Virtually Speaking

Dan Kusnetzky, Paula Rooney and Ken Hess

Control is Highly Overrated and Overpriced

By | June 6, 2011, 3:00am PDT

Summary: The case for VDI grows stronger with each passing billing cycle. It’s time to gain control of your desktop infrastructure and save some money.

An interesting conversation arose over my post, “The Increasingly Irrelevant Desktop OS,” that I placed over on LinkedIn in one of the Virtualization groups. One of the conversations trickled toward the issue of control. The excerpt from that thread reads, “I can see consumers not needing an OS for most of their daily activities. Web browsing, mail and streaming multimedia can all be done from a centralized location. Other than that, I do not see professionals giving up their OS of choice any time soon. That would simply involve giving up too much control.”

True.

Giving up control of one’s own desktop operating system is sort of like allowing someone to fly you across country in a plane or to drive you from the airport to your hotel. It’s almost as if by giving up some of that need for control that other people could have decent jobs. That and the fact that it’s less expensive than doing it yourself. The loss of control, however, is devastating regardless of cost.

It’s funny how many IT support people, managers and corporate types believe that they need some sort of localized control over their operating systems, infrastructures and applications. I’m not sure what it is about computing that makes people feel like they must maintain ultimate control over these resources but it is an across-the-board attitude. It’s very odd. It’s odd and overrated. It’s also a very expensive attitude to have.

And, as the reader clearly states, “…not needing an OS for most of their daily lives,” it’s a control issue, “That would simply involve giving up too much control,” rather than a need or technology issue.

So, what he and so many companies are saying is, “Yes, we realize that maintaining legacy desktops is very expensive but we prefer to keep control by paying more for support, dealing with security problems, removing malware and viruses and maintaining various operating environment.

Awesome and shortsighted.

It seems to me that if someone wants to gain control of desktops, that he would actually embrace virtualized desktops (VDI) because of the higher level of control. Yes, there’s far more control in VDI than in trying to maintain dozens, hundreds or thousands of renegade desktops and laptops running around gathering malware, viruses and pirated software.

It’s all in your definition of control.

There’s apparently control and then there’s control.

No, I don’t know the difference either. It makes no sense that someone would want control and then snub VDI, when VDI is the ultimate solution for those control freaks who claim that ultimate control is required. You have centralized management, simplified patching, guaranteed storage of user files, infinite possibilities for spying on users through logs and an immediate remedy when a worker’s contract expires or employment terminates.

Why bother with that kind of control, when you can allow the terminated user to continue to have access to corporate data on that local computer?

And, yes, I’ve heard all of the arguments against cloud-based desktops and VDI. For example, “What happens when you don’t have Internet access?” My answer is to change locations. Surely, you’re mobile enough to head to a coffee shop, a restaurant, a library or friend’s house. If you’re telling me that you’re in some place that doesn’t have Internet access, then perhaps you should use that as “down time” and get some rest or use your computer for localized note taking until you return to civilization.

The issue of control is a ridiculous one to punt VDI into the dark and stormy future.

The money-saving aspect of VDI should provide enough impetus to at investigate the practicality of hosted desktops. Can you operate a localized desktop computer for $1/day? What about $3/day? Actually, the real cost of localized desktops is between $4/day and $5/day. My rule of thumb for estimating desktop costs was $800/year to $1,000/year. That was fifteen years ago.
But, let’s say for a moment that cost is still the same. That’s between $2/day and $3/day. That’s for each system.

And, prices for hosted desktops will fall over time and as more competition enters the market. Within two years, you’ll be able to “lease” hosted desktops for 50 cents/day or less. Amazon’s cloud system and storage prices have dropped steadily, since its offerings first appeared a few short years ago.

Your outdated attitudes toward VDI and hosted desktops is, well, outdated. It’s time to gain real control of the spiraling costs and constant maintenance hassles. It’s time to update your desktops and your attitudes. Welcome to the second decade of the twenty-first century.

So, I’d love to hear the excuses of why your company isn’t jumping at the chance to convert those heavy and expensive desktops to lighter, hosted ones. Please, talk back and let me know.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Virtually Speaking”

Topics

Kenneth 'Ken' Hess is a full-time Windows and Linux system administrator with over 15 years of experience with Mac, Linux, UNIX, and Windows systems in large multi-data center environments.

Disclosure

Ken Hess

My full-time employer is EDS (HP). I write as a freelancer for ZDNet. The postings and opinions on this blog are my own and don't necessarily represent EDS's, HP's, their subsidiaries or affiliates positions, strategies or opinions. I own no investments or direct financial instruments in the companies I write about.

