Hi Acroll,"but still lock you in through scale or ...

2008-07-21T15:53:00.000+01:00

Hi Acroll,

"but still lock you in through scale or APIs"

Whilst there is an issue regarding lock-in through network effects, what you describe as "open service" would seem to be in practice the same as what I describe as "open sourced standards" - i.e. based upon an open sourced reference model which is operational.

The issue is that most services today may well be based upon open source platform but the service itself is not based upon an open sourced standard .i.e. the service itself isn't open.

I would completely agree with you that what we need are more open and utility like services in IT, that's commoditisation for you.

I'm not sure open source is the answer. Most cloud...

2008-07-21T12:43:00.000+01:00

I'm not sure open source is the answer. Most cloud vendors operate on open source platforms, but still lock you in through scale or APIs somehow.

I think what we need is Open Services. I'm not sure what this means yet, but I suspect it's something like this:

Electrical utilities are "open service" because you can plug into the grid and generate power. So anyone can become a producer. Of course, electricity is a lot easier to standardize than a computing platform, so in the cloud we're likely talking about a set of fundamental functions that are portable and plug-compatible, and priced in an "open" way.

Then, just as OpenOffice keeps Microsoft Office's prices in check, so an open cloud alternative provides push-back against cloud lock-in.

Comments on Bits or pieces?: RedMonk talks clouds.

Hi Acroll,"but still lock you in through scale or ...

I'm not sure open source is the answer. Most cloud...