Cloudscaling CEO Randy Bias argues that using public APIs and open-source code doesn’t make your cloud service “open.”
Editor’s note: CEO Randy Bias’s Cloudscaling firm is a cloud software supplier competing with the corporations cited on this commentary.
As probably the most earliest proponents of the notions behind an “open cloud,” I always find it amusing when the purity of message is diluted behind marketing fluff. Recently, two blog posts, one from IBM and another from Rackspace, revealed a deep misunderstanding of what openness is ready generally and what “open cloud” is set specifically.
Being open
There has always been a debate about “open-source software” vs. “free software,” nevertheless it is usually accepted that the discussion is ready level of freedom. Open-source software provides freedom to access and notice the code, while free software, theoretically, provides more freedoms, most notably greater flexibility in licensing.
Of course, the talk gets even murkier once you inspect something just like the Apache Public License, which permits not just the facility to peer the code, but to repeat and use the code commercially — another freedom which may be important to you. Regardless, what’s clear is that both open-source and free software provide choice and freedom, and a lot of the argument is ready: to what degree and around what dimensions you get choice and freedom.
[Not every cloud has a silver lining. See Top 10 Cloud Fiascos.]
The ideas of being open have evolved significantly. To illustrate, the Open Compute Project (OCP) provides “open hardware,” an try to institute freedom of choice for hardware suppliers. At its heart, you get access to the “code” (server, motherboard, and other hardware designs), but since not everyone can manufacture their very own hardware, the actual value is you could take these designs to anyone it’s essential build the hardware for you. So, unlike open-source or free software, it’s unlikely you could open up and modify the code directly, but you may certainly use what’s available to attenuate lock-in by specifying to the hardware manufacturer what to make for your behalf.
Hosted services will not be open
The recent Rackspace blog post shows how far afield we now have come on “open,” that’s now being badly abused as a notion. There isn’t a reason to select apart the item point by point, but some key items are worth calling out.
First, the FUD around “proