Microsoft, HP to unveil 'solutions built on new infrastructure-to-application model'
Summary: Microsoft and partner Hewlett-Packard are holding a press conference this morning (January 13), where the pair are planning to announce a new joint investment "to prepare customers for the next generation of business computing," according to information provided to the media.
Microsoft and partner Hewlett-Packard are holding a press conference this morning (January 13), where the pair are planning to announce a new joint investment "to prepare customers for the next generation of business computing," according to information provided to the media.
HP posted early its press release on the topic but pulled it before I could grab any more than the headline: "HP and Microsoft Simplify Technology Environments with Solutions Built on New Infrastructure-to-application Model." Whatever that means....
Update: More details about the $250 million cloud infrastructure deal are now at the bottom of this post.
Microsoft's press site connected with today's announcement points to its "IT Infrastructure" Web page, where Microsoft hosts information on everything from its cloud computing, to its virtualization products and everything in between. In December, Microsoft moved the Azure team to make it part of the company's Server and Tools division.
Given that Microsoft's Azure cloud environment officially opens for business of February 1 -- the date Microsoft starts charging customers for hosting data and apps in its cloud -- perhaps this is related in some way to Azure. (A side note: Microsoft isn't starting to charge users for its AppFabric development components for Azure until April, so this is somewhat of a rolling roll-out.)
Last May, Microsoft and HP announced a $180 million pact for four years to create and market unified communications products and services together.
In any case, I'm sure there will be lots of total-cost-of-ownership data and cost-savings promises involved. We'll find out more details around 11:15 a.m. ET today once the pair go live with the specifics. I'll provide an update.
Here are more details:
* It's a three-year, $250 million partnership
* Included deliverables: An engineering road map created by the pair for data management machines; jointly developed "pre-packaged" application solutions; integrated virtualization offerings; and integrated management tools. The pair is committing to integrate HP Insight Software, HP Business Technology Optimization software and Microsoft System Center with Microsoft Hyper-V Server.
* Joint sales/partnering network will sell the HP-Microsoft solutions
* Creation of a "deeply optimized machine environment" based on providing products like Exchange Server and SQL Server via "turnkey, pre-integrated server, storage, networking and application packages" that provide "'push button' simplicity in deployment and management" (according to the joint press release). These jointly developed apps will be in the aras of data warehousing, business-intellegence, transaction-processing and more, and will be cloud-deployable and/or on premises.
* The cloud angle: The pair will collaborate on the Windows Azure platform, with HP and Microsoft offering services, and Microsoft continuing to invest in HP hardware for Windows Azure infrastructure," the press release said.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
A Day late and a dollar short: Microsoft
Microsoft is once again late to the game.
So, they are attempting to make yet another 'empty' promise for future services that don't exist today.
Microsoft would like nothing better than to have CFOs freeze their Cloud development initiatives and wait for them to catch up.
<a href="http://aws.amazon.com/">Amazon Web Services</a> is continuing its expansion and has a total of over three years experience in Cloud Infrastructure, Operating System as a service with 'on demand' pay for only the resources you need being its main attractor.
Don't limit yourself to a Microsoft-only proprietary Cloud.
AWS is agnostic and gives you flexibility to choose which O/S to use, including <a href="http://aws.amazon.com/windows/">Microsoft Windows Server 2008</a>, without any license, if you so choose.
Amazon Web Services is here today
<a href="http://www.dtschmitz.com">Dietrich T. Schmitz</a>
Amazon Web Service Provider
Amazon and scalability
As an Amazon partner, I'm curious whether you agree or have anything to say about a recent blog post claiming Amazon is hitting a scalability wall. Do you think it's true?
Here it is: http://alan.blog-city.com/has_amazon_ec2_become_over_subscribed.htm
MJ
There are two sides to a coin, and an edge.
Also, it should be noted latency, by itself, does not imply a scalability issue.
For example, if a web app user spawned a thread for a 'poorly-optimized' back-end database SQL query, that query might be contributory to latency seen in an app, if the query doesn't return its results in a timely fashion.
Moreover, SQL correlated queries are preferred over nested dynamic queries and if developers of the web app's database were diligent in testing their SQLs (e.g., using <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explain_Plan">Explain</a>) they'd have readily seen where their DB bottlenecks are.
Something as simple as identifying a slow-running query and observing that it is running a 'brute-force' sequential table scan vs indexed read can be remedied with the creation of a new primary key index on the column or columns of the database which are part of a SQL select/insert/delete query statement.
It is stuff like the above that has hit concerns like Twitter. The tools they were using were first suspect (Ruby on Rails), but it was really a matter of their coming to terms with their own programming and scalability issues that ultimately allowed them to become the success they are today. Their scalability issues were not due to the inability of RoR to scale, it was only that they had to go through their own 'learning curve' on how best to configure their servers for peak demand usage that was at issue.
No fault of the tools/resources--just a 'learning experience'.
So, while I won't rule out the possibility that AWS may have intermittent 'growing pains', I am always concerned when only one side of a story is given in a blog.
To be fair, the author could have given Amazon the opportunity to provide a response which could have been included in the story.
AWS Networking Latency issue update
There appears to be a broader issue going on with networking at AWS and the latency is now being reported by many concerns. <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/15/amazon_ec2_latency/">FYI</a>
Something as obvious as a down or incorrectly programmed router can produce latency symptoms by itself.