Biography

Ken Hess

Kenneth 'Ken' Hess is a full-time Windows and Linux system administrator with over 15 years of experience with Mac, Linux, UNIX, and Windows systems in large multi-data center environments.

Ken writes on a variety of topics including interoperability, virtualization, data center operations, databases, and open source software. He has written and co-written books on Linux, databases, and virtualization. He currently writes a System Administration column for Linux Magazine and is a regular contributor to Linux User & Developer magazine, ServerWatch.com's Trends and InfoStor. He often contributes to other online and print publications as well.

His first computer was a Commodore VIC-20, which he purchased because William Shatner was in the commercials.

In his limited spare time, Ken enjoys painting, drawing, and flinging angry birds at fortified pigs.

49
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Control is Highly Overrated and Overpriced
FAULKNE 13th Oct
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Control is Highly Overrated and Overpriced
hakanernnews Updated - 6th Jun
For new companies with zero legacy I totally agree with you. On the other hand many enterprises have tons of software they have to maintain in the traditional "controlled" way. It will take time to transition and nobody wants to start first.
0 Votes
+ -
@hakanernnews

Where does Idaho rank? We have been living in Montana for the past 5 years and I am not supri sexy shop to find it #3 on the "worst" list. Considering a sexshopmove to Idaho to escapthe high cost of living a low income in MT. There may not be a sales tax here but they get you if you own property!
Partially its about the control of our proprietary data, which you cloudy 'the network is the computer' people just can't wait to get your greedy little hands on.

Even if you were trustworthy, more important is the fact that your cloudy security is, well, terrible. Look at TJX, they compromised 45 million plus customer's credit card data... and got away with it. 45 million people victimized by one hack.

Now multiply that by the number of bundled groups which would be sharing your cloud service. The more potential money there is in one target, the greater the desire of the criminal element to hack it.

Do you really think your cloud can secure data better than the FBI, which was awarded a failing grade by the government's own security analysis? Is that really a safe bet?

Regards,
Jon
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Credit card numbers were hacked before there was a cloud. It isn't a cloud problem. Have you stopped using a laptop because someone's laptop was stolen and thousands of social security numbers were compromised? Have you stopped using bank ATMs because criminals will put fake strip readers on them? And, finally, have you stopped carrying a wallet because if you lose it or it gets stolen, all your personal info is in it?
You can't blame the technology. It's more appropriate to blame the criminals and to make sure they never do it again.
Hello khess,

Sure, you're right, the blame is with the hackers not the technology ... but how are we to stop the criminals when they're in China and China turns a blind eye to their activities?

Since we can't get all the criminals all around the world, we need to protect ourselves. To start with, how about we keep our stuff away from the them by NOT having it in the cloud?

We already keep our critical infrastructure and proprietary data on a separate network which doesn't connect to the outside world for exactly this reason. Non-critical front-office and communications apps have internet access, but nothing important does.

Recent history demonstrates that no-one (not even the government; see wikileaks for any number of examples) can keep internet accessible data safe.

Additionally, we're small potatoes and probably not worth locating and hacking by ourselves ... but if you combine our data with that of dozens (perhaps hundreds) of other companies ... well, that becomes an irresistible target.

Frankly, the whole concept of security and cloud are antithetical.

Regards,
Jon
0 Votes
+ -
Even in rental buildings
fwarren 6th Jun
The tenant has locks on the doors.

In exchange for the cheaper price, part of the control you give up is your ability to own your data and to make sure it is not stolen. As well as control over availability. If your cloud provider has a problem, you are in trouble and also, have very little recourse.

There is a steeper price to pay when someone else outside the company has control and is negligent, incompetent or decides to exploit the fact they hold control and it will be painful for you to get away from them.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@fwarren

And that keystroke logger you just downloaded on your highly controlled local system is stealing your precious data.
@khess

As opposed to a keylogger on a hosted system stealing your precious data?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Control is Highly Overrated and Overpriced
YetAnotherBob Updated - 9th Jun
@fwarren

There's clouds and there's clouds. If your cloud is facebook, then you are right, you have no protection. If your cloud is a locally hosted and well maintained server, then you do have some security. But, you should remember than security is not a product you can just buy and forget.

Security is a state of mind and a process.

