as SalesForce.com, if they started cross referencing your business data with other hosted companies and selling that it would be a major concern (again not saying they do or don’t.)

As you decide to use web based services, cloud based or not, for business and personal purposes you need to carefully assess how the data is encrypted, secured, backed up and used.  You need to also be very aware of changes to the privacy policies and End User License Agreements (EULA.)  This is no small task as these policies are typically lengthy and change frequently.  In every case remember that being skeptical is your best tool.  If I walked up to you on the street and told you that for just $100.00 I could teach you how to be a millionaire you’d laugh in my face, so why trust a company that says they can give you the world for $0.05 per Gigabyte?

Summary:

This is not intended as an anti-cloud rant, if you look around my blog you’ll see that I’m a definite endorser of cloud architectures in all shapes and forms.  The concept here is that you need to carefully assess both what you move to the cloud and where you move it.  Throughout the history of the data center we as an industry have had a tendency to make it work first and worry about security and privacy later.  Fantastic security engineers and researchers are working hard to change this behavior, help them out.  There is a saying in carpentry that you should always ‘measure twice, cut once’ apply the same to data center and cloud migration strategies.

What the iPad means to cloud computing

ipad_with_keyboard

Let me preface is by saying I am far from an Apple fan boy, in fact I would consider myself the exact opposite.  I don't like their business tactics (iTunes trying to force Safari down my throat for example) or their hardware lock-in for their laptops.  I would never buy a Mac as a PC or laptop replacement.  Most of all I despise the smug pretentiousness that owning Apple products seems to breed.

That being said I just bought an iPad; I fell victim to it's charms while fiddling with a friends at a BBQ. The device is as sleek and elegant as you could ask for, and it definitely has some cool factor. The responsiveness of the touch screen and the potential for interaction with the device are just phenomenal.  For instance when reading the illustrated iPad version of specific book formats you can watch the pictures respond to you moving the device.  The applications for this type of thing are endless (think therapy for special needs children for one.)

What finally convinced me to get over the 'it won't replace my laptop' and 'it doesn't have USB ports etc.' arguments I’d had were that I realized that it isn't intended to, and it shouldn't respectively.  Why tether down to USB cables when I can wirelessly do everything on my Wi-Fi network?  I don't need a laptop replacement, I want something to supplement my laptop.  For instance when I'm watching TV I don't want
to break out a laptop to check my email, update my blog, or respond to a Twitter message, instead I grab my iPad and I'm set without adjusting position and flipping a screen.  The iPad is what Apple does best simple interactive devices.

Now that being said what does this mean for cloud computing?  The answer to that came to me the first time I docked the iPad.  Plugging my toy (iPad) into it's keyboard docking station it sat upright charging with a good size High definition screen and a full size keyboard.  Seeing that it came to me that this is the future of the dummy terminal.  I can carry around an iPad for light use and fun while traveling or out, and when I get to my desk at work or home set it into a docking station and use it as a Virtual Desktop Terminal connected to backend Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) system.  Need more screen real estate?  Use the VGA dongle.  I don't need the full PC functionality on my iPad because it can front end a power user virtual machine for me to do the heavy lifting.

Devices like this make all varieties of cloud services more attractive to individual end users.  I can access my Gmail from anywhere, my iTunes music will follow suit.  Pushing my productivity suite into a services offering allows me to access my work anywhere, and any number of companies will give me free cloud storage.

That covers most of my personal use, attaching to a corporate virtual desktop would cover most of my business needs. At that point there's less to carry, less to worry about, less to lose in the event of a hardware failure, and no sacrifice of functionality.

At $499.00 in the US for the base model that compares nicely with thin clients that range from about $300 - $1000 US.

I think my favorite iPad selling point is that I typed this blog from my iPad in a cramped coach seat on a flight, I can't even open the lid of the laptop I travel with in this seat, and it was finished nearly as fast as it would have been on my laptop.

65512c96f580f456_f

Objectivity

I came across a blog recently that peaked my interest.  The post was from Nate at TechOpsGuys (http://bit.ly/9PxZQV) and it purports to explain the networking deficiencies of UCS.  The problem with the posts explanation is that it’s based off of The Tolly Report on HP vs. UCS (http://bit.ly/bRQW2g) which has been shown to be a flawed test funded by HP.  Cisco was of course invited to participate, but this is really just lip service as HP funded the project and designed the test in order to show specific results, typically vendor’s will opt out in this scenario.

There were three typical reactions from the Tolly Report:

The TechOpsGuys post mentioned above will have the same types of reactions.  Lover’s of HP will swallow it whole heartedly, major Cisco fans will write it and TechOpsGuys off, and the unbiased will seek more info to make an informed decision.

I initially began writing a response to the post, but stopped short when I realized two things:

Nate is admittedly biased towards Cisco and has been for 10 years according to the post.  Nate read the Tolly report and assumed it was spot on because he already believes that Cisco makes bad technology.  Nate didn’t take the time to fact check or do research, he just regurgitated bad information.

This is not a post about Nate, or about HP vs. Cisco, it’s about objectivity.  As IT professionals it’s easy to get caught up in the vendor wars, but unless you’re a vendor it’s never beneficial.  Everyone will have their favorites but just because you prefer one over the other doesn’t mean you should never look at what the other vendor is doing.

If you’re a consultant, reseller, integrator, or customer you’re most powerful ally is options.  Options to choose best-of-breed, option to price multiple vendors, option to switch vendors when it suites your customer.  Throwing away an entire set of options due to a specific vendor bias is a major disadvantage.  Every major vendor has some great products, some bad products, and some in the middle.  Every major vendor plays marketing games, and teases with roadmaps.  It’s part of the business.

If a major vendor makes a market transition into a new area it’s beneficial to just about everyone.  The product itself may be a better fit for the customer, the new product may force price drops in existing vendors products, the new product may drive new innovation into the field which will shortly be adopted by the existing vendors.  The list goes on.

Summary:

As IT professionals objectivity is one of our key strengths, sacrifice it due to bias and your making a mistake.  When you see blogs, articles, reports, tests that emphatically favor one product over another take them with a grain of salt and do your own research.

If you have engineer in your title or job role you shouldn’t be making major product decisions based on feelings, PowerPoint, or PDF.  Real hands on and raw data (with a knowledge of how the data was gathered and why) are key tools to making informed decisions.

What is the biggest barrier to your move into the cloud?

Take the poll:

http://polls.linkedin.com/p/83955/edtrt