Cisco: 'World head over heels for convergence' Cisco Systems didn't necessarily want to be in the server racket. But a few years back, when the networking giant realized that converging server and storage networks would cut into its revenue streams. Therefore, to remain relevant - by which I mean to make money - Cisco could create converged infrastructure, including servers …
HP is eager to sell convergence too, as are Oracle and Dell. To each their own convergence of course. Good luck with that. Every vendor has weaker spots in their portfolio. Going sole-source for all your IT has tech management advantages, as integrated management offers an opportunity to manage all of your tech through that awful "single pane of glass" that salesmen won't shut up about. It also makes you entirely subject to that one vendor's every whim. Not a good idea.
To quote the wise Admiral Ackbar, "It's a trap."
..they would know what they did themselves the last 20 years: Building Ta Intanet. Which is the basis of Google, Facebook and all the Cloud Computing things.
Companies are under great pain to operate all these broken Lotus Notes, Exchange and SAP installations they have bought and installed at great financial and human expense (in terms of management and employee time wasted).
Many businesses do want to dump all that on the "cloud", but they are reluctant to hand their data to Google and Salesforce.com.
What if Cisco simply showed up with a 32-ton truck carrying a "ready-to-use datacenter" in a container ? That container would house a reasonably configured network of servers, cooling, fire extinguishing system and a 200Gbit/s fiber interface to plug into other "compute containers" and the network of the customer and certainly the internet.
Everything from the network switches to the applications (SAP, mail, sharepoint,alfresco etc) would be configured by Cisco. Maintenance scripts would periodically perform backups. Once a month a cisco guy would clean up the parts which can't be automated, via the internet.
The customer would have to press a prominent Red Button to let the Cisco guys into the compute boxes, every single month. If the customer were cautious, the boxes would be inside a cavern, replicating everything and so on. All the patching would be automatically done by Cisco, after having been tested by them.
All they want to sell at the moment is still way to complex. Customers want a service, not components. But they also want control.
You do realise that if you had just taken that one more little jump you wouldnt be far off something that exists today! If someone is going to run and manage your environment then why host it on your site? Why not stick it in their DC's.
If you did then they havent missed a trick they have just become one of the many outsourcing companies our there! Go and speak to anyone who uses an outsoruced I contract to see how that works out for them (clue usually not very well!).
Oh those ready to use DC'? Yeah they've been around for a while now, most of the major vendors will quite happily sell you one! (Really useful for HPC work!).
Most companies DO/ARE and WILL use multiple sourcing for IT, some things that are applicable will live in the cloud, some will be outsourced and some will be self managed. Its not about one or nothing its about choosing the right strategy for that particular service. The trick is to build a service provider model that lets you do that effectively.
(Oh and for the record most of the internets routing doesnt use Cisco gear, they no more built the internet than any one else (thank the DoD for that if anyone!))
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