Paranoia is only a problem if you are wrong. There's always a way in, keep looking until you find it, then fix the hole, and start looking again. Look first for traces that someone else broke in. Go from there.
I have to agree with Jon on this. Even though my organization does not handle any particularly sensitive data, losing control over our client data is not an option.
The personal computer won against the cloud in the 80's because those who used computers for serious stuff knew how important control of their data was. Those same users and their reasons remain. Today though, we have many more casual users and their stuff can be placed pretty much anywhere as long as they can find it. The cloud is good for those.

Your analogy of having someone drive you from the airport is really cute - not to mention bad for your case. Sure its nice to have someone pick you up from time to time, and to use public transport occasionally - but that will never be as responsive as having your own vehicle to go anywhere you want, when you want to. Its having control over your mobility. You realize this is the first thing one loses when one's freedom is taken away. Its a fundamental feature of life.

Control over your own stuff is the simple definition of freedom. If you think that freedom is over rated and over priced you'll probably learn what a dangerous path you are on - when you lose it. Whatever can be said in favor of the cloud, no well thinking person will give up their freedom to control what is theirs because everybody else seems to be doing it.

So, by all means, promote the cloud, but stay away from from berating persons who still believe in the freedom to control what is theirs. It is on their account that you still have the right to make your comments.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@laserdrill

You totally missed the point. You're not really giving up any control, you're actually gaining control and freedom in the cloud. You ensure that user data is kept on recoverable storage, etc.
I think the thing with cloud computing is, you either get it or you don't.
@khess
"I think the thing with [cloud] computing is, you either get it or you don't."
Its interesting that I would have used the same words but from the other side. We could argue this point for a long time and never resolve it but I would expect stronger arguments in support of the wonderful cloud. To say "You ensure that user data is kept on recoverable storage, etc." assumes that somehow people who don't trust their data to the cloud are therefore incapable of ensuring ".... that user data is kept on recoverable storage, etc." May I suggest that people who choose to handle their own data understand the importance of this perhaps to a greater degree than those who just want to hand it off to somebody somewhere in the cloud.

You can conceivably gain greater access to your data via the Internet, but you cannot possibly gain more control by trusting someone who is completely beyond your control to keep your data. Unless my understanding of these terms is severely warped, it seems to me that one has to decide to give up control in order to get the convenience of cloud computing. You cannot have it both ways.
@khess
the cloud will give you more availability, but less security and ownership. What happens when the data you have is co-located with another company who gets seized by running afoul of the law. The cloud provider has to turn over the equipment with your data on it. they may have copies of it on another server so that it is still available, but now someone else has your data too. Also, how does the cloud company ensure that your data never leaves the U.S.? that the backups are fully erased when you remove your data from that company? too many security issues with cloud providers for anyone dealing with sensitive data. And just look in the news, at how many companies using cloud services have been hacked.
0 Votes
+ -
@laserdrill

Using a hosted service and using the internet to access your own server are both 'Cloud Services". The case Ken is making is, I think, that using a thin server to reach an instance of a virtual server on a secured network is more secure than using a laptop or desktop.

Ken is right about that. You lose the control and the responsiblity of securing your PC. You gain by having that be someone's responsibility. It works, as long as they are held responsible.

you lose some control also, by not being able to just use any application not on the 'approved' list, but you have probably already lost that if you work at any government body or mid-sized to large corporation.

If you must have high security, then do what the Military does. Keep the computer with the data in a locked safe, with restricted access and no network connection.
quote:: So, I?d love to hear the excuses of why your company isn?t jumping at the chance to convert those heavy and expensive desktops to lighter, hosted ones. Please, talk back and let me know. ::quote

We decided that by going with a Linux based OS it would save us more money, by removing the need for antivirus soultions, and by removing other security hazards, and would keep our data within the company, rather than having to trust that the external source will always keep our data secure.

Also given that we are a small company and there is really only one person who doesn't really need a full machine running a full OS and applications, it simply makes no sense to pay rent for access to our own data.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@tracy anne

Makes sense to me.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Control is Highly Overrated and Overpriced
tracy anne Updated - 6th Jun
@khess

I'm happy to see you agree with me, although it would have made no difference if you had not.

Cloud is really not that different from the Dumb terminal Server based technology I "grew up" with in my early days in IT. The differences are quite minor really. A web browser running on anything with enough grunt to support a browser and Graphical intensive web applications.... the Google or thin solution.

or client Server infrastructure with both browser based applications and Web Centric PC based clients, the fat solution.

