next »

[isthisthingon]

http://www.extranetevolution.com/extranet_evolution/2010/01/20-of-firms-will-own-no-it-assets-by-2012.html

I don't think this will happen on schedule, to say the least.  But    is increasingly becoming the choice for startups (Google Apps, Zoho, Salesforce.com, etc.) and the next generation of business will be weened on SaaS.

Weened on SaaS 

[perkiset]

Just a titch hyperbolic IMO ... IT will still need to update/upgrade the Dell/Mac/Wyse thin client sitting on Dilbert's desk.I think it's accurate to say that firms will have no server infrastructure or perhaps a limited amount of IT ... but what are they classing desktops or desktop mechanisms as? If everyone is running around with an iPad to access the cloud, doesn't that fall under the IT budget as does the salary of the bonehead assigned to take care of the users?

Definitely on the right track though.

[perkiset]

  is increasingly becoming the choice for startups

Indeed ... or groups that are simply moving. Why tear down and rebuild that phone system? Why worry about the server cluster? Move it to the cloud and call it a day.

And send them my way when they need to go ... 

[nop_90]

Article makes absolutely not sense at all.

For starters how does he define an "IT asset" ?
Cellphones,personally owned laptops,ipads according to the article are not "IT assets".
And then he starts spouting off about how this is because of "the cloud". WTF

Anyway guy who made the statement wants to appear "wise" and wants to combine as many "catch phrases" in his prediction as possible.

An ipad, or some smart phones are more powerful computing wise then most desktops 10+ years ago.
So "computing power" is being transferred from "IT" assets to "mobile devices".

[isthisthingon]

Yeah the article itself is a little tedious.  I just Googled "A fifth of enterprises will hold no IT assets by 2012 as cloud computing and mobile working practices become commonplace, Gartner predicts" and chose it randomly.  It's not about what that guy says but the craze that surrounded Gartner's bold prediction.

It's definitely an area riddled with confusion but call it what you want, it's a pretty severe shift in our industry.

[nop_90]

It's definitely an area riddled with confusion but call it what you want, it's a pretty severe shift in our industry.

Contrary to what people want to believe, the only time there are not "severe shifts" is when you are dead.
People attempt to anything to do "stability".
Whether it is "climate change" or what ever. Guess what, change has been happening since beginning of time.
Probably when the north american continent was 1/2 covered by ice, and in 1000+ years it all melted, that was "climate change" and humans had nothing to do with it.

[isthisthingon]

Whether it is "climate change" or what ever. Guess what, change has been happening since beginning of time.

I'm not worried about change nor in denial about it happening constantly.  What interests me is periods of fast and fundamental change that stand out as unique, though one experiencing change for the first time might think any change is the greatest that has ever happened due to lack of perspective 

Trending dramatically towards utility computing matters - especially for us   

[nop_90]

@ITTO
Much of nation's recent growth may have been a mirage
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/01/AR2011020106617.html

The title is misleading. But it deals with invention and how it effects human lives, and indirectly economics.
The steam engine did more to better people's lives then the internet, all the computers and everything else put together.

Originally steam engines where used to pump water out of mines. So now mines could go deeper. This lowered the price of mineral resources etc.
That was the vision of James Watt.
Then the steam engine was used to operate lifts, so miners did not have to spend 4 hours of their shift going up and down.
Then it was used to replace water/wind power, which sparked the industrial revolution.
And finally it was used for transportation.

This happened over a period of 100+ years.
If you probably told James Watt after he made his first steam engine and installed it at a mine. (amazingly some of them are still working to this day)
That he would affect everyone's lives from the clothes they wear, how they travel etc.
Probably he himself would not have believed it.

[isthisthingon]

If you probably told James Watt after he made his first steam engine and installed it at a mine. (amazingly some of them are still working to this day)
That he would affect everyone's lives from the clothes they wear, how they travel etc.
Probably he himself would not have believed it.

And that's where a different kind of vision comes in.  It takes a "Steve Jobs" to see what Zerox created and yet felt was not worth bringing to market to produce the modern, mass-marketed GUI.  You know I think the guy's an arrogant turd so giving him this credit might have more meaning.  But anyway, if you think like an engineer, the "cloud" is just more parts with a fancy label and perhaps a unique approach to the same old Internets. 

Contemplate    for a while from a non-engineer perspective and you might just have an 

[nop_90]

Contemplate    for a while from a non-engineer perspective and you might just have an 

Ideas are like assholes, everyone has one
The secret is promoting the idea, bringing the idea to the masses.

[perkiset]

But anyway, if you think like an engineer, the "cloud" is just more parts with a fancy label and perhaps a unique approach to the same old Internets. 

Contemplate    for a while from a non-engineer perspective and you might just have an 

EXACTLY. The problem with tech guys is that they think from their techweenies first. The cloud is more about a way than a method. Of course, to build them (like Nuts and I are) takes a HUGE amount of very, very specific knowledge and technical capability. But as soon as we let the technical intricacies fascinate us more than the result we are screwed.

[isthisthingon]

>The cloud is more about a way than a method.

Yes definitely.  I'd add another thought about the global move to cloud that directly challenges existing business models and approaches.  Although from one perspective a SaaS business would provide the perfect model for producing the shiniest, tightest golden handcuffs ever made, the cloud by it's very nature favors the long-tail business approach in contrast.

As other competing clouds emerge, the notion of lock-in security for a cloud-lord diminishes significantly.  Those dominant cloud players who continue to grow and thrive are completely in line with the long-tail business model (Salesforce.com, Google, Amazon, etc.)  There's always possible room for large margins and relatively brief periods of lock-in in the specialty sectors, but I believe this is a moving target.  The elastic provisioning possibilities along with economies of scale need to benefit more than just the possible short-term profits of cloud owners.  When these are converted into a low-entry (or long-tail) offering with steep profit curves towards the high dollar, high requirement clients, the chances of success seem far greater than otherwise 

The failures of the Application Service Providers before SaaS was a name reflect this I believe.