Welcome to
Virtualization and Beyond
Cage Match: IT Simplicity vs. IT Capability
Contributed by Michael Thompson, Director, Systems Management Product Marketing, SolarWinds
The Holy Grail, the Fountain of Youth and simple IT systems with no
compromise in capabilities-all things that man has quested after for
years, but has never been able to find.
While IT vendors have offered up
a huge range of IT solutions, there are always tradeoffs to be made
between the capabilities (e.g., how many features it has, how many
environments it supports, how many things it integrates with, how it
scales, etc.) and the simplicity or ease of use of the system. As a
general rule, the more it does, the harder it is to make it simple for
the user to operate. So, this is where the cage match comes in: I
started wondering what the market has told us about which
approach-simplicity versus capability-wins.
For starters, we can
disqualify the extremes of both approaches-extremely simple but no real
functionality or ultimately capable but impossible to implement or use.
With that, let's take a look at three technology areas to see what we
can learn: hyperconverged systems, cloud and IT management.
Hyper-converged Infrastructure
There
are two main flavors of hyper-converged infrastructure-the prebuilt,
preconfigured appliance type (e.g., Nutanix, Simplivity, Scale
Computing, etc.) and the standardized/tested architecture approach
(e.g., EVO:Rail). Both are intended to make it easy to start up a
compute infrastructure, including the virtualization, server and storage
elements, very quickly and simply. Then, when you want to add another
VM, there is often an "easy button" or the equivalent.
So, here we
have a classic capability versus simplicity example-the hyper-converged
systems can definitely simplify installation, configuration and
operations of the environment, but the trade-offs are you can't optimize
the system for different workloads, you are stuck with a single
hardware vendor when you want to expand for more capacity and while it
integrates well internally, integration to an existing environment isn't
always a top priority of the vendors. However, for many companies,
these problems aren't that important. They may find managing an IT
environment challenging and expensive and are thus willing to give
something up for that simplicity and ease of use.
That segment of
the market is all about hyperconverged infrastructure and related
vendors tend to be seeing very strong growth. What you don't see very
often is mid- or large-scale datacenters swapping out there existing
infrastructure and replacing it with hyper-converged ones. So, in this
case and at this time, my view is that simplicity is driving strong
growth in a segment of the market, but capability will remain the
dominant player in the market for the near-term.
Result: I'd call this a draw.
Cloud
Cloud
has been the hot topic for a long time now-Amazon Web Services launched
in 2006. Every year since then, the demise of on-premises
infrastructure has been predicted. This hasn't been all hype as cloud
implementations have been growing substantially over time, but this
should still be put in perspective. In a presentation by Michael Cote
leveraging data from Gartner and Goldman Sachs, he shows that the cloud
IaaS and PaaS markets are expected to grow at a 30 percent 5-year CAGR,
compared to only 3 percent 5-year CAGR for traditional IT spending.
Other analysts have even higher growth predictions for cloud markets.
But in absolute terms, the Cloud IaaS and PaaS markets are predicted to
be $21 billion in 2015 versus $312 billion for the traditional IT
market.
While there is clearly a shift going on with more new
investment moving to cloud, there is a long way to go before it replaces
traditional IT systems. This is due to a number of factors. First,
while cloud can be much cheaper for short-term capacity, it can also be
more expensive as a permanent replacement for well-optimized on-premises
capacity. There is also a loss of control over both performance and
security in a public cloud. For example, cloud vendors generally only
provide limited performance data and are only held to SLA agreements.
These contracts and SLAs also typically include very limited financial
exposure for the cloud vendor if something goes wrong. So, if there is a
big financial impact resulting from application performance problems,
those will be borne by the cloud user, not the cloud vendor.
Still,
the simplicity of just outsourcing IT to a cloud vendor and consuming
the services as you need them can meet a lot of needs. Overall, the
disparate growth rates tell a story that the simplicity provided by
cloud offerings is very appealing to many companies.
Result: By split decision, I have to go with cloud and simplicity.
IT Monitoring and Management
The
scope of management can be huge, including different platforms (e.g.,
Windows, Linux, Unix, Mainframe), technical disciplines (e.g.,
application, network, database, storage, virtualization, help desk,
desktop, security, etc.) and vendors (e.g., Dell versus HP servers,
NetApp versus EMC arrays, VMware versus Hyper-V hypervisors, etc.). All
this diversity can make management extremely complex. In fact, many of
the early offerings attempted to cover a large number of these
permutations in a single product or framework. As a result of these
broad capabilities, complexity often went through the roof. Legacy Big 4
solutions often took months or years to implement by some of the most
expensive consultants on the planet, and even then, they often failed.
That
provided an opening for a new generation of solutions from companies
like SolarWinds, ServiceNow and Splunk that really focus on simplifying
complex problems. Part of this simplification does involve limiting the
technical capabilities in some areas. For example, if you want detailed
monitoring of Mainframe, OS/400, Windows and Solaris all in the same
product, you will probably have to go with a more complex solution from
IBM or CA. However, if you can succeed by monitoring for Windows, Linux
and Unix systems, SolarWinds or other similar companies should have
everything you need.
Admittedly, the legacy players can see the
writing on the wall and are working to either build or buy new solutions
that are easier to use, but it can be tough to complete against your
own profitable install base. SolarWinds, ServiceNow and Splunk have all
had multiple years of double digit growth, while as a group, the legacy
vendors have had flat or declining market share.
Result: Simplicity by a knockout.
As
a society, we have come to expect more. We want to have our cake and
eat it too. In the IT market, it's pretty clear that strong, but
targeted functional capabilities combined with market-leading simplicity
is a winning combination. The question is: what will be simplified
next?
##
About the Author
Michael Thompson, Director, Systems Management Product Marketing, SolarWinds.
Michael has worked in the IT management
industry for more than 14 years, including leading product management teams and
portfolios in the storage and virtualization/cloud spaces for IBM. He holds a
master of business administration and a bachelor's degree in chemical
engineering.
Make sure to also read, "The Hybrid Cloud - Choose Wisely" and "App-Centric and Admin-Centric -- Too Much to Ask?"