There's nothing particularly new about cloud services, other than the buzz words, and perhaps the size of the backend installations.
@tracy anne
".... it simply makes no sense to pay rent for access to our own data. "
Well said. I totally agree with you on this point.
And like with a rented apartment with your stuff in it, you do not control the apartment, you are simply paying for exclusive access to it. There are any number of ways to lose that access, not the least of which is becoming incapable of keeping up with the payment. Rent, like cloud service fees, are not under the control of the user and do not always go down.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@laserdrill

You pay rent on your data even if it's local, if you back it up or store it on leveraged storage.
@tracy anne Given your OS choice you can run your own "cloud", to abuse the market-speak. We did something similar YEARS ago, 90% Linux on the back end. downtime is practically nil.
@piperdown

Yes the thought has occured.
@tracy anne But but but, how will those poor SaaS vendors be able to milk you if you dont fall for their buzz-words?

Will no one think of the Consultants?? lol
@Tommy S.

I "grew up" in the days of Mainframes and dumb terminals, every application we ran, including our software development environment was effectively "in the cloud", there were enough problems associated with the reliance on a with multiple points of failure, all of which sit between the Mainframe and the terminal. We experienced more than enough down time with communications issues (not always due to a failure in the system itself, but also from systems beyond our control) that smart terminals and finally networked PCs with on board applications made a huge difference (even with Windows as the OS).

Cloud, at least the thin implementation, is not significantly different from the old Mainframe scenario, at least is not significantly different that I want to reply on the multiple points of failure that are inherent in a WAN infrastructure.

Forget about control.

Most of the points of failure are outside the control of either the Cloud provider or myself, just as they were for us in the Mainframe days. This is why Cloud providers disclaim responsibility for problems with your cloud service.
0 Votes
+ -
@tracy anne

If your server is accessible from the Internet, then you ARE operating a cloud server. But, please do keep it safe.

Linux is not bulletproof in and of itself. Look online for ways and programs to strengthen your protection. Password rules, SSH input and output, AppArmor or Bastille, There are many possibilities.
@YetAnotherBob

Thanks for the reminder Bob. It is true that while Linux based Operating Systems are inherently safer than that other Operating System. In the final analysis, that security is only as good as the people who administer them.
0 Votes
+ -
Liability
sabroad Updated - 7th Jun
Until cloud companies stop disclaiming all liability (consequential or otherwise) for loss of service there's no way companies will entrust mission-critical services to the cloud.

To continue the article's analogy, signing up to cloud-computing like getting into an uninsured taxi: if they crash (due to negligence or otherwise), it's you that ends up with the crippling medical bills.

"The loss of control, however, is devastating regardless of cost."
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@everyone

You claim that you want control or somehow you have control by using local systems with local data. Do you backup your system(s)? Where do you back them up to?
Does that give you some control? Think before you respond. You might feel like you have control but you really don't.
And, it's equally funny that someone who's commenting on this article over on tuxmachines.org is talking about the government coming in and wanting his data on his personal computer vs. the government wanting that data if it were stored in the cloud. Really? How many times has that happened? Unless you're involved in criminal behavior, then I think the government has better things to do. That kind of paranoia is just...weird. I'll bet that guy also has stockpiles of food, water and duct tape.
@khess
"You might feel like you have control but you really don't."
Whilst the same could be said of life, the universe and everything, some people don't believe in fate.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Control is Highly Overrated and Overpriced
salparadyse Updated - 8th Jun
@khess
You might feel like you have control but you really don't.

Absolute, scare-mongering rubbish. I have complete control over my data. It's on my hard drive and on my backups. If the makers of the software I use decide to go down the route of trying to force an upgrade by releasing a new version without backward compatibility, I can install an older version (all quite unlikely seeing as how I use Debian/Slackware).

With respect, all you are doing is telling lies on behalf of Corporations who stand to profit from people's gullibility. You should be writing articles that point out the truths about control.
And to equate those who care about such things with paranoiacs is just cheap and pitiful.

Control is highly overrated?
No - it's priceless - control is freedom. If you can't see that you need help.
Control is overpriced?
Again, no it isn't. It's free. If some want to surrender their freedom (and minds) to Corporations, they're welcome to - but don't be writing these Corporate lies that insult those of us who know otherwise.
0 Votes
+ -
@salparadyse

Hard Drives break, backups also fail sometimes. It's all a question of the cost verses the benefit. I Don't know your situation, but off site storage can be real cheap. It can also be very expensive. Even at the same price.

