IBM Opens New Cloud Computing Laboratory

Rob writes "InfoGrok is reporting that IBM is in the process of opening a new cloud computing laboratory, based out of Singapore. The new lab's primary aim is to help business, government, and research institutions to design, adopt, and reap benefits of cloud technologies. The lab will help IBM's clients deploy first-of-a-kind solutions that increase business responsiveness and performance."

Comments

Singapore

[Jurily]

All the other words in the summary are buzzwords.

And?

[LS]

Is anyone else here thinking: so what? Sounds like a press release with almost nothing of interest.

really IBM?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cloud computing? What if it rains? All our data will be flowing through the streets!

cue the naysayers

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems there's a pattern. Internet starts becoming popular: "That's nothing we can't do with our 9600 baud modems..." Facebook becomes popular: "That's nothing we can't do with email..." GUI's become popular, "That's nothing we can't do with a csh prompt..." javascript and flash become popular: "That's nothing we can't do with html..." Windows becomes popular, "That's nothing we can't do on our Sun workstations". The naysayers dissing something is a surefire sign it'll be huge in 5 or 10 years.

Same now with cloud computing. Enough slashdotters dissing it makes me want to invest in it, because if there's one constant, it's that opinion here is a polar opposite of the public at large. Slashdot: "It means nothing!" --> it'll be the next big thing.

There are always people who want things to remain as they always were, so they don't have to ever change or adapt to new things. But time moves on regardless.

Re:cue the naysayers

[biryokumaru]

There are always people who want things to remain as they always were, so they don't have to ever change or adapt to new things. But time moves on regardless.

When things change, they don't always get better. For things to get better, they always have to change.

Re:cue the naysayers

[eln]

You seem to present a false dichotomy between endless pessimism (the naysayers) and boundless optimism (investing in whatever the naysayers say won't work). I prefer a more pragmatic approach.

The simple fact is that "cloud computing," as defined by those people selling space on clouds to external clients, is nothing more than a logical evolution of "software as a service". It is, at its core, technology outsourcing. While the term "cloud" connotes an amorphous blob through which data can move freely, the actual mechanics of a cloud are unimportant to the end user. I could be running a "cloud", by this definition, on a big server farm with virtual servers migrating between hardware devices as needed, totally transparent to the user. Or, I could be putting each client on his own dedicated piece of hardware and not including virtualization at all. Either one of these could be called a "cloud" as far as the client is concerned. The whole point of an external cloud is the client doesn't know or care what the underlying technology is or how it works.

The more interesting definition of cloud, to me, is the internal cloud. By this definition, the cloud is explicitly a collection of servers that host multiple virtual machines, which can be moved essentially at will (and even automatically with no input from the operator) as individual virtual machines require more or fewer resources. This type of cloud has also commonly been called a "grid", although grid is another one of those terms with several not-very-well-understood meanings. In this kind of cloud, you optimize the use of compute power while (in theory) reducing administrative overhead. Of course, this depends on a lot of technology that's fairly new and requires a great deal of automation and excellent management software in order to actually make administration easier, and most implementations so far tend to increase, rather than decrease, administration costs. Even so, this type of solution can save a lot of money in terms of hardware, space, and power required to support the IT needs of a business.

I've been deeply involved in developing and implementing internal clouds for a couple of years now, and the technology really does hold a lot of promise. I'm not sold at all on the external Amazon-style clouds as the future of computing, but the "blob of virtual machines" internal cloud seems to hold a lot of promise, especially in larger data center environments.

Re:Don't we already have this with the Internet?

[FlyingGuy]

We had this LONG before the internet ( as we know it ) came into being.

Back then it was called dial up time share or (DUTS).

There is a guy that has a tiny warehouse space and inside it lives an HP-3000 that is as maxed out as he could get it when he purchased it used from Stanford University. Instead of Dial up you connect to it over the net and it runs legacy applications that are still considered to be quite valuable. He makes himself enough money to pay for the bandwidth, the space and the electric bill AND all his hobbies since he retired from, you guessed it, HP.

Thomas Watson is spinning in his grave

[WindBourne]

Palmisano and Loughridge are gutting that company. It is time for American Feds to cut their losses and kill all contracts with this worthless company.

Advertising masquerading as news

[Whuffo]

Thanks for that but I get all the ads I want from Television.