BriefingsDirect Analysts Discuss IT Winners and Losers in Era of Global Economic Recession

Edited transcript of BriefingsDirect Analyst Insights Edition podcast, Vol. 31, on the outlook for IT in the face of the economic downturn, recorded October 10, 2008.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsors: Active Endpoints, Hewlett-Packard.

Special offer: Download a free, supported 30-day trial of Active Endpoint's ActiveVOS at www.activevos.com/insight.

Dana Gardner: Hello, and welcome to the latest BriefingsDirect Analyst Insights Edition podcast, Volume 31. This periodic discussion and dissection of IT infrastructure related news events with a panel of industry analysts and guests comes to you with the help of our charter sponsor, Active Endpoints, makers of the ActiveVOS visual orchestration system.

I’m your host and moderator Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and our panel this week consists of Jim Kobielus, senior analyst of Forrester Research. Welcome, Jim.

Jim Kobielus: Hi, Dana. Hi, everybody.

Gardner: Tony Baer, senior analyst at Ovum. Welcome back, Tony.

Tony Baer: Hey, Dana, good to be here again.

Gardner: And, Dave Linthicum, independent consultant with the Linthicum Group. Is that the correct designation these days, Dave?

Dave Linthicum: That's right. Thanks guys, good to be back.

Gardner: Very good. We’re going to talk primarily today about the burning issue of the moment, and hopefully not for the next 10 years, and that's the financial situation of fairly well-defined panic. We‘re not sure why, but there’s certainly a panic at this point in the global markets, and bailouts and other attempts by governments around the world not necessarily helping, so far. We’re coming to you on October 10, 2008.

Hopefully, when you hear this in the next few weeks, things won't seem quite as dire, but we are going to take a pulse of whether this is panic or whether this is a prelude. We’re certainly not going to look at this through the full lens of the economy. We’re not economists, and people will probably think we don't know what we are talking about, but we wouldn't be alone in that category right now.

So, we will focus it on what we do know a little about, and that is the IT sector, the software business, how this will affect IT vendors, users and enterprises.

First, we've heard a couple of different takes on this whole situation. IBM just came out with some fairly encouraging results, 2 percent real top-line growth and 20 percent bottom-line growth. So IBM says, “Not so bad,” HP had similar results and Oracle as well. They’re saying that we’re seeing some bumps in the road, but certainly not a meltdown. On the other hand, companies like SAP and Dell are saying that they’re really feeling it.

For my first question, I want to take this out to Tony Baer. Is this going to be something that drops the tide on all boats in IT? If not, who are the winners and losers likely to be?

Baer: Well, I think the winners are those who are likely to be more diversified into services, services that can help companies harvest more of what they already have. I was actually doing a mental comparison before we got on the call between, for example, IBM and SAP. In other words, why has IBM reported positive results and SAP hasn't. On first blush, they are both global companies, they both have incredible penetration into the Global 2000.

So, part of it is fairly hard to explain, you have to drill down a little bit deeper into the SAP’S acquisition of Business Objects, a two-product company With maybe some exceptions on the Business Objects side, it’s not so much new sales, but essentially maintenance and upgrades to new versions In a tightening economy, putting in a new version of SAP or NetWeaver is probably a discretionary expense.

Just look at IBM, which, besides the fact that it's much more diversified, has services. The fact is that in an economic situation like this, especially where there are a lot of known unknowns, having a services business is a good way of helping clients to discover new economies. And it's also potentially a much more flexible arrangement than having to put in an upgrade of a new version of SAP software.

Gardner: What I think I hear you saying is that companies that are in the services business, and that have primarily revenue through subscription, might fare better than those who are in a product cycle, where licensing and actual product upgrade, in addition to their maintenance, might be in a situation where people will postpone those upgrades.

Baer: Absolutely!

Gardner: Where does that put Microsoft?

Baer: Good question, because they are in a transition. I just had a fairly detailed briefing with them yesterday on their Software Plus Services strategy and that's clearly where they want to go, and they do have some impressive early wins. But it's obviously still not the majority of their business. In the short-term, I think it's going to hurt their business, because clearly take-up of Vista has pretty well-flagged, especially on the corporate side.

Obviously they are trying to cultivate the Software Plus Services side, but that business is still very much in its early in its cycle. In the long run, it will be a good strategy for Microsoft, but they are so early along that it accounts for a pretty slow proportion of their revenue. In the short-term, Microsoft is more vulnerable.

Gardner: I was at a Red Hat conference earlier this week. Their model built very much on subscription and support, not on licensing the software. They give it away essentially. They felt pretty confident too that this wasn't going to be a cliff for them. So, I guess that further substantiates our trend.

Jim Kobielus, how do you see the shaping up for IT vendors? Is there going to be a dichotomy between those who have a recurring revenue model around subscriptions, versus those who have little bit more reliance on software licensing?

Kobielus: By the way, full disclosure, I have a degree in economics from way long ago and I am not going to even try to be dangerous. . . .

Gardner: Well, you might as well, because they don't see that what's going on either, right.

Linthicum: There’s an instant CNN gig out there for you, dude.

Gardner: By the way Jim, you are pretty dangerous, so go right ahead.

Kobielus: Okay, I do see in any economic downturn in the things that get cut from corporate budgets, for example, large capital expenditure (CAPEX) projects. That's going to hurt a number of IT vendors in particular niches, for example the hardware vendors, and where it's a discretionary software upgrade purchase. Those are going to feel the crunch.

Ongoing maintenance of existing systems, existing solutions that will relatively weather the storm. In other words, just to keep on keeping on.

So, the business model that open-source companies like Red Hat have established, and likewise, very mature software vendors like SAP and also Business Objects in the business intelligence (BI) space, they will do relatively okay because a large percentage of their revenue is from maintenance and support.

Those who will get hurt are those vendors who rely on new-product sales, especially new product sales that are very much hardware-centric. And where that comes in now ties in with my core focus areas, BI and data warehousing. We see in the data warehousing arena more of a focus on appliances, the hardware-software bundles that are pre-configured and so forth.

So, all the vendors in the data-warehousing space, pretty much all of them have re-geared their entire go-to-market strategy around hardware optimization of their own with turnkey solutions.

How will this economic crunch shake out the data warehousing appliance industry, really the data warehousing market? In any downturn, users, large corporate IT, look to rationalize and streamline their vendor commitments. In other words, they consolidate to a few very large, very strategic vendors. So, the big guys will get bigger and the small, pure-play data-warehousing appliance vendors will be acquired or will vanish.

Gardner: Is that the flight-to-quality kind of effect, do you think?

Kobielus: “Flight-to-quality,” explain that Dana?

Gardner: Well, you are not sure about where vendors might be and you might want to have one throat to choke, a bit more opportunity to deal with them, and that they can bargain with you because they want you long-term business. They are in a more powerful position and so quality, not unnecessarily the buy side but on the sell side, makes some sense.

Kobielus: Okay, yes, it's very much the phenomenon. They are the dynamic in play here. I think that the larger data-warehousing vendors will do relatively okay, especially those who are well-established and have a substantial amount of maintenance and support revenue themselves. I’m talking about the likes of Teradata and Oracle and IBM and a few others.

But, right now, with the data warehousing and BI vendors, every time I talk to them, I ask them, “Okay, a substantial proportion of your business is in the financial services vertical. How are you feeling? Are you seeing any softness in demand for your solutions?” And pretty much uniformly, they say, “Well, so far so good. We’re not really seeing a huge cut back in orders, or even any substantial delays in placement of orders that were expected,” but everybody is sort of bracing for the worst.

Gardner: Alright, so what I heard from you is that there is certainly a benefit of subscription, but there are also certain niches within IT that are specialized and that are hot right now, like BI and warehousing, that adds such a competitive advantage that they are probably going to continue to invest there.

Let’s look at this not necessarily just through the selling but on the buy side, those people who are in IT shops. Let's go to Dave Linthicum. You have been in the situation of specifying and buying. About 70-80 percent of these budgets are already locked into maintenance, not a lot of discretionary spending. What kind of pressure do you think they are going to feel?

Linthicum: They are going to feel a lot of pressure with anything that can be cut in the short-term. It's really going to be more that there is so much stress in there, instead of just definite cutting, just tactical pulling of expenses. They are looking to morph the way in which they consume IT. I just did a survey yesterday. I basically talked about the economic downturn and their plans to implement strategic technology into their enterprise. And everybody came back with, it's going to increase in interest but decrease in cost.

In other words, people are going to move into more efficient technologies. They are going to look at a little bit more at cloud computing and other ways to save money and start moving aggressively in those directions.

I think IT and some of the IT leadership were just waiting for an excuse to drive in this unfamiliar, risky area. If their budgets are sliced, they still have the responsibility for doing very intense IT business processing, and they are looking for new innovative ways to do that. That's inclusive of cloud computing and services-oriented architecture (SOA).

I don’t know if you looked at the SOA market just in terms of services, but it seems to be exploding right now. I’m not sure about the adoption of technology and the selling of technology. That may be an after effect, after all of these SOAs start taking more strategic positions within these enterprises. It's definitely a game changer right now. I’m not sure if it's positive or negative, but it's changing the game.

Gardner: When we look at how these organizations, these enterprises will move to, as you say risky, unproven, or just innovative new ways. What aspects of IT do you think they are going to be more willing to offload to a cloud first? Clearly, there is going to be too much risk in some areas and acceptable risk in others. Where do you think we are first going to start to see business activities and IT functional sets and applications offloaded -- just because it's so much cheaper to do it that way?

Linthicum: I think it's initially going to be the office-automation technologies, moving to more of the lighter-weight processes, and then moving to more of the heavy-weight processes.

Gardner: Can you be more specific on an application-by-application basis?

Linthicum: Yeah. Instead of having a huge Microsoft infrastructure just for e-mail and calendar-sharing in groupware, and those sorts of things, moving to things that are in the cloud. This is obviously Google, but there is also a ton of other guys that are offering some pretty good technology -- information-sharing using similar infrastructure. They’ll start outsourcing that, versus maintaining all these data centers that are just dealing with e-mail and communication between people within the company.

Gardner: Sure, there are plenty of hosted exchange too. Even if you don’t want to move from Microsoft, you can go off-premises.

Linthicum: You can go off-premises with lots of stuff and the cost is always cheaper, and also it allows you to upgrade and innovate into new technological areas you haven’t driven before.

Next, would be tactical, software-as-a-service (SaaS) applications. Take some of the HR processing, which is driven by some kind of in-house system in the data center, and outsource that to the dozen or so SaaS vendors who are offering HR processing. That's kind of a light-weight business process.