Have you actually done the analysis? What are you paying staff to keep the backups current? How frequently do you do backups? How much does the Cloud cost? What are it's security provisions?

There are lots more questions than answers here.
@khess

Well, let's talk about this backup bit for a moment. Given how cheap storage is now I have two hard-drives, a NAS, a keychain thumb drive and some online storage. Depending on what it is depends on how serious I am about redundancy and which storage it goes on. I know exactly where it is, and exactly how safe or unsafe it is.

While a cloud theoretically provides backups out of the box, how real is it? The bigger the cloud provider the more tools they have to use to manage said data which creates more and more openings like the Gmail outage where large swathes of data simply disappeared. Fat finger a low-level query? 10,000 users data gone in a blink.

I have seen time and again in the enterprise where fancy backup and failsafe mechanisms that had been touted for years utterly fail to deliver the goods on the day they are finally needed. Cloud is a pillar of data redundancy, but not the whole strategy.

Cloud hosting is also one of those games where everything is fine until one day it isn't which gives short-sighted managers in the cloud provider room to cut corners until one day everything explodes.
0 Votes
+ -
@khess
"I'll bet that guy also has stockpiles of food, water and duct tape. "

Sounds like a right sensible fellow. I'll bet a lot of folks in the Midwest during the flooding recently would agree with that, and wish they had done it too.

However, the benefits of Cloud verses on-site need to be reviewed on a cost/benefit scale. Does the cost justify the benefit? What are the costs and the benefits? Does off site storage make sense?

I think the answers might be different for each business. That might be driving some of the discussions here.
0 Votes
+ -
Like VDI, not the licensing structure
piperdown Updated - 7th Jun
You still need hardware on the desktop. VDI vendors are still too "proud of their offerings". Get it down to like $25 a license, then yeah I'd think about it. Some of it can go to the cloud, the critical data goes to an internal cloud. Because "cloud" is market-speak for technology that at it's base level has been around before. Can you say "time-sharing"? It's "shiny", more capable, and makes the suits moist, but you're still letting someone else control access to YOUR data. AND I would likely stream the VDI from INTERNAL servers, not hosted ones. What guarantee do you have that someday your data may be held hostage by a pricing structure change? While normally economies of scale would dictate that the price would go down, popularity or perceived popularity can just as easily drive it up. The lawyers get ahold of the TOS/SLA and tweak it and you're forced to either pay up or move your data. AND if you've allowed yourself to become dependent on any of their proprietary "features", you're double screwed. I'd be curious of the author's "exit strategy", if one even exists.
0 Votes
+ -
What is it with you journalists?
Do you attend meetings where you're told what to say?

If you don't understand why people are unwilling to let go of their local hard drive based OS then frankly you don't deserve your job.
If you do understand, but are preaching counter to it anyway, then you don't really deserve your job as you've become little more than a Corporate propaganda tool.

If you really do trust these Corporations to host all your applications and data and not to start price gouging and withholding access based on ability to pay, then you're naive in the extreme because the world is full of examples of just that sort of attitude.
0 Votes
+ -
You never give someone else control of your process. If you do they own you. Not going to happen. We may start up our own clouds and use them, but we will not be dependent upon others in our business processes.
Looks to me like resistance to implementing a cloud system will come from the individual more than the corporate.

Photographers, videographers, audiophiles - all will want the power and speed that local storage of both OS and data give. There is no way for a cloud service to compete at the performance level these users will require. At least not with todays network bandwidth levels.

As for a shared cloud OS, your average 'geek' user is going to offer a great deal of resistance as well. These are users who have spent their entire lives learning to tweak, maintain and manipulate 'their' computer to be the best they can make it. They drive the viewership and impetus of an enterprise like ZDNet. And they are legion. This person (very much an individual) will try it, work in it, and in the end, because it gives them both satisfaction and power (imagined or otherwise) they will stick with a local operating system as their primary base environment, or even multiple operating systems. They will use the cloud, but only in addition to, not in replacement of, their local OS.

The corporate world does not drive desktop computer development. The consumer does. Until cloud can show it does everything (literally everything - gaming, multimedia editing, browsing, chatting) better than local, it will not make the leap to the accepted standard. The 'average' cult member of the computing public is not going to want to give up ability anywhere and while they love to complain about all the maintenance they do to keep running an independent operating system, the habit of going through those motions is accepted, ingrained and satisfying to them.

