The Uncertain Promise of Utility Computing

icke writes "A quick overview of where the Economist thinks we are with the The Next Big Thing, also known as Stuff that doesn't work yet. Quoting: 'It is increasingly painful to watch Carly Fiorina, the boss of Hewlett-Packard (HP), as she tries to explain to yet another conference audience what her new grand vision of "adaptive" information technology is about. It has something to do with "Darwinian reference architectures", she suggests, and also with "modularising" and "integrating", as well as with lots of "enabling" and "processes". IBM, HP's arch rival, is trying even harder, with a marketing splurge for what it calls "on-demand computing". Microsoft's Bill Gates talks of "seamless computing". Other vendors prefer "ubiquitous", "autonomous" or "utility" computing. Forrester Research, a consultancy, likes "organic". Gartner, a rival, opts for "real-time". Clearly, something monumental must be going on in the world of computing for these technology titans simultaneously to discover something that is so profound and yet so hard to name.'"

Comments

Carly's explainations

[feed_those_kitties]

Sound a LOT like the way Enron tried to "explain" how their business worked.

If you can't explain what you do in a way a 10 year old can understand, your business will probably fail.

Re:Carly's explainations

[TALlama]

Examples:

Wal-Mart: We sell everything everywhere, for cheap.
Banks: We give money to people, and they give us more money back later.
McDonalds: We make fast food that kids like and parents put up with.
In-N-Out: We make fast food that everyone likes.
Dell: We make cheap computers.
Microsoft: We make software, and whatever else we want.
SCO: We sue people.

The unexplainable e-business on demand

[Anonymous Coward]

When I started IBM recently (posting as AC to protect the innocent), I had to attend an orientation class covering IBM's policies and so forth. One of the topics was the "E-business on demand" initiative, IBM's next big thing.

The instructor couldn't explain it, so she brought in a marketing exec, who could only define it in terms of itself. "E-business on demand is about computing, on demand, for e-business." Sprinkle in a healthy dose of meaningless adjectives, and you get the picture.

I'll tell you, it's pervasive. Since then, I've not found one person who can give a cohesive definition at this company. And yet, it's supposed to be my driving force and ultimate goal.

yay.

Nothing monumental yet...

[s.d.]

Clearly, something monumental must be going on in the world of computing for these technology titans simultaneously to discover something that is so profound and yet so hard to name.

There's nothing monumental that's really floated to the surface yet. I work in grid computing, which itself is an amazing buzzword that everyone wants to say and no one understands (hell, I am not really sure what the purpose of what I do is).

Everyone's grasping for straws right now, b/c when some research project actually does become useful, they want to be in front of the wave so they can ride it all the way. This is everyone throwing out made up words in the hopes that people will like some (or at least one) of them. Around here, our made up phrase that I love is that we are being called "the cornerstone of cyberinfrastructure." It's even been used so much that they've shortened cyberinfrastructure to "CI" in big rambling memos about our future and direction. It's sort of depressing, though, when you realize that none of this actually means anything yet. Maybe it will one day, but that's not quite here yet.

I know why

[vorwerk]

It's so hard to name because these companies all lack the synergistic, results-driven leverage that will incentivize their paradigm shift.