Then, the next generation is even more risky, and I don’t see a ton of guys doing that initially. It involves some of the core business processes, and getting into an SOA kind of an initiative. Re-automating those, but also outsourcing a tremendous number that haven’t been done before for the primary reason of cost saving.

Gardner: I think I’m hearing from Dave here that not only we are now going to make baby steps towards significant innovation, but the economic pressure that's going to come down on CIOs and IT departments forces them more towards that transformational level of change. So, that could include a lot more SOA, a lot more virtualization, internal on-premises cloud infrastructures, and so on.

Jim or Tony, how do you feel about the possibility that more economic pressure is actually a catalyst towards transformation rather than iterative change?

Kobielus: You mentioned my name first so I’ll respond first and I’ll be brief, so Mr. Tony can go right after me. I see definitely the economic downturn is going to expand the footprint, as it were, for the cloud in data warehousing, where data warehouses are becoming ever larger in the hundreds of terabytes and now into the petabyte.

I’m seeing an upsurge in the number of start-ups and data warehousing vendors that now have cloud based offerings. For example Vertica and Oracle now support databases that can run in the Amazon EC2. There are other vendors, like 1010data, that are very much pure plays in the fact that they only operate in the cloud and they are very highly scalable, share nothing, and parallel process.

There are, of course, SaaS-based offerings on a subscription basis. In other words, where there is a capital expenditure crunch or a budget crunch, and users can’t afford to pay the millions of dollars to bring one of these petabyte-scale data warehouses in house, they are going to go outside to the likes of a 1010data or using Amazon EC2 to aggregate, persist these huge datasets.

They can do very complex analyses and also run a greater degree of their data mining and predictive analytics algorithms in that very cloud. It just saves them money, and it's not a huge capital expenditure. It's a pay-as-you-go kind of thing. I think that's going to be the trend and those vendors who are already out there could be the major beneficiaries of this current economic crunch.

Gardner: So, that might mean if you are going to go to market, you want to have a cloud avenue for your go-to-market activities in addition to on-premises, or even say an open-source support model, right?.

Kobielus: Yes, for sure.

Gardner: Tony, what's your take on the possibility of harsh economic times as actually a catalyst towards the increased transformation?

Baer: Well, I am going to pair a couple of words that would otherwise seem like an oxymoron, which is tactical transformation. In times like these, obviously you have changing economic conditions, changing in a very unpredictable manner. On the other hand, the financial crunch and the credit crunch is going to restrict the amount of resources you have at your disposal. So, you’re basically going to look very opportunistically. You are going to look at, let's say, the low-hanging fruit that will give you the greatest gain in savings or a way to respond to the market in a more agile manner.

That will be very much in the way that Dave and Jim mentioned, which is that you will be taking advantage of specific services in the cloud. You won’t necessarily do a global top down or enterprise-architectural SOA transformation, if you haven't done SOA already. But, opportunistically, if you are trying to take advantage of some of these cloud-based services to start doing mining on a more massive scale, at the same time trying to lower your risk, it will require certain applications or data source that you may have. You may need to conduct a transformation, where you will implement, more flexible architectures, data SOA architecture.

But you will do it opportunistically in these tactical areas, where you can take advantage of services in the cloud that give you the advantages of the transformation to solve the problem you need to deal with, and at the same time, minimizing your risk.

Gardner: So, they are going to be looking for innovation without a big CAPEX, and if they can do that at the same time they are shutting down their own high-cost, high-labor applications in data centers that will be particularly attractive.

Baer: Or put it another way, “Capital, what capital?”

Gardner: Remember, not all companies are like banks. They have cash on hand, or they have ability to raise capital in a variety of different ways, rather than just going to a bank. So, we don't need to lump all these different types of enterprises into just the financial crisis problem.

Baer: Agreed. It's not to say that capital is totally shut-off, but the fact is that it's going to be rationed and a lot more carefully. I was just reading the advice that all these VCs are reading, and what they are saying is that if you have capital, find ways of stretching it.

Gardner: Save more cash, hold your cash basically. Speaking of verticals, let's look at this now through the lens of verticals, which verticals will do well and which will not.

My first take on this is that the government vertical is actually going to explode and might even start going down this road towards transformation in a much more significant way. Now, we can't read the tea leaves entirely on the economy, but politically we do start to see quite a momentum around the Democratic ticket and potentially a substantial majority for Democrats in Congress. They have put down platforms that include significant investments in such things as energy, healthcare, and of course they are going to need to transform how the government and the financial sector work together to calm the markets down.

On the other hand some, verticals that don't look good include retail and manufacturing. The auto industry is getting whacked. So, as IT spending is sliced and diced according to vertical, do we get a net-net up, down, or flat, when we look across verticals. I want to take a look at that. Dave Linthicum.

Linthicum: Yeah, it’s great living in Washington DC, let me tell you, because I think no matter where this thing goes, there is going to be full employment. The housing prices have actually crept up.

I think that you’re absolutely right. People are going to look to government to solve some of these issues and bureaucratic changes are going to be built here in different divisions, and people are going to have oversight of the financial industry.

If the Democratic administration comes in, there is going to be more civilian spending, and there is going to be probably a little shift from the spending in the Department of Defense on the military side.

So, this area is going to be explosive yet again, based on some things that are occurring and based on the government taking power in particular industries that they think they can be helpful in taking power. You can argue whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, but you are definitely going to see a lot of job shifts as things shift to that vertical.

The retail space is going to suffer tremendously. They already have very narrow razor-thin margins. I think we are going to see a lot of the larger retailers suffer and perhaps go away. I think healthcare is going to remain fairly static, and I think some of their costs maybe reduced. As they start moving into more of a socialized medicine, if the Democrats take it there, there is going to be some big shifts there.

Believe it or not, even though you are moving into a healthcare-for-everyone kind of an environment, you are going to see that actually cost probably will go up, as a bureaucracy is put in place to maintain and administer that.

Finance is obviously going to be killed for a long time, especially the banking industry. That's going to be an area that isn't going to recover very quickly from what's going on right now, but I think that manufacturing ultimately will recover and we are going to see some good growth in the year 2009-2010.

Gardner: Why do you see manufacturing as doing okay?

Linthicum: Because, the need for products worldwide is down right now, because people don't have the capital or access to the credit to make that happen. However, they are going to continue to have to replace airplanes, factory equipment, those sorts of things. It's just going to be a pent-up demand, and I think that's going to basically get unleashed in 2009-2010.

You’re going to see the large durable goods, large manufacturing kind of systems. People are going to just spend money on that area and that's going to be a worldwide driven thing. It's not going to be just driven from the United States.

Gardner: Great. Jim Kobielus, you mentioned earlier that you saw financial organizations buying data warehousing services and solutions as sort of still growing, if not at the same rate. I'd like to have your take on the financial sector alone Sure, there’s lots of turmoil, lots of contraction, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can shut off your IT systems. Mergers and acquisitions, consolidation sometimes can have a short-to-medium increase in IT requirement.

Kobielus: Right, and one of the things, Dana, that occurred to me is that the financial vertical and the government vertical are becoming overlapped. There is a degree of nationalization already that's taking place. The government is taking back Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I think they have taken over AIG, but all around the world, you hear governments, especially in Europe saying, “Hey, we need to re-nationalize or, to some degree, exert tighter control over the financial vertica., I think this is everywhere in the world.

What we’re already seeing is that the government vertical, as they have indicated, will continue to grow, because it's going to exercise much greater oversight and equity positions within the financial vertical. I think the early part of this decade is a prelude to what we’re going to see in even greater abundance in the next 10 years.

After the whole Enron fiasco, with Sarbanes-Oxley and so forth, we saw the growth of this market and this technology called governance, risk management, and compliance (GRC) to exert tighter control over the financials of private enterprise, and bring greater transparency.

I think we are going to see now, the government exert ever tighter GRC reigns over the financial sector, to a degree unprecedented, because we now have government actually owning or controlling a number of the key firms in that space. So, the whole GRC sector is in an embryonic stage. There are a number of vendors like SAP and Oracle who have taken sort of a leading-edge position in that area. That will expand greatly, and we are going to see more of these risk dashboards and controls being implemented in the context of BI and the data warehousing investments that enterprises have already made.

In terms of the horizontals, the GRC sector will come into its own, and it will be primarily the driver. There will be the financials, and then it will be around the world. All governments will enforce the use of this kind of technology.

Gardner: Right, and at a higher abstraction, that really means governance, and as much as internal governance it's perhaps governance from the extended enterprise sense, where there is going to be governance that crosses organizational boundaries. That's not going to be done with folks holding clipboards. That's going to be largely automated.

It’s going to have to be enforced through policies and rules and governance engines, it sounds an awful lot like SOA, but we are not going to apply the infrastructure we have developed for SOA. Just like services, we can apply it across a multitude of different business processes and activities in order to satisfy what you are talking about.

Baer: This reminds of something I heard from Microsoft this week. I was in Seattle at their BI conference, and they were talking about how Microsoft internally is using their own BI tools and stack. They described a number of roles -- like marketing, sales, and finance -- and how they use BI. Then, I asked the person, “Okay, your CEO, Steve Ballmer, obviously uses BI, but does he have a risk dashboard or a compliance dashboard or tools?”

Clearly, Microsoft is under a number of legal and regulatory mandates, compliance and so forth, and the people from Microsoft couldn’t answer that question immediately. They weren't really quite sure what's on Steve's dashboard.

In three years time, every CEO in the world will have a GRC dashboard that tells them on any given day the hoops they need to jump through to satisfy the regulators, I think that's coming fairly soon.

Gardner: Not just regulators, but the market doesn’t want to be caught unaware, as we apparently have been with this meltdown. In the future, they are going to want to know not just what they have to do to comply, but what the unknown risks are in terms of how the markets themselves are behaving.

Let's go to Tony Baer. Tony, what's your take on the opportunity for governance infrastructure to move beyond SOA, and is the new environment for business a growth area for SOA governance infrastructure?

Baer: Yeah, big time. I was talking before about these opportunistic areas. In the case of governance, I don't know if I would call it “opportunistic,” but it is an area in which you do not have an option as to whether you comply or not. Therefore, the only economic way to provide all the information and to do all the audits without having to rip apart all of your existing back-end infrastructure is through a service's layer on top of all that.

Maybe I can come up with a cheap buzzword here, a buzz-line or a tag-line, such as “Son of SOX,” for what's going to become a changing regulatory environment. You’ll need a governance layer that can contend with changes in this moving target.

Obviously, the only feasible way, from an architectural standpoint, to deal with that is do a flexible architecture, and that's essentially what a SOA is.

I very much agree with Dave and with Jim in terms of what are likely to be the growth sectors, but there are a couple of extra points I want to plug in there. This ties in with this question. The financial industry itself will not be a growth sector over the next few years, it will be very much a consolidating sector, but guess what, as you consolidate, you need to invest in consolidation.

Imagine all these huge mergers going on. Wells Fargo just finally got the agreement to acquire Wachovia, but of course there will be a some litigation from Citibank. Also, Bank of America acquired Merrill and there’s the whole reorganization of Wall Street, from investment banks into banking institutions.

The fact is, there is going to be a lot of transformation going on, and it's not transformation to support a growing business. It's transformation to support a changing business. There will be a lot of investment there, in addition to whatever investment will be necessary to deal with the new governance risks in compliance requirements.

Another area -- and I wanted to slip this in because it's nothing intuitive -- but if you look back at past history during economic downturns, and I hate to use the 'D' word but back in the depression, and I hope we are not heading into one, what area boomed during that era? Hollywood, the film industry. People were going out to the movies for cheap thrills.

In today's environment, the equivalent of that is, if you already have an Xbox 360 out there, you are going to be buying more games. Those are cheap thrills. It's going to be cheaper than going out and buying a new HDTV or going out to Six Flags.

Gardner: That's interesting. We haven't talked about one sector, and that is the Entertainment/Web 2.0/Internet. We’ve seen some downturn in advertising, including Internet advertising, but is there an opportunity for buying $3 movie and downloading it, a $2 song, a $3 game. How might our Internet /Media/Entertainment economy fare and will it be sliced and diced between those who depend on advertising and those who are not?

Baer: Very much so. The only downward pressure on this would be downward pressure on households to cut expenses and, if they consider that broadband is a discretionary expense, that would be the ceiling there. My sense though is that today to participate in the modern economy, broadband is becoming a necessity.

Gardner: Yeah, it's a utility. It’s like water, electricity. It's one of the last things that will go, right?

Gardner: My mother is 93, and I finally got her to get broadband. So we won’t give it up.

Kobielus: I have to jump in here and be dangerous one more time. I have another degree in Journalism and I was primarily a student of the mass media. If you look at the depression of the 1930s, historians and people who lived through the period talk about, what kept them company, in the dust bowl or wherever when they didn't have a job. It was the radio, which had been introduced in the previous decade.

Now, if gosh forbid, we have something similar coming up in the teens of this decade, what is the new radio? It's the Web. And so, who are the new entertainers? Well, actually in many ways it will be each other. I mean, through the whole Web 2.0 user-generated content paradigm. If you think about it, that's cheap entertainment, because it's generated for free and there is an unlimited supply of it available over some pipe that you've got coming into your home.

Gardner: I'd like to point out that this podcast is coming to you completely free. Continue.

Kobielus: And we are free to say what we want on this podcast.

Gardner: Does anybody else have some thoughts out there on the impact on Internet and startups? What's the impact with startups? We have seen this slide deck from Sequoia Capital saying “batten down the hatches, no discretionary spending, hoard your cash. Is this the VCs overreacting, because it's their pool of money that's its stake, or aare there actually opportunities beyond what they are saying in these dire predictions?

Linthicum: There are huge opportunities out there. If you saw my column I did in SOA World Magazine, I think this is a great time to do a startup.

Number one, VCs be damned at this point. You don't need their money at all, just some angel investors to invest in some very minute infrastructure. With cloud computing out there and the number of things you can do from a marketing, application developer's, and outsourcing perspective, you can basically get a technology company up and running -- and profitable -- probably for the least real cost we've seen in years. It's a great time for people who are innovative, able, and resourceful to get out there and start technology companies.

There are two types of companies out there right now. There seemed to be the big behemoths that are very slow and cumbersome and strategically challenged, even though they are making a lot of money and grabbing a large share of the market. Then, there are the old maids and basically a lot of small startups that just haven't been able to get acquired to do their exits.

Now is a great time for small innovative new startups to get out there and help create new spaces, such as Web 2.0, and I think there are a number of SOA problems that needs solving as well. I'd love to see some startups get out there and take those problems on.

Gardner: So, unintended consequence of the VCs contracting might be laying off a bunch of engineers and entrepreneurs. They'll go out there and say, “Okay, what am I going to do, sit in my garage and cry or am I going to look for platform-as-a-service (PaaS) providers and cloud providers that will allow me to develop a whole new set of applications on the cheap that I could put on my credit card. Then, I only pay for infrastructure as I need it and as I can create a business model?

Linthicum: Yeah, one of the things I would love to see come out of this whole mess that we are in right now is some of the Sarbanes-Oxley stuff contracting a bit. Quite frankly, a lot of the startups out there are unable to do any kind of exit other than acquisitions. You have no chance to take anything public. It's economically not viable for you to do so, because of the cost of maintaining the regulations around the whole publicly traded company opportunity.

I would love to see the government reopen that market a bit and make it much easier for startups that are profitable, that have a good track record and good technology to get access to the public marketplaces. Right now, they have to keep going back to the venture capital community. In many instances, those guys are strategically challenged. They are not focused on a particular industry, they are basically just focused on investment. That's going to be difficult to going forward.

Gardner: So in the ‘30s, we had the Works Progress Administration (WPA), which got people out there with shovels -- and my grandfather was one of them -- moving stuff around in the city in order to create works. Perhaps with an Internet Public Assistance Program, we can let the government be the seed and even steer them towards solutions of the government’s needs.

Now, the government wants to hire investment bankers to solve the problem that investment bankers created, but perhaps there is an opportunity for technologists to be brought in to solve some of these problems too.

Linthicum: Absolutely. What if a couple of the billions of dollars we are pumping back into the banks just went off to assist organizations and start-up companies around the technology space. I think there would be a huge boom in the area, and it would create jobs and be profitable fairly quickly.

I think some of them would probably go away, but overall, I think that it would have a positive effect on the economy. If you think about 1999, we were doing so well, because of the innovations around the Internet technology and other things that were booming. I think we are able to do that again, but we are just putting so many regulations, so much bureaucracy out there, that it makes it very difficult for the upstarts to get going.

Gardner: One little subset on this media discussion would be the press. Jim Kobielus, press has been under a tremendous amount of pressure lately. How are folks like Sam Zell going to fare on their traditional media, as advertising dries up, going to the Internet, seeing appreciable advertising business uptake there. It seems to me they are in the dead-end situation.

Kobielus: There is an ongoing crunch in the whole media sector that continues to ripple and ripple. It forces people out of being full-time journalists. So, it's not a happy thing. There was a Doonesbury cartoon recently in which Rick Redfern had been forcibly retired from the Washington Post. He was told, “Go and be a blogger!” He said, “Yeah, I will be one of a trillion bloggers out there.” “Well, you have a special differentiation. You are ex-Washington Post.”

Everybody is going to be from the journalism space, and even publishers are going to be “ex-journalists.” They have to find some next stage in their career, and I think a lot of smart people are going to become, as Dave indicates, entrepreneurs, but who will be self-funded from whatever remaining savings they have. It's not going to be a happy thing until the credit crunch eases.

Gardner: We only have a few more minutes. Let's look at some other potentially unintended consequences of all this.

If technology company stocks plummet some more, we might see some interesting things there. Somebody floated the idea that Sun Microsystems might just take its cash and buy itself out when its stock is trading at $5 -- and that was a stock that had a reverse four-way split. So it's down like a buck and change from what it was a few years ago.

Also RIM, still a strong company, a potentially for a takeover, is looking back to the buy side. What sort of interesting unintended consequences might we see among the vendors. Any thoughts?

Kobielus: I have no thoughts. Guys?

Linthicum: Just from your first point, I think you’re going to see some guys who are going to buy themselves off from the market for now, and I can't blame them.

If I were CEO of a publicly traded company, and my stock price was below my market capital, with cash in the bank -- where some of them are -- I’d get off the market quick, because it's a good deal.

Gardner: Absolutely.

Kobielus: I think we've talked in a previous podcast about the upsurge of private investing, of companies going private. I think the difference this time will be that if companies are going to go private, they are going to have to basically bootstrap it. They are not to be able to get a Silver Lake or anybody like that in the short-term.

Gardner: So a takeaway might be, if you can ride this out for two or three years, there is a buying opportunity, even buying yourself.

Kobielus: Right, if you get cheap enough. The other dividend of all that is once you go private, of course, you don't have to worry about all the GRC.

Gardner: One other subject that we haven't talked about is the analysis business. Is this an opportunity for people that need to know more about what's going on, and are folks like us going to be okay? Any thoughts?

Baer: Folks like us. Yeah. I think everybody is becoming an analyst. There is a whole blogosphere. Everybody in the blogosphere, to some degree, is an analyst. So, we’re going to be okay in the sense that we can still do analysis to our hearts delight for free, if we so choose.

In terms making a living on it, I think more-and-more analysts need to be half analyst, half consultant, doing projects for those who will pay us to actually show up and attend to only their needs and help them out with projects and also to make sense of what's going on in the space.

In any good time or bad time, analysts are essentially like reporters or journalists. We not only are in the industry, but we are in a sense above the industry, surveying what's going on and reporting to everybody else what we can see in terms of broad patterns and trends.

So I think there is a greater requirement on analyst to come in and offer reassurances or to tell people, “Okay, this strategy that you have been taking is not going to pan out. You better jump ship and try something different.”

Gardner: So changes are growth engines.

Kobielus: Yeah, and from that standpoint, it basically supplements the fact that there is going to be a decline in the journalist population, essentially a migration towards the extremes, which is on one hand journalism and this is not a development.

I’m very happy to see is that, as the financial base and the business model for journalism businesses is evaporating at this point, you are seeing more-and-more citizen journalists taking up more of the load. People are reading more blogs. They are not buying newspapers.

On the other end, it will create an appetite, and it will create a demand for people who are above the level of citizen blogger to say, “I have some professional credentials, and I can provide you some value-added analysis on your positions, so that you can essentially improve the competitiveness of your business.”

Gardner: Traditional and trade media will contract, which opens up a vacuum that can be filled by the expert-blogger function.

Kobielus: Right, expert blogger, but also the fact is that you get what you pay for. If you are a business and you are trying to improve your chance of surviving the market, you are going to work with key experts, key thought leaders out there, and you will pay for that.

It's not to say this is an infinite market for analysts. The business model for analyst firms is going through some stresses. Especially when you take a look at blogging. A lot of analyst firms have really not adapted to the blogosphere very well, or the more rapid flow of information.

So, even though I think they will continue to be a need for analysis and for paid analysis. The analyst industry or the analyst-firm industry needs to adapt to the new world of faster more instantaneous communications.

Gardner: Well, great. We've had a well-rounded discussion about the situation. We found some bright spots and some counter-cyclical possible growth areas within this sad situation we find ourselves in. But, as we exit I want to go around the panel and on a 1-to-10 scale, with 10 being flush, financial nirvana, and 1 being a dead-pool bankruptcy, where on a scale of 1 to 10 at a median level will the software business be in a year from now, let's start with you, Jim Kobielus.

Kobielus: I give it 5, straight down in the middle. I am trying not to lean towards either the manic or the depressive ends of the spectrum here. I think that some will do quite well and some will not. It's just a matter of taking a deep breath and recognizing that the economy goes through cycles, and the economy occasionally goes through panics -- the banking panics of the early 1900s and the late 1800s. We are sort of in the middle of one right now, which is an interesting phenomenon. I say interesting in the old Chinese sense of may you live through interesting times.

This has been a harsh decade. We started off with a tech-crunch and we are going to end with a tech-crunch, and a financial crunch, and it's going to take some time to sort it through, so just breathe easy.

Gardner: Tony Baer, 1 to 10, software industry.

Baer: Well, I'll give it 4, only because there are different headwinds on this go around. On the positive side, as Dave was mentioning before, the fact is that the barriers to entry are so much lower. So, if you can take advantage of the cloud, you can start in your own garage, and essentially marshal resources for very little cost. Basically, if you can sustain yourself and live close to the ground for the next two or three years, you and many others who are taking advantage of platform-as-a-service will have a whole new generation of solutions that will be ready for the next uptake.

Gardner: Dave Linthicum.

Linthicum: I am going to say 7.5. There are huge opportunities for the innovative and resourceful few out there in the market space. I think that technology shift, moving to higher regulations, you’ve got this “mother of all Sarbanes-Oxley” coming. Everybody is going to need folks in there to re-architect and re-automate and re-cast these businesses.

Then I think if there is going to be some upside in the future. Every cloud has a silver lining and those who are smart out there can certainly find the silver linings in this cloud. I think IT is going to stumble a bit, but a lot of more innovation is going to come into play, and people are going to use the cost-reduction capabilities, become a little bit more modernized and innovative in moving to cloud computing and SOA. All that stuff is going to accelerate tremendously in the next couple of years.

Gardner: I am going to go with 6.5. I agree that this is a transformation period, not just a contraction. I think this is going to necessitate a lot of the things that people have been working towards, but accelerate that, and force them to cut bait on the old stuff that doesn't work and adopt the new stuff that does. So, I’ m fairly bullish on IT, but with a lot of spottiness. There are going to be some pockets of certain failure and the ability in people to move among and between those is what's going to become essential.

I want to thank our panel for a very interesting discussion about the IT sector in this economic maelstrom.

We have been talking with Jim Kobielus, senior analyst of Forrester Research. Thanks, Jim.

Kobielus: Thank you. It was great!

Gardner: Tony Baer, senior analyst at Ovum. Thank you, sir.

Baer: Hey, thanks, Dana!

Gardner: Dave Linthicum, independent consultant with Linthicum Group. Thank you.

Linthicum: Thank you!

Gardner: I also want to thank our sponsor, the charter sponsor for the BriefingsDirect Analyst Insights Edition is Active Endpoints, makers of the ActiveVOS visual orchestration system. I am Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Thanks for listening, and come back next time.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsors: Active Endpoints, Hewlett-Packard.

Special offer: Download a free, supported 30-day trial of Active Endpoint's ActiveVOS at www.activevos.com/insight.

Transcript of BriefingsDirect podcast on the outlook for IT in the face of the economic downturn. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2008. All rights reserved.

BriefingsDirect Insights Analysts Examine HP-Oracle Exadata Release, Extreme BI, Virtualization and Cloud Computing Trends

Edited transcript of BriefingsDirect Analyst Insights Edition podcast, Vol. 30, on Exadata, extreme BI and cloud computing, recorded Sept. 26, 2008 from Oracle OpenWorld in San Francisco.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsors: Active Endpoints, Hewlett-Packard.

Special offer: Download a free, supported 30-day trial of Active Endpoint's ActiveVOS at www.activevos.com/insight.

Dana Gardner: Hello, and welcome to the latest BriefingsDirect Analyst Insights Edition, Vol. 30. This periodic discussion and dissection of IT infrastructure related news and events, with a panel of industry analysts and guests, comes to you with the help of our sponsors, charter sponsor Active Endpoints, maker of the ActiveVOS visual orchestration system, and also Hewlett-Packard via the HP Live! Podcast Series.

I'm your Host and moderator Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Our panel this week consists of Joe McKendrick, an independent analyst and prolific blogger on SOA and BI topics. Hi, Joe!

Joe McKendrick: Hi, Dana, glad to be here.

Gardner: We are also joined by Brad Shimmin, a principal analyst at Current Analysis. Hey, Brad!

Brad Shimmin: Hi, Dana, thanks for having me.

Gardner: Jim Kobielus joins us. He's a blogger and senior analyst at Forrester Research. Hello, Jim!

Jim Kobielus: Hey, Dana, and Hi, everybody!

Gardner: And Dave Linthicum, blogger, independent consultant, joins us this week. Thanks for coming, Dave.

Dave Linthicum: Thanks, Dana, thanks for having me back.

Gardner: We are going to be talking about the news of the week of Sept. 22, 2008. We'll be looking at the HP-Oracle announcements and other news made here at Oracle OpenWorld. We'll be talking about cloud computing and the notion of "on-premises" or "private clouds," and how data portability might actually work among and between different clouds -- both "public," if you will, and "private." We'll look at recent virtualization news from VMware, HP, Red Hat and Citrix.

An Exadata 'Shocker' ...

Let's start our show this week with Jim Kobielus. Jim, you and I are both here at the Oracle OpenWorld. We had an unusual announcement around optimization between hardware and software from Oracle, which has traditionally been a software-only company.

Oracle and HP introduced two Exadata products. I wonder if you could fill in our audience on what Oracle did this week.

Kobielus: Yes, this week Oracle announced the release, in partnership with HP, of a very high-end data warehousing appliance. They may not use the word "appliance," but that's in fact what it is. It's a configured and optimized bundle of hardware and software, with database storage, so it meets very high-end data warehousing requirements. It's called the HP Oracle Database Machine.

It encompasses and includes the HP Oracle Exadata Storage Server, which is a grid storage level server. One of the key differentiators on that storage approach is that it puts the query processing in the storage subsystem. As a result, it can greatly speed up the processing of very complex analytics. What Oracle and HP have essentially done is take a page from the Netezza book, because that is, of course, the feature of the Netezza performance system. [Netezza] has an appliance that they accelerate your data models through by putting this whole processing back close to storage. But the HP Oracle release does much more than simply taking the page out of that Netezza book.

What they did essentially is they also shot across Teradata's bow, because this is Oracle's petabytes-scale, data warehousing-solution platform. The HP Oracle Database Machine that they demonstrated at the show definitely screams. And it can scale -- Oracle says that it can scale with almost no limits, and that remains to be seen.

But it can definitely go to a much higher scale in terms of capacity than the current Oracle Optimized Warehouses that they have already begun to ship with HP and a variety of other hardware partners. The Oracle Optimized Warehouses max out at several hundred terabytes. And, as I said, the HP Oracle Database Machine can go well beyond that.

This is a shot both across Teradata's bow and across Netezza's. And Oracle Chairman and CEO Larry Ellison from the stage directly honed in on both of those competitors by name.

It was classic Ellison, a very well put together presentation. But quite frankly when you begin to analyze the various claims he made, they don't all hold up. Or rather, he is presenting a lot of the Oracle-specific differentiation. Yet they were very impressive.

Gardner: This is a significant departure for Oracle and HP on several different levels. On one hand, we have a combined hardware-software product from two different vendors. We also have a new parallelization process, with their architectural design, where the database and the storage are very close. The processing can take advantage of massively parallel processing. We also have the fat pipes in the form of InfiniBand connections.

So we have an architectural departure. We have a hardware-software departure, and we also have this interesting alliance between HP and Oracle, making and selling a product together. How does this all strike you, Brad Shimmin?

Shimmin: Well, I was shocked, shocked, absolutely simply shocked. This is because historically Oracle has strayed so far away from the appliance market. It's been surprising to me on a number of occasions when I have spoken with them about acquisitions. Actually they made one acquisition earlier this year, they acquired a company that had an appliance that was very successful, and they chose to simply kill it outright because they “did not want to play in the space.”

With that said, I am glad to see this happening. I really am, and I think that HP is a good partner with them because I don't feel that the two companies really bumped into one another in terms of Oracle's core constituency. So I think it's a good play all around, and I am glad to see Oracle finally getting into this. Now if only they would release parts of their middleware as an appliance, I would be very happy.

Kobielus: And, in fact, Brad, Larry Ellison indicated that they seem to have some plans for that. They really resisted details -- but they seem to have some plans to "appliance-ize," if that's the word, more and more the Oracle Fusion Middleware stack.

Shimmin: There are other quite prominent middleware stack players that are moving to appliances, as well. I can't mention their names but the use of appliances seems to be of great interest to more vendors.

Gardner: I have also been picking up on this interest in the appliance business. IBM has been into this with DataPower SOA Appliances for a while now, but IBM has not really extended use of appliances out as widely as I was expecting. I have also heard that TIBCO may be building an appliance for complex event processing (CEP). So, yes, I think we are going to see more of this.

Brad, I want to go back for one second to the HP-Oracle relationship. It almost seems now that Oracle has anointed HP at some level as a preferred hardware supplier on storage, if not also other aspects of hardware. What does that mean for EMC and some of the other storage hardware providers? They are no longer on an independent or third-party-friendly level with Oracle, right?

Shimmin: Absolutely. I think that all of those relationships will come under strain from this. There is no question about that. And it seems to me that this makes Oracle look a lot more like both IBM and Sun Microsystems and EMC, in terms of having some sort of competency in hardware. So I think there are going be a lot of far-ranging ripples from this relationship that will change the way the market functions.

Gardner: And how is all of this going to come to market? If you want to buy the Exadata warehouse you actually have to go through the Oracle sales force. Oracle is going to support it, and sell it, price it, and then HP is going to service the hardware. So in essence, HP is the supplier to Oracle, and Oracle is the principal vendor. Does that mean anything anybody out there?

Kobielus: It means that Oracle is taking much more of a marketing lead on the HP Oracle Database Machine than they have with any of the Oracle Optimized Warehouses. So Oracle is very much staking its data warehousing go-to-market strategy on this new product, and on this partnership with HP. That said, HP is providing all of the technical support on the new products. So it's not like Oracle is really becoming a hardware vendor, rather they are going to become very much a software vendor, but has staked their future on delivering the software on this one particular hardware partner's platform.

Gardner: Actually it allows Oracle to operate at a solutions level and so take quite a bit more of the margin across that total data warehouse solution, right? And that undercuts the data array providers significantly.

Okay, so let's talk about what we do this thing. We heard that the 1 terabyte-sized data sets and higher start to hit performance issues. And that then prevents companies from adding more queries on their warehouses, and also reduces the amount of additional data that they want to put into their warehouses.

So we could have hit a wall somewhere around 1 terabyte databases. This approach, this architecture in the Exadata hardware-software optimization claims to blow that away, that it can deal with the largest sets, of 10 terabytes and up, with very high performance. What does this mean for business intelligence (BI) analytics? What does this mean for bringing more types of data and content into the warehouse? What are the business outcome benefits?

Joe McKendrick, what are your thoughts on the BI perspective on this market development?

McKendrick: Well, it certainly moves the business intelligence arena forward. Looking at what the rationale is for having an appliance in this market -- versus what's has been happening for the previous decade with data warehousing -- it really says a lot about what's needed in the market.

Data warehouses, when you get into the multiple terabyte range, are simply too complex and have high cost of ownership. That's made BI a fairly expensive proposition for companies going this route, and the cost is tied into the maintenance, the updates for the warehouse software, the organizational effort, and the input required to make a large data warehouse go.

Now there is a trend emerging. I am sure Oracle has an eye on this as well. It's toward open source. We are seeing more open source in data warehouses too. This is open source at the warehouse level itself, at the database level itself. [Sun Microsystem's] MySQL for example has been pointing in this direction, PostgreSQL as well. [And there's Ingres.]

Gardner: Well, that's another distinct issue. Now with Oracle and HP cooperating, why shouldn't we expect Sun to come out with something quite similar, but with MySQL as the database, and their [Sparc/UltraSparc] processing, and their rack, cooling and InfiniBand, and of course, their storage?

McKendrick: I wouldn't be surprised, I wouldn't be surprised one bit if we see some kind of response from Sun fairly soon because Sun still makes its money from hardware.

Gardner: Right, now if Sun does that then IBM will certainly come out with something around DB2. We should expect that, right?

McKendrick: Yes, yes, definitely. And I think there is an emphasis on simplifying data warehousing, making data warehousing simple for the masses. Microsoft, love them or hate them, has been doing a lot of work in this area by increasing the simplicity of its data warehouse and making it available at more of a commodity level for the small to medium size business space.

I think we're going to see more in the open source data warehousing space, and Oracle is looking at that as well.

Gardner: Let's go to Jim Kobielus. Jim, [using Exadata] we can start taking 10 terabyte data sets and delivering analytics in near real-time and deliver query results out to various business applications on huge scale. We can also start looking at this as cloud infrastructure -- where we are going to be providing data as a service, BI as a service even. And then we have Sun, IBM, and perhaps Hitachi, and all these other guys that are jumping in with their own data warehouse appliances, and they start beating each other up on price, and the price comes down in the market. Are we then entering an era of affordable extreme BI?

Kobielus: For sure. Well, extreme BI, that's really BI and data warehousing with very large data sets, with very demanding real-time loading scenarios, with very extensive concurrent usage and so forth. We are already in that era. If you look at what's going on -- and actual deployment, enterprise deployments -- like 10 terabytes, those are in fact much of the data warehousing solutions in the market. That's the joy of data warehousing, enterprise departments are between 5 and 15 terabytes. They are being handled quite well through a lot of symmetric multi-processing (SMP). So these are around in the market.

Now our data warehousing and BI environments are in the hundreds of terabytes, and up to the petabytes range and beyond. A lot of these are in the cloud already. I can't name names yet. There are a few things right now that I can't show. But well-known Web 2.0 service providers are already above the petabytes scale in terms of the amount of data that's persisted, and in terms of their needs and their ability to do continuous concurrent loads into those humongous data warehouses in real-time. In these extreme data warehousing environments you may have millions upon millions of queries hitting that data warehouse all the time.

Gardner: But aren't we with Exadata taking this from the high-end, roll-your-own, computer-science gee-whiz level down to much more of an off-the-shelf, forklift upgrade level? Aren't we now getting to extreme BI at much more a commodity, or at least something that's much more germane across many more types organization?

Cloud computing gains traction ...

Kobielus: Oh, yeah, for sure. It's getting down into the affordable way to eventually bringing cloud data warehouses down into the range of the main market, as well as for large enterprises. ... The one thing -- one of the other important outcomes from my point of view this week at Oracle OpenWorld -- was the fact that Oracle, now in conjunction with Amazon's Elastic Compute Cloud, has an Oracle cloud -- the existing Amazon cloud can take Oracle database licenses.

They can move those licenses to a cloud, hosted by Amazon EC2. Using tools that Oracle is providing they can move their data to back it up or move databases entirely to be persistent in the cloud, in Amazon's S3 service. So this is very much a lead in. I strongly expect that the other enterprise database vendors over time, maybe in a year or two, we'll also offer similar deployments and flexibility for their data warehousing customers.

Gardner: Okay, let's go to Dave Linthicum on that. Dave, you're familiar with moving data around the cloud. It sounds like people will start getting comfortable with this from a risk and from a reliability/privacy/control issue level. And then it's a no-brainer to start moving fairly massive data sets, or for backups or extend-enterprise sharing or federation of data -- what have you, into cloud infrastructures.

How important from your perspective is what Oracle announced in conjunction with Amazon this week?

Linthicum: I think it's very important. I think that the economics -- that it's much cheaper to do cloud computing than on-premises stuff -- and you can prove that at each and every time, or run into an issue around cultural, and kind of total protection issues within the enterprises ... I think those are falling down as time goes on. Go back in a time machine five years ago, and start talking about running major enterprise applications delivered as SaaS, they would have laughed at you.

Today, everyone is using Salesforce.com, and just a bunch of other SaaS-delivered applications. So enterprises are getting their minds around cloud computing, understanding the concept of it. So moving information into the cloud is not really much of a leap. You already have customer information existing on Salesforce.com, or other SaaS providers out there.

I think that this is one step in the direction that, in essence, we're going back in time a bit, moving back into the time-sharing space. A lot of things are going to be pushed back out into the universe through economy's scale, and also through the value of communities. It just can be a much more cheap and cost effective way of doing it. I think it's going to be a huge push in the next two years.

Gardner: Does it seem reasonable that Oracle would test the waters on this, in terms of market acceptance, with Amazon? Once people get a little more familiar and comfortable with it, then Oracle comes out with its own cloud offerings?

Linthicum: Absolutely, I think that Oracle is going to have a cloud offering, IBM is going to have a cloud offering, Sun is going to have a cloud offering, and it's going to be the big talk in the big industry over the next two or three years. I think they are just going to get out there and fight it out.

I think you are going to have number of startups, too. They are going to have huge cloud offerings as well. They are going to compete with the big guys. And they can -- because it's very simple to put up infrastructure. It's fairly cost effective, and you can get out there and start battling it out with them. Quite frankly, I think, maybe the more agile, smaller companies may win that war.

Virtualization for private clouds ...

Gardner: In other recent news, Brad Shimmin, we have heard quite a bit of virtualization, and cloud compute discussions from VMware, from Citrix, and from HP. We saw some acquisition from Red Hat that brings them into the hypervisor space. Maybe you can help our listeners understand a little bit better the relationship between virtualization, management and platform vendors, and how this whole notion of private or enterprise clouds works.

Shimmin: It depends on the perspective we have, right? It depends on if we are talking about virtualizing the datacenter, virtualizing the desktop (VDI), or moving facets of the datacenter to the cloud. If you are trying to understand how, as we were just talking about, these smaller players are able to use things like Amazon EC2 to get into the market -- or if we are talking about moving the desktop to data center cloud -- what I want to understand as a customer is just what the SLAs and protections are from these provides, whether it's IBM or Amazon. And, by the way, another one we need to mention is Cisco, which will be using the WebEx platform as a SaaS platform and SaaS solution for the enterprise.

The point is that as a customer you don't just want to know what the [performance reliability figures] are, you want to know what sort of wrapper these vendors are putting around their solutions for things like security and policy management enforcements. It's not just the fact that they will be able to secure the data, but it's about being able to control and manage the data, and have visibility into the data; whether it's something that's sitting in some sort of virtualized instance in your own datacenter, or whether it's something that's sitting in some federated system that might be shared between Cisco and Amazon.

Gardner: I found it interesting that these vendors are basically tripping over themselves and rushing out to the market, way before these private clouds have even established themselves. Yet the vendors are declaring that they have the infrastructure and the approach to do it. It sort of reminds me of a platform, or even operating system, land grab -- that getting there first and establishing some of the effective standards and coming up with industry-common implementations gives them an opportunity to at some level or format create the de facto portability means.

This is a layer above virtualization. And virtualization is there to bring all the legacy stuff into play, but what do you do with the new applications? What do you do with the new services? Dave Linthicum, what are your thoughts on a meta-operating system in the cloud? Are we in a kind of a race to be first to that?

Linthicum: I think that's a ways off at this point. I think people are going to put aspects of the infrastructure up in the cloud first. And I think that the platform-as-a-service (PaaS) and the ability to provide a development infrastructure, storage infrastructure, some deployment infrastructure, and things like that -- that is all going to be a bit of mix and match. I think people are going to do little tactical projects to kind of dip their toe in the water to see if it is viable.

However as we go forward, I think that's the destination. If you look at how everything is going, I think everything is going to be pushed up into the cloud. People are basically going to have virtual platforms in the cloud, and that's how they are going to drive it. Just from a cost standpoint, everything we just discussed, the advantages are going to be for those who get there first.

I think that very much like the early adopters of the Web, back in the 1990s, this is going to be the same kind of a land grab, and the same kind of land rush that's going to occur. Ultimately you are going to find 60 percent to 80 percent of the business processes over the next 10 years are going to be outsourced.

Gardner: What about this issue of data, these massive data sets, and bringing some of that up into a cloud? Is it going to be just standards-based interoperability for my data set and your data set to play well with each other? To what level are we hung up by different cloud implementations, and therefore perhaps also different data implementations? Does that need to be solved?

Linthicum: Yes, I think it does. I think that you are going to find that integration does occur in the clouds, just like it does within the enterprise, from enterprise to enterprise. The reality is that people have information up there with different semantics, different data formats, and all of that stuff has to be transferred one to another.

I think that the idea of integration in the cloud, which I have been involved with personally over the last 10 years, may actually start to be used. I think that people are going to have to do transformation around control, filtering, all of these things as information moves between these partitions out in the universe. Ultimately integration is going to be easier. We know lot more than we did 15 years ago when I wrote the book, Enterprise Application Integration. But I think that it's still going to be needed and a necessary thing. So maybe integration in the cloud companies should start pushing forward.