I think it going to be a long long time before the local OS bites the dust. That is not to say that a VDI won't gain great acceptance alongside it, running in concert. I just don't think it will displace the local OS anytime soon.
0 Votes
+ -
When you say "Control is Highly ... Overpriced", are you implying that it costs more to handle my data myself, than to PAY SOMEONE ELSE to handle my data for me? Or that it costs more to drive myself than to pay someone to do the driving for me?

I also agree, wholeheartedly, with all those who say they would not trust an unknown with their personal data. That is the real crux of the argument. It may be worth it, in some situations, to pay someone else to do the "heavy lifting", for the sake of convenience. I don't believe the mythical "cloud" qualifies as one of those situations.
0 Votes
+ -
@everyone
djohnston11@... 8th Jun
"That kind of paranoia is just...weird. I'll bet that guy also has stockpiles of food, water and duct tape."

Yeah, those Mormons are just crazy fools, aren't they?
The fact is that when you operate solely in "the Cloud", there are many, many issues to contented with, such as it's not so easy to move an entire company to Starbucks when the cloud isn't accessible.... or the fact that the provider is not going to let you audit their network, apply security updates, replace hardware, etc. I'll keep my local control as not having local control is just too expensive and risky in too many ways to list.
You know... I just don't really know anybody, common-users, businesses, geeks, admins, managers... that actually accept that returning to the "dumb terminal", perpetual "pay-per-play", "loss of (REAL) control" to external corporate-interests, is in any way offset by, alleged, "benefits" presented by cloud-computing. And, personally, I have had far too many, very-real, experiences with "external" business-interests trying to FORCE their-own decisions, interests, and desires, upon our business' methods and needs (not to mention numerous abusive, manipulative, self-interested, "changes" being FORCED upon us by external "services"... if we had no "choice"). And, the only actual method of preventing such a clearly, and repeatedly, demonstrated, ACTUAL, threat is that we (users) maintain "control" of our software, hardware, and, especially, our data... and thereby, maintain TRUE "independence", "control", and "choice" (once, it's in "the cloud", surrounded by vendor lock-in, dependence, and fees... that "control"... I.E. "freedom"... is gone).

The simple fact is that "the cloud" is mostly being pushed by those that will benefit from our (very real) loss of "control" (by switching to a perpetual-payment, "services" based, external, consumers don't "own it", consumers don't possess it, and, therefore, consumers can never actually "control" it, IT-infrastructure). It [cloud services], is not being touted by those that will actually LOSE the, far more important, "benefits" of real "freedom", "control", and "choice". "Cloud Computing" is mostly a buzzword, catch-all propaganda-campaign that is being used to move the computer industry backward in time... back to the good-old days of absolute, narrow, corporate-control of computer-use.

And, I think most people realize this... and so now, those that are pushing "cloud services" so hard (clearly for their own "benefit"), have had to embark on a campaign of ridicule, degradation, and dis-information... to dis-credit the legions of business-people, users, and IT-professionals, that have, so rightly, pointed-out the dangers (and true goals) of... "Cloud Computing".
I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate! nccma cooler
I used to be more than happy to seek out this internet-site.I wanted to thanks in your time for this glorious read!! I positively enjoying each little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you weblog post. this thread is amazing i like your work and i appreciate you that you have share a useful stuff thanks for sharing the i shop abatwa
I used to be more than happy to seek out this internet-site.I wanted to thanks in your time for this glorious read!! I positively enjoying each little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you weblog post.Bookmarking now thanks please consider a follow up post. power sa shop
I think the representation of this article is actually superb one. This is my first visit to your site. Thanks a lot and keep sharing the information. Keep updating the information for all of us. Thanks ZDNet Government was launched as the brand's first industry vertical, with a mission to cater to IT professionals in the public secto I agree with your post. However, do you have any sources I can cite for my paper wheel car com bury
Well welcome, hopefully you can become a vital member of the community and really help to push far ahead of google. Which Im sure the development team would love. This will of course earn you alot points too and get you on the leaders board. z d n e t t h a n k Im not sure i come to an agreement with you on every level, howevor it absolutely was a good posting, many thanks for taking the time to put up your ideas.
Thanks nice info z d n e t I really liked your current article write more..let me add you to its favorite
I really enjoyed reading this post !!!have bookmarked w e b s will come back to read more.
Fantastic news about the new release.I positively enjoying each little bit of it and I have you b o o k m a r k e d to check out new stuff you weblog post.Im not sure i come to an agreement with you on every level, howevor it absolutely was a good posting, many thanks for taking the time to put up your ideas
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix