VMForce.com Thoughts


Great announcement. The only problem with it is that it is not available today. But today will come soon enough...

For SalesForce, this is a huge step in saying they want to be a major Cloud deployment platform. They want all Java apps to run on their infrastructure - it is no longer about just hosting their own programming model. This also jumps up a level from what Amazon and Google and Rackspace are offering in terms of ease of use and deployment for Java apps. And of course their trump card is access to their database and apps and users - the thing that has proved a virtuous cycle of bringing 3rd party apps and more customers to SalesForce.

For VMWare and Spring, it is a major proof point of their platform and applicability for the Cloud. It gives them a solid use-case to focus their development efforts on to adapt Spring to the new era of Cloud-enabling middleware (not a trivial task), and provides a clear higher level use case for moving to the Cloud. Of course VMWare and Spring will be trying to become the plumbing for all service providers as they roll out Cloud offerings - so do not expect them to be locked into just this deployment over time.

From an eXo perspective, this is confirmation of the path that we are on - providing a set of Java-based services around Content, Collaboration, and Social that are Cloud-enabled. Just as you see the demo of a Java app working with Chatter in the Force.com demos to generate an activity stream, all of the other service providers and enterprises with their own Cloud offerings will need a similar implementation of services. While VMWare will offer Zimbra for mail and some collaboration applications, eXo will be a useful addition.

While it has been cool to see Amazon and Google lead the industry into Cloud computing, this move promises the next few years will be very exciting indeed.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ringside Winding Down

A year ago, a group of us met in a pizza parlor to discuss how we could bring the social web to every website and business. In January, we launched Ringside Networks with seed funding from Matrix Partners, one of the best VC firms in the country. By the end of March we released into open source an initial beta of our Social Application Server – a very ambitious project. We got some very positive reviews on our approach, our implementation and the need in the marketplace for every website to become social. We were ready for our Series A round of funding, and in late May we received a number of term sheet offers from the very best VC firms. As we were about to finalize our funding, one of the biggest non-evil Internet companies asked if we would have interest in being acquired instead. After a lot of thought and debate, we decided that the larger company would enable us to get our technology to market sooner and with more impact. The story sounds almost too good to be true. And it w...
Read more

Capitalism vs. the Three Legged Stool

Image
Wikipedia defines: " Capitalism  is an  economic system  in which trade, industry and the  means of production  are controlled by private owners with the goal of making  profits  in a  market economy ." This definition has always bothered me. I prefer a different model where there is equal recognition of the three primary drivers behind the success of a company: Owners Employees Customers I like to think of it as a three legged stool, where each leg is as important as the other.  One gets too large or small and the stool tips over. The free market is supposed to take care of Employees and Customers.  Employees because the Owners will create so many jobs that due to supply and demand, employees will receive competitive pay.  Customers because if the owners are not building the right thing, then they can go elsewhere. As someone who has helped to build about 10 startup companies now, I have seen the power in mak...
Read more

Galbraith Revisited

Image
To follow up on my post from a while ago, Galbraith sited 5 key reasons for the 1929 crash and following depression: 1. The bad distribution of income. 2. The bad corporate structure. 3. The bad banking structure. 4. The dubious state of the foreign balance. 5. The poor state of economic intelligence. To compare this to today: 1. Bad income distribution. 1929 - Top 5% received about 33% of all personal income. 1929 - Top 1% held 44% of all wealth. 2000 - Top 1% received about 20% of all personal income. 2004 - Top 1% held 34% of all wealth. Here is a picture of the real income gains between 1979 and 2005 by percentage. It is clear that the top income groups are gaining ground faster than lower income groups - creating an income distribution that approaches 1929. 2. Bad corporate structure. In the 1929 era there had been a large rise in a "vast structure of holding companies and investment trusts... In particular the dividends from the operating companies paid the interest on t...
Read more