Kobielus: I hear what you're saying. I think that's an important point to put forward, which is that these clouds, these data warehousing clouds -- data warehouses that are external to the firewalls, the multi-tenant environments -- are multi-domain, multi-entity data warehouses with strict separations between the various domains, which are often searching with particular customers. But like a supply chain application in the cloud, it is the probably the best place to put all that data so that companies and suppliers and the customers all have access to common pooled data in a common externally hosted environment.

What that raises then is that the data warehouses in the cloud, really become data federation in the cloud. So all these different data sets, the divergent schema and so forth, need to be normalized to a common semantic layer in the cloud provided by that cloud vendor. So then you are into the data federation vendors that had a huge footprint in the enterprise, those guys then need to provide their capabilities in the cloud for these types of supply chain and B2B applications.

I am talking with a couple companies, like Composite Software and some others, where they have well established data federation to manage virtualization layers. Those guys need to get cracking to put a lot of that into a cloud environment to enable this level of data integration and federation in that cloud environment going forward, and make it scalable.

Gardner: Well I think we will have to leave it there. We have been discussing announcements from Oracle OpenWorld, other news in the virtualization space, and how these relate to the future of "extreme BI," as well as what cloud infrastructures might look like from a variety of vendors in the future. I want to thank our panel for joining us for BriefingsDirect Analyst Insights Edition, Vol. 30.

I also want to thank our charter sponsor for supporting our podcast, Active Endpoints, maker of the ActiveVOS visual orchestration system, and Hewlett-Packard via the HP Live! Podcast Series. This is Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions, thanks for listening, and come back next time.

Special offer: Download a free, supported 30-day trial of Active Endpoint's ActiveVOS at www.activevos.com/insight.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsors: Active Endpoints, Hewlett-Packard.

Transcript of BriefingsDirect podcast on Exadata, extreme BI and cloud computing. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2008. All rights reserved.

Interview: HP’s Paul Evans, Oracle’s Lance Knowlton on Application Modernization and IT Transformation

Transcript of BriefingsDirect podcast recorded at the Oracle OpenWorld Conference in San Francisco the week of Sept. 22, 2008.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsor: Hewlett-Packard.

Dana Gardner: Hi, this is Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and you're listening to a special BriefingsDirect podcast recorded at the Oracle OpenWorld conference in San Francisco. We are here the week of Sept. 22, 2008. This HP Live! Podcast is sponsored by Hewlett-Packard (HP), and distributed through the BriefingsDirect Network.

We are here with representatives from both HP and Oracle to discuss how IT infrastructure, systems and software come together in a whole greater than the sum of the parts for many enterprises.

We are going to be discussing services-oriented architecture (SOA), application modernization, next generation data centers and how better results from computing deployments come from tighter integration and cooperation between the platform and software providers.

Joining us to discuss these issues we have Paul Evans, worldwide marketing lead for IT Transformation Solutions at HP. Welcome to the show, Paul.

Paul Evans: Thank you very much.

Gardner: Lance Knowlton, vice president for modernization at Oracle, also joins us. Welcome, Lance.

Lance Knowlton: Thanks for having me.

Gardner: You know here at OpenWorld we have 43,000 people from around the globe, bringing lots of thought leaders together, and it seems that the level of cooperation between HP and Oracle has never been stronger. I wonder if we could start with what's going on between these two large global vendors and how software support and systems come together. Let's go first to Paul. What's going on with this relationship between HP and Oracle?

Evans: Obviously, Oracle and HP have a historical relationship around systems and database. Everyone knows that Oracle is the leader in that space, and that's where the history has been, but as we move forward, the agendas of both HP and Oracle have focused more on the transformation and modernization of environments.

That is built around the desire to deploy new applications, modernize existing applications, or take a fundamental look at the underpinning infrastructure, the support applications.

For some that can be the infrastructure that is the database or the way the operating system just does what the operating system does. But, as we look into the future, the customers that we both have are looking at things like SOA to understand how they are going to architect the solutions going forward. They will incorporate the technologies from HP and Oracle.

Gardner: So this sounds more like a solutions relationship than a supplier relationship.

Evans: Our customers don't buy products. They want solutions to business issues, and that's a very glib term. The word "solution" can be overused by people in marketing, but that's what people want.

You walk into a car show room, and you want to buy a car. You don't want to buy an engine, a set of wheels, or a set of headlights. You are going there for solution for a particular need, whether it's a sports car, a family car, an SUV, or whatever it is you want. Similarly, between companies the size and scale of HP and Oracle, we have the ability to deliver those solutions, both between ourselves, and with the network of partners that we share.

Gardner: I suppose they want an Audi at the price of a Ford Focus. How do we get high performance but at reduced cost, or at least higher value?

Knowlton: Well, in the application modernization space we have seen a number of customers that are faced right now with proprietary legacy systems. These systems are costing them a lot of money, not only in dollars, but also in agility, and the lack of ability to be able to react to business conditions in that particular industry. So when we are modernizing legacy systems out of these proprietary platforms, we are helping to reduce their cost and increase agility, which is a much more beneficial approach than just simply leaving them on the proprietary platforms that they have had.

Gardner: Now this is more than simply modernizing the applications. They also want these applications to play well with the newer applications, be they packaged apps or green-field apps from either ISVs or the custom apps that the organizations are building internally. Help us understand how Oracle and HP work together, not only on the modernization, but more so on the SOA approach.

Knowlton: SOA is an approach where you take existing applications or new applications and create services on top of these applications. This is very important from the sense that you are abstracting these entry points into these systems and you no longer have the dependency of these systems in where they run today.

SOA is not only important in new application development, but also where we're leveraging legacy systems, and bringing these systems together. From this point you are no longer creating point-to-point relationships, but you are actually allowing a higher level of reuse, and many more participants can access these applications.

Gardner: Paul, if I'm in an organization modernizing apps and I am getting better integration on a services orientation, I'm not going to be just looking at my apps to transition and to transform. I'll probably be taking a hard look at the infrastructure as well. So we're talking about a multi-tiered approach here. The benefit being agility, but also lower total cost as we go to these more modern systems and platforms. What's the relationship between application modernization and the next generation data center – the end goal on the journey?

Evans: Well, all organizations are looking to modernize or transform. They all are. They're doing it in different ways, whether it's hardware, software, services, whatever it maybe. Everybody is modernizing something. Nobody is standing still.

The recent business environment we have seen over the last month or two has pointed out that business changes very quickly and people have to respond to that. IT has to also, as it will either lead or follow -- but it is intrinsically involved in that change process.

The customers that Lance and I work with come from different directions. Some come in from, "I have all aged applications that I need to transform. They're costing me a fortune. They are inflexible, and they don't respond to change. The skills of the people to support these applications are becoming limited, so we need to move now and do something."

We have other clients who come from the database environment. They're looking to provide a much stronger, more resilient database environment to look after their information, and provide a much-improved level of customer service. Or, they come in from an infrastructure point of view. "I'm running hardware. It's obsolete. It's aging. It's costing me a fortune. I want to change."

So there's no-one-size-fits-all. What we have done with the relationship between HP and Oracle is that we have studied some of these points, whether database historically, or whether it was two years ago when we started the application modernization initiative with Oracle.

We came at it from the top down, but what we are also looking at is a holistic view around what we call IT Transformation. That allows our clients to join the party from any doorway they want in terms of what they are looking for in a business benefit. That's the really exciting thing between us and Oracle, because you have two organizations with immense capability that bring that capability together to deliver these real-world cost solutions.

Gardner: We're hearing some pretty interesting news this week about deeper relationship between Oracle and HP. We're also seeing an additional partner, Intel, prominent here at the show. Tell me a little bit about the triumvirate, if you will, of Oracle, HP and Intel.

Evans: Well, the combination of what Oracle, HP and Intel can bring, is somewhat immeasurable in terms of the capabilities of three companies. Two years ago, we announced this thing called Application Modernization Initiative (AMI), which was from all three companies.

The intent here was to bring together the capabilities of the three companies and to de-risk the solutions that we could provide by doing the testing off-site in our own labs to make sure the effects what Oracle is producing, versus what HP produces, runs on what Intel produces. So you have three enormous companies with enormous capability taking the time to really ensure that the modernization solutions that we deliver to our customers actually do what they say on the box.

Gardner: Lance, what does that mean for modernization in Oracle's perspective?

Knowlton: When we talked to our customers, there are two key areas that they look at. They are having problems on their legacy. That's their applications and their data. From the applications perspective, these systems are often fragmented and siloed. They've been developed over the past 30 years, and they have been maintained so much that they no longer have the ability to keep pace with the business.

From the data perspective, often times the data is very siloed. It's very hard to leverage in future-state architecture. So for Oracle the interest that we have for HP and Intel with applications modernization is to be able to take this legacy data and legacy applications and bring them forward into a new architecture.

Oracle will often speak about SOA and Java relational databases, but it's not just enough to talk about new standards and new technologies. You have to have a process and a means of bringing those systems forward. That's what AMI brings to the party.

Gardner: In this IT transformation phase, there are different implications for different enterprises. It's happening not in an isolated fashion, but in the context of some other major trends. We have more virtualization. We have storage that has created these abstractions of data. We have the need for skills that is propelling people off of these older systems.

Tell me, Paul, about some of these trends that are underscoring and accelerating IT transformation, and what that means also for HP and Oracle.

Evans: When Lance and I worked in this thing called AMI two years ago, we had our sights firmly set on applications. What is also bubbling up, and I think technology by technology, is this whole concept around the next generation of data center, which a lot of our customers, joint customers, are looking at. Oracle, the world leader in databases, has a real interest in the data center market. From a high technology infrastructure market, we obviously are extremely interested in where people are going.

As we said earlier, there are different priorities. Some people are coming at this from a green IT issue. They want to lower their power in cooling. They want to reduce their floor space that the data center uses, or CO2 emissions.

Other people are coming at this from experimenting with newer technologies like virtualization. How can I improve the servers' utilization by actually using this virtualization technology? Other people come at it from a more straightforward way, which is, "Hey, I have an aging mainframe. I am not going to continue to pay the sort of prices that I have to do for that technology. Therefore, I am going to upgrade."

The next-generation data center is the underpinning to some degree of what we are seeing, whereas the reverse of that is what we see in the applications world. But what we are seeing is these two coming together, and I think that the real joy and benefit, as it were, and passion in this is what Oracle brings, and what HP brings. Then, of course, what we can now blend into that what HP will bring with the EDS acquisition, in terms of the skills and knowledge and industry credibility.

In terms of bringing solutions of a world-class nature, that will exploit the work that Lance and others and I have worked on over the last couple of years, but also those fundamental technologies, which of course are underpinned, by the Intel technology. So it all tends to sort of overlap and come together. As long as we can explain it to our customers in simple joined-up language, then I think we are going to have a lot of fun, and in a great position.