This 'latency' does not necessarily have anything to do with 'scalability' issues as suggested by MJ.
I prefer to call it 'growing pains'.
Drop the advertising Dietrich. Are you that Hard Up for business?
Sorry Dietrich but it's the rules. You have to play by them just like anyone else.
I guess what you said about MS being so far behind is not really true or you wouldn't be on here making such a big deal out of it.
You know that MS retains a massive customer base who are most likely to stay with MS, whether they move to the cloud or not.
The cloud is in it's infancy and a 3 year start on providing services is nothing, unless you want to admit that Microsoft's 20 year head start over Linux and OS X means they are late to the game as well?
Well? Are you ready to say that Ubuntu and Red Hat and others are all wishing that companies would "freeze up" their server and client rollouts until Linux catches up?
Well? What about it?
No, I am making full disclosure.
Why can't you follow her example?
Besides, I include my real name, and am up front about AWS, which qualifies me to give my relevant opinion here.
Why don't you give your real name and your true affiliations?
It might help your cause and 'credibility' provided you can get your anger under control. Yes?
No Anger here. I will use CAPS if I am ever angry.
I'm rarely angry when I write here and am not sure why people sometimes seem to think they know better than the writer.
I've seen people's posts deleted many times in the past for having nothing more than a link to their site
Another perspective
AWS is pretty cool but I think comparing AWS to what Microsoft is doing in the cloud is somewhat like comparing apples to oranges. AWS is largely a provider of hardware. You can rent a box and spin up a VM using the OS of your choice and go to town. The problem is that you're still responsible for dealing with all of the complexity of managing the OS and updating your applications - pretty much just as if the machine were down the hall. I'm exagerating a bit but not much. Microsoft is doing what they always do - providing a more integrated/comprehensive service that further abstracts the complexity that the developer has to deal with. With Windows Azure, Microsoft handles the OS updates, patches etc. You no longer have to worry about that. Rolling out an update for an application is largely automated. You don't have to start from scratch if you want additional instances of an application. There are tradeoffs. With AWS you can pretty much pick up an existing application and drop it onto AWS and it'll work. With Windows Azure you can't do that today. I'm sure Microsoft will offer raw VM's for people who want to do that. But the design point for Windows Azure is very different. You need to write applications differently but the benefits can be significant.
Also, there is some irony in your claiming that AWS provides more flexibility and choice than Microsoft. Au contraire. Microsoft gives you more options. You can buy a piece of hardware, install the OS, build an app and run it yourself. You can use any one of thousands of hosting providers who will host Windows for you. Amazon is one of those. Or you can use Microsoft's 'public cloud' in Windows Azure. Do whatever is best for your scenarios. Amazon offers essentially one choice: we'll host your app and you can use Windows or Linux.
Finally, Amazon deserves a lot of credit for being the perception leader in providing cloud infrastructure. They were super smart to see that they can defray their operational costs by renting out excess capacity. But they are far from the first and definately not the only company that offers similar service. They're a glorified hosting provider with some nice 'native' cloud services that are somewhat interesting.
Call me Dietrich
I believe Mark meant Dietrich.
<a href="http://www.dtschmitz.com/dts/2010/01/a-day-late-and-a-dollar-short-microsoft.html#comments">Here</a> is a link to his post on my site.
[b]Update[/b]
There appears to be a broader issue going on with networking at AWS and the latency is now being reported by many concerns. <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/15/amazon_ec2_latency/">FYI</a>
Thanks Mark.
Sorry...but you didn't address any of my comments
Regardless, you don't address any of the points I made in my reply. I think AWS is undoubtedly going through growing pains...which is partly why not many companies are building mission critical apps on AWS...but my comments were focused more broadly on what AWS offers vs. Microsoft.
Response
[b]Only fools are positive. There is nothing but PR at this point unless you have a link to specific plans for raw VMs and what kind.[/b]
[i]"But the design point for Windows Azure is very different. You need to write applications differently but the benefits can be significant."[/i]
[b]Is MS stating plans to deploy Linux machine images? Otherwise, you need to write to the Windows API, which isn't open source. If that doesn't matter to the business concern, fine.[/b]
[i]"Also, there is some irony in your claiming that AWS provides more flexibility and choice than Microsoft."[/i]
[b]Sorry I didn't make myself clear--I meant strictly in terms of IaaS and Operating System offerings. AWS even offer 'on demand' Micosoft Server 2008 AMIs with no licensing fees.[/b]
[i]" Au contraire. Microsoft gives you more options. You can buy a piece of hardware, install the OS, build an app and run it yourself. You can use any one of thousands of hosting providers who will host Windows for you.
Amazon is one of those. Or you can use Microsoft's 'public cloud' in Windows Azure." [/i]
[b]Amazon's Virtual Private Cloud will ease many (not all) of the concerns regarding Risk Assessment for Cloud computing.
There is some <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/SAAS/?p=973&tag=content;col1">ongoing discussion</a> about providing dedicated physical servers in the private cloud also, but I don't know of any advance information for such a service from AWS. But I would expect that to follow as an AWS service in the very near future.[/b]
Thanks again Mark for your thoughtful reply.
--Dietrich
Message has been deleted.
RE: Microsoft, HP to unveil 'solutions built on new infrastructure-to-application model'