2 ms·

I remember Lou Gerstner predicting the rise of utility computing way back in 2002[1]. It was a great idea, but IBM were simply unable to execute on it. As far

by wtbob 12y ago

I remember Lou Gerstner predicting the rise of utility computing way back in 2002[1]. It was a great idea, but IBM were simply unable to execute on it. As far as I can tell, Amazon were the first firm to actually execute and deliver. [1] http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2002/gerstner http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2002/gerstner

ghshephard 12y ago
It's tricky - "Utility Computing" can mean many things to many people. I think the subtle challenge is in understanding the difference between "Cloud Services", "Hosted Services", "Web Hosting", "Professional Services", etc... There were a lot of "Managed Web Hosting" companies back in 2000/2001, doing quite well. Logictier, Sitesmith, Mimecom, Loudcloud were some of the big ones. What Loudcloud tried to do was provide a platform that other companies could drop their application on top of. Loudcloud fought and struggled for the longest time to keep the users from having root on their servers, and installing whatever they wanted - until they finally gave up that battle, and just let the customers have at it. What LDCL never understood, (or, perhaps, it was just to early to deliver) is that the real, amazing scale came from having simple services that are 100% automated to procure, and then letting the customers procure and deploy those services, and then build their applications against those services. That is, provide scalable services, and let the customers worry about how to scale their applications to use them. A lot of the early LDCL DNA came from AOL, where it was observed that every time a business was placed on AOL, they would collapse under the flood of traffic that came at them. As such, it was believed that most businesses wouldn't know how to scale their system - but they could write their functional code. So the division was, "You write the application, we'll scale the rest" - If I understand what they do, it feels like Heroku ended up executing on LDCL's original vision. LDCL, in some ways, executed well, but on the wrong vision (or, once again, perhaps the timing was wrong). They wrote massive systems management/package management software, that would allow people to deploy code, software, on a large number of servers but never really got into the business of supplying "cloud services" the way we think of them now. Still, $1.6 Billon exit in 8 years on around $350mm raised - not too shabby. And talk about your pivots...In the middle of an economic (web) collapse no less. Ben Horowitz is quite the street fighter... (More details here: http://www.bhorowitz.com/the_case_for_the_fat_startup http://www.bhorowitz.com/the_case_for_the_fat_startup)

by wtbob 12y ago

ghshephard 12y ago

It's tricky - "Utility Computing" can mean many things to many people. I think the subtle challenge is in understanding the difference between "Cloud Services", "Hosted Services", "Web Hosting", "Professional Services", etc... There were a lot of "Managed Web Hosting" companies back in 2000/2001, doing quite well. Logictier, Sitesmith, Mimecom, Loudcloud were some of the big ones. What Loudcloud tried to do was provide a platform that other companies could drop their application on top of. Loudcloud fought and struggled for the longest time to keep the users from having root on their servers, and installing whatever they wanted - until they finally gave up that battle, and just let the customers have at it. What LDCL never understood, (or, perhaps, it was just to early to deliver) is that the real, amazing scale came from having simple services that are 100% automated to procure, and then letting the customers procure and deploy those services, and then build their applications against those services. That is, provide scalable services, and let the customers worry about how to scale their applications to use them. A lot of the early LDCL DNA came from AOL, where it was observed that every time a business was placed on AOL, they would collapse under the flood of traffic that came at them. As such, it was believed that most businesses wouldn't know how to scale their system - but they could write their functional code. So the division was, "You write the application, we'll scale the rest" - If I understand what they do, it feels like Heroku ended up executing on LDCL's original vision. LDCL, in some ways, executed well, but on the wrong vision (or, once again, perhaps the timing was wrong). They wrote massive systems management/package management software, that would allow people to deploy code, software, on a large number of servers but never really got into the business of supplying "cloud services" the way we think of them now. Still, $1.6 Billon exit in 8 years on around $350mm raised - not too shabby. And talk about your pivots...In the middle of an economic (web) collapse no less. Ben Horowitz is quite the street fighter... (More details here: http://www.bhorowitz.com/the_case_for_the_fat_startup http://www.bhorowitz.com/the_case_for_the_fat_startup)