Gardner: How is the market reacting to this? It sounds like a fairly complex approach and, as I say, it's going to vary from enterprise to enterprise, perhaps from department to department. What's going on out there? How are people adjusting to this? Are they tentative; is there an accelerating adoption? What do you see as the trend in that regard?

Knowlton: We see a lot of pent-up demand in this particular area. Paul mentioned legacy skill sets. We have had a couple of our customers over the last month tell us that they are actually bringing back IT staff – these people were greater than 70 years old -- because they simply could no longer maintain their existing legacy applications. We hear this time and time again. There are systems that went down, and that have been maintained over such a long period of time, that they are not able to bring them back up again.

Gardner: At that age you ought to get your options to invest fairly quickly, don't you think?

Knowlton: Exactly, exactly.

Gardner: So in addition to having these skill-sets issues, we are starting to see not only pent-up demand worked at from the legacy perspective, but also we are starting to see people interested in modern architectures. Tell us, Paul, what are you seeing from HP's perspective on readiness -- how to move in a market?

Evans: As I said earlier, everybody wants to modernize. The problem is that people see it to be risky. So we have this situation where 10 percent of the customers that Lance and I go out and talk to are sort of on the move, want to modernize, are getting on with things. Eighty percent of those customers out there are watching the 10 percent to see will they stumble, will they fall, will they actually deliver improved agility, and will the cost be lower?

I think we have enough proof points now that those people are saying now is the time we have to do this. We can't keep holding back. It was like the age-old days where you were going to buy a brand new calculator or mobile phone. If you wait a week the price will go down. Well, yes, the price did go down. The problem is that for that week that you waited, you didn't have the benefit of the technology.

Customers have now gotten to that inflection point that [former Intel Chairman and CEO] Andy Grove used to talk about, which is the point that says, "We have got to move. Our competitors are moving. They are modernizing. They are delivering improved customer satisfaction and service."

Whether you are an airline or a car manufacturer, everybody is using technology to deliver richer customer experience. If you don't modernize, you have no ability to deliver that experience. That's what is driving the market, whether it's a change in applications, whether it's database, whether it's a move to SOA, or the underlying infrastructure. Here at Oracle, everyone is asking us, "What do I do, where do I start, what do I need to do?"

Gardner: Let's look at some examples. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say. Lance, give us some examples perhaps of where 70-year-olds have had to be brought in, and what happens after the modernization and transformation activities?

Knowlton: There is an inherent cost of doing nothing, and, as Paul is alluding to, you can't just simply let these legacy systems stay out there, not treat them truly as an asset, and not have an ongoing plan on how to modernize them. What we have seen several times with our customers is, they have not have had that plan. They let these systems age. They become fragile over time, and now they have to figure out a strategy on how to move them forward. Often times, they feel like that this is a big-bang sort of risk.

Gardner: I know you can't always mention names, but you give me some examples of what's really happened in the field?

Knowlton: We have had one of our customers in the manufacturing area that had a system outage that was planned. They expected the system outage to be just a couple of hours. Unfortunately, they found that they couldn't bring the systems back up. This was a very critical process to the manufacturing, and after seven days they finally got the system back up. So, it was a mission-critical system, and because they didn't understand it, and because they had not modernized that system, they are exposing themselves to a tremendous amount of risk.

Gardner: So they are fairly brittle at this point?

Knowlton: Very brittle.

Gardner: Any additional examples from the HP side, Paul?

Evans: There is always one thing that Lance and I understand every day of the week. Legacy systems still, in general, run the largest organizations, whether that's in a public sector or a private sector worldwide. That's something we have to understand.

Legacy doesn't mean they are old and unused. It means they are old, but actually critical to the operation in any organization. The point is that we have to appreciate that, but in moving people from the legacy world, we are, as it were, playing with, experimenting with, and having to work with the systems that are absolutely fundamental to that company's success or failure.

That's why we have done so much in de-risking the solution, because what we have to demonstrate to these customers is that by moving from the legacy environment to a modernized environment, they are going to get improvement. They are not just going to spend a ton of money with Oracle and HP, and we are going to walk away and leave them. We are not going to do that. What we have got to ensure is that whatever they're using today we can improve on, and give them a fundamental change in the cost structure, but also a fundamental uplift in the agility.

From the example standpoint, one of our clients is an airline. These days, all of us expect to just sit at our PC, wherever it might be, and be able to choose any option we want in terms of what we are going eat on the plane, where we are going to sit, who we are going to sit next to, and are not going to sit next to, and all the rest of it.

One airline we have been working with has not been able to offer some of that capability. They have traditionally run batch mode, in which they get all the bookings in from the travel agents during the day, process them overnight, and the following day everyone knows what flight they are on.

By not being able to offer that real time capability, they have seen sales drop, because people are just not prepared to say that somebody else is going to allocate my seat when I get the airport. I want to sit. I want to print my boarding card. So, that airline is suffering real problems in terms of not being able to do that. Now, they are in that position of being on the back foot, and they have to work twice as hard to regain the position they had in the first place.

Gardner: And, that's not a band-aid solution. That's a fundamental transformation that will bring them into that real-time capability.

Evans: Well, I think the challenge is that they've spent years and years and years bringing up a loyal customer base. It's the old adage. It takes $10 to get somebody into a store, but it only takes $1 to keep them in the store. The point being, if you build up a loyal customer base, as long as you can keep delivering and pleasing them with the customer experience, they will remain loyal customers. The problem is, as soon as you trip, they can be somewhere else.

Gardner: Sure. Expectations are increasingly getting toward that real-time gratification.

Evans: Absolutely.

Gardner: Especially among the younger folks.

Evans: It's the "I want it now, and if I can't get it now, I will go and find somebody else that will give it to me now."

Gardner: We were here talking about of IT transformation, legacy systems, and modernization of applications at Oracle OpenWorld. We have been focusing also on how the services and value of Hewlett-Packard and Oracle come together on that front.

We have been joined by Paul Evans, worldwide marketing lead for IT Transformation Solutions at HP, and also Lance Knowlton, vice president for Modernization at Oracle.

Our conversation today comes to you through a sponsored HP Live! Podcast from the Oracle OpenWorld conference in San Francisco. Look for other podcasts from this live event series at hp.com, as well as via the BriefingsDirect Network. I’d like to thank our producers on today's show Fred Bals and Kate Whalen, and of course, our panelists.

This is Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Thanks for listening, and come back next time for more in-depth podcasts, on enterprise IT topics and solutions. Bye for now.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsor: Hewlett-Packard.

Transcript of BriefingsDirect podcast recorded at the Oracle OpenWorld Conference in San Francisco. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2008. All rights reserved.

Interview: HP's John Santaferraro on Latest BI Modernization and Data Warehousing Strategies

Transcript of BriefingsDirect podcast recorded at the Oracle OpenWorld Conference in San Francisco the week of Sept. 22, 2008.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsor: Hewlett-Packard.

Dana Gardner: Hi, this is Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and you're listening to a special BriefingsDirect podcast recorded at the Oracle OpenWorld conference in San Francisco. We are here the week of Sept. 22, 2008. This HP Live! Podcast is sponsored by Hewlett-Packard (HP) and distributed through the BriefingsDirect Network.

We welcome John Santaferraro, director of marketing for HP’s Business Intelligence (BI) portfolio. We're going to be talking about the intersection of BI in the context of not just business value and outcomes, but in the context of Oracle, a major data applications middleware and BI provider, and HP as prominent systems provider, as well as a prominent BI services provider.

We're going to try to figure out how this plays together. Then, we'll look toward the future of BI in the context of some major trends, such as service-oriented architecture (SOA), master data management (MDM), and bringing more automation to the delivery of intelligence from systems and data to those users who need it at the front lines of business. So I want to welcome John Santaferraro to the show.

John Santaferraro: Glad to be here, Dana. Thanks.

Gardner: First, let's set the stage and get a level-set about the Oracle-HP relationship vis-à-vis BI, because we're here at Oracle OpenWorld. Oracle is in the software side of things predominantly. You’ve got both systems and services. Perhaps you could paint a picture of how this fits together.

Santaferraro: It’s been a great and long relationship that we've had with Oracle since they were first building and releasing a database. We had folks in our labs that understood this idea of databases and data warehousing, and they were actually building and architecting our systems in a special way with things like massive I/O, massive memory to address -- the kinds of things you need in a data warehouse and query environment.

Back in those days, we were actually building our systems to handle data warehouse workloads, when everybody else was still focused only on the regular online transaction processing (OLTP) kinds of transactions in the enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems.

Because of that natural connection that we had with what was going in our labs, and what Oracle was doing, we have from the very start built a tight relationship with them from an engineering perspective and a good market perspective. Oracle is very clearly a leader in data warehousing and BI, and we augment that with the systems that we have developed to run in an optimized way with Oracle, as well as some other services that we bring to bear.

We recently bought a company called Knightsbridge, which was known as the go-to company for anybody who was doing data warehousing or BI and who ran into problems that nobody else could solve. Everybody knew that if you went to Knightsbridge, there were people there who could solve those problems. So it’s great to have them at the center of our global BI services organization. This company has taken their methodology and their expertise and has transferred it to folks around the world.

The other great thing about the acquisition of Knightsbridge is that they have real deep expertise in their various vertical markets -- health and life sciences, communications, financial services, retail manufacturing. Because of that, the Oracle-HP relationship is strengthening.

We are more than a systems provider and more than a services provider. We are delivering real solutions to our customers. We can come alongside of anybody, talk to them at the level of the business, and be able to build data warehousing and BI solutions that are mapped to the business, not just technology.

Gardner: I just got back from listening to Thomas Kurian at Oracle describe their full portfolio, and they’ve really put together quite a full lifecycle approach around the gathering, cleansing, and organizing of data, integrating it from disparate sources, managing the scale of huge loads, making this closer to a real-time value. They're also exporting middleware for application integration, creating the BI analytics, and then delivering that back out to those business applications.

It’s quite an impressive portfolio. They've been putting it together for quite some time, and they’re also quite proud of the metrics around the performance, and getting closer to that real-time nirvana. Tell us a little bit about how what Oracle has done from the lifecycle perspective and what you think are important aspects of the services’ side of making organizations readily able to let exploit those technologies.

Santaferraro: What you described is very much a product lifecycle in the data warehouse and BI space. Along with that, you can go in two directions. Along with the product lifecycle, there is actually a system lifecycle as well. Anytime anybody says to me that they can make data warehousing simple, I react, because the truth is that it’s very complex.

The processes you just described are extremely difficult for any company to work with and navigate through. Add to that the whole infrastructure piece of it. The more you move towards “operationalizing” BI, suddenly the more important the infrastructure becomes.

A lot of time we get calls from customers who are trying to deploy data warehousing solutions. They'll be in test and development and are supposed to perform, and they've got users out there who are expecting to click on a button and get all of the information back within a matter of seconds, and they can’t figure out how to make it work.

So they call the HP storage folks and they say, "Hey, we’ve got a storage problem. What’s going on here?" And, the storage folks say, "Well, wait a minute, it's not storage. That sounds like the database." So, they call Oracle, and Oracle says, “Well, that’s not us. It’s not the database. It must be a server problem.” So the customer has to go back to the server guy. We have people that will lose weeks of time in deploying their systems, because the entire lifecycle is extremely complex.

What we really do is look at how can we come alongside of Oracle in our labs and figure out how to build those systems with Oracle, pre-installed, pre-configured, and pre-tested, so that what the customer is getting is ready to go out of the box. It takes the guesswork out of all of this implementation and development that they’ve got to do.

I had one customer who lost a week in production, lost a week in test and dev, went into production and made the same exact little thing. They forgot to turn on a synchronous I/O on their storage system. It’s just a basic little problem, but it cost them another week in production time before they were up and running.

So, we’ve got solutions like HP BladeSystem for Oracle Optimized Warehouse. We have about 50 reference configurations that help take the guesswork out of deploying these.

Gardner: This is really more than just one hand washing the other. This is three hands washing each other. We have the systems integration and specialized software, which is created through products, integration, and technology innovation, and then the opportunity for that third hand of services to come in with methodologies and best practices, for preventing those gotchas.

Santaferraro: Exactly. And then, on the services’ side, here are people who have walked this path before. They’ve done it before. My recommendation to companies who are out there trying to do BI and data warehousing and are hitting difficulties is, “Why not go find somebody who has done it before?”

You really don’t have to do it alone. There are people out there who have walked this path. They’ve done it. They know the gotchas. They have accelerators. They have ways of making it all come together faster. And all of that translates into more business value. If I don’t have to spend as much time in deployment, as much time in all of the testing and trying to figure out what is wrong, then I can be investing my time and my effort in developing real business innovation and real business value.

Gardner: And, of course, in the field there are many different companies that are at different places on the path toward some of these goals. For those that are deeply into BI and recognize the value of getting this lifecycle, elevating the data, getting that good quality data out, and then be able to work with it, what’s the next step?

I’m hearing some buzzwords nowadays about operational BI and even BI modernization. Tell me little bit about what these mean, and are these in fact the next chapters in where companies will be taking this capability?

Santaferraro: Yes, these are definitely the next chapters, and you're seeing right now probably about five percent of companies out there -- the ones who are on the leading or bleeding edge -- already doing Operational BI and BI Modernization.

Operational BI has to do with this idea that I have all of this data in a single place, it’s accessible, and it’s fairly well cleaned. I don’t think anybody has perfectly clean data -- that doesn’t exit -- but once it’s there, what do I do with it?

We're finding that customers want to do two things. One, they want to get that information to everyone across the organization, as well as customers and partners, and they want it to be actionable. So how do I get actionable information in the hands of everyone across my organization who needs it?

The second thing I see is people wanting to do with operational BI is actually take the analytics that are driving their systems, and embed them in the business processes or in the business applications. When a loan comes in to be underwritten, you want to have the right rules that don't put you in a position as a bank where you end up with a bunch of loans that you can't sell in the secondary market, or going into default. Everybody is aware of that problem, right?

How do you take the analytics and discovery that you’ve made and put it right in the applications, so the decision is automatically made by the application or so somebody has it right there. As they are using the business application, they have the information to make the decision right there at their disposal.

Gardner: And is that what you call operational BI?

Santaferraro: Yes.

Gardner: Now, this also raises in my mind a question about the capabilities that a services oriented architecture (SOA) offers -- governance, bringing services like BI as a service into play with applications, but at the right point in time. So it's exercising governance policy; learning from your mistakes, and building on them. How does what you’re describing as operational BI and SOA fit together?

Santaferraro: It’s a great question, because when I hear people talking about SOA, I primarily hear them talking about business services. How do I take these mammoth applications that I’ve built, reduce them into reusable business services, and be able to use them effectively across the organization, instead of replicating them all over. The real opportunity comes when you have these business services in operation and you begin to bring in information services as well. Take customer profitability, for example. That's not really a business service. It’s an information service.

A lot of analysis has to go into the mix for companies to figure out or answer the question, "Who are my most profitable customers?" If you can figure that out, and give every customer a rating, then that information service again becomes a service within a SOA that you can actually use and distribute in a very useful way all across the organization. You can send it to the call center, send it to the sales force, send it to the Web, and send it to the ATM transactions that are happening. So there's a whole opportunity of information services as a part of SOA that haven't even begun to be tapped.

Gardner: It’s sort of the intelligent implementation of BI as a service?

Santaferraro: Absolutely.

Gardner: How does that differ from BI modernization?

Santaferraro: Modernization is built around this whole concept that folks started doing data warehousing 15 to 20 years ago. It’s a fairly old technology; yet it’s still very useful. It’s still something that companies need to do, but a lot of new technology has come in and new kinds of data. We are discovering that data warehousing had great value. It has all the information in a single place. It made information accessible. You could now do analysis.

Gardner: But it was largely structured data.

Santaferraro: Exactly. Now we have other kinds of data coming. What about email? What about document management systems, and all the documents that are being digitized? What about new types of data like RFID? What about GPS data? There are all these new types of data, and we're discovering now that the data warehouse bubbled up.

It's a great value for BI, but not everything has to go into the data warehouse. In fact, we’ve discovered with a lot of our customers that as soon as the data warehouse gets to a terabyte, about 70 percent of the data in that data warehouse never even gets touched or used.

So companies are spending enormous amounts of money to build these massive data warehouses, and a lot of that is not being used. Modernization is about figuring out what data needs to go into the data warehouse and what needs to be delivered through the enterprise service bus (ESB). Are there certain things where you can just embed analytics out at the application layer and do the analytics out there? Are there other types of data that should be just cataloged at the user level?

Gardner: Metadata, for example?

Santaferraro: Yes, and metadata becomes the rich side of definitions around that content, that actually brings it all together for the sake of the user.

Gardner: Regardless of where it resides?

Santaferraro: Exactly, and that becomes active metadata by the way. It’s no longer just this metadata that sits below for the data folks to understand what’s there. It’s active metadata that the users are using to understand the information that they're looking at.

Gardner: I suppose that, over time, that’s going to also include events?

Santaferraro: Absolutely, events and then tie right into the new complex event processing (CEP) systems. One of the opportunities that I’ve not seen tapped into by any software companies is this whole new world of information delivery.

So, if you’re operationalizing BI, if you’ve got a modernized BI infrastructure with data provisioning in place, and it’s not just the data warehouse -- you’re basically trying to get it out to all these users across the enterprise and embed it in business processes. There needs to be the design of a brand new information-delivery system that actually can handle all of these kinds of data to the desktop, to the application, to the hand-held device, or wherever it happens.

Gardner: Without belaboring this point, what sort of technologies are you looking at? Is this syndication, publish-and-subscribe, terminal services? What do you use to get that out there?

Santaferraro: I would say, yes. Because, as I said, I haven’t seen anybody that’s done it yet.

Gardner: Good, a big opportunity there. Okay. We've talked about this modernization of BI. This is happening in the context of other trends, of course, for virtualizing our data centers, and a lot has been done to virtualize storage and data over time.

We're going to be bringing in more kinds of content. We might even be getting content and services off of clouds, other people's public services or perhaps a cooperative private federation among business partners, all of which has to be managed and accurately projected back into the application services and processes that people use. It sounds very interesting, and is a much easier sale to the C-class, the corner office in the organization, because this really helps them in the way they do business.

What can companies do in terms of exploiting these technologies, getting those business outcomes, and, I suppose most importantly, how do they get started? As you say, this is not trivial. It’s complex and needs to be done properly.

Santaferraro: Most companies are started right now in BI and data warehousing. What I hear a lot of customers say is that they either are not getting the value out the investment they are putting into it, or they don’t know if they are. So I think it really makes sense to kind of pause where you're at and bring in some experts to do an assessment.

We do a lot of work with customers. We look at the vision, the strategy, and the planning behind data warehousing and BI, and because of our depth of experience, we can come alongside our customers and help them figure out what’s working and what’s not to put value on where to really invest moving forward, and help drive that forward in an intelligent way. Why not do BI with some intelligence behind it?

That’s one thing. The second thing is that with operational BI on the horizon, we’ve got a lot of folks within our organization who understand the potential of what could be done with BI in a bank? What if you could have customer profitability, customer segmentation services, and offer optimization at every point of sale? So, for the teller, for the ATM service, for the call center, wherever somebody is interacting with a bank, all of that information is right there with them.

What we find is that people have been so caught in the world of reporting and just basic analytics and online analytical processing that takes place in the back room. We think that it also makes sense to move to this next level. Bring in some folks who understand operational BI and let’s dream together and figure out if you could actually have these capabilities, what could you do with your company? How could you transform your relationship with your customers and your suppliers?

It's basic vision strategy and planning, too. Let’s get together and dream about operational BI, and figure out what your company could become? We actually believe that in the next five to seven years that there is going to be a major restructuring of leaders in every single industry. The ones who come out on top are going to be those companies that figure out how to use BI to transform themselves into competitive leaders.

We want to be there with our customers to make that happen for them.

Gardner: And this is not just for them to actually find new markets, but to uncover risks that they wouldn’t have been able to uncover until it was too late. And we’ve seen examples of that -- and perhaps to focus on what the right businesses are to be in and not to be in? So it’s not just how to make things better, it’s also risk mitigation on what to avoid?

Santaferraro: Absolutely.

Gardner: Very good. We’ve been talking about BI and some of the next chapters in BI, particularly in a context of a longstanding partnership between Oracle and HP. We’ve been joined by John Santaferraro, director of marketing for HP’s BI portfolio. Thanks very much, John.

Santaferraro: Thanks a lot, Dana.

Gardner: Our conversation comes to you today through a sponsored HP Live! Podcast from the Oracle OpenWorld conference in San Francisco. Look for other podcasts from this HP Live! event series at hp.com, as well as via the BriefingsDirect Network.

I'd like to thank our producers on today's show, Fred Bals and Kate Whalen. I'm Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Thanks for listening, and come back next time for more in-depth podcasts on enterprise IT topics and solutions. Bye for now.

Listen to the podcast. Download the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod. Learn more. Sponsor: Hewlett-Packard.

Transcript of BriefingsDirect podcast recorded at the Oracle OpenWorld Conference in San Francisco. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2008. All rights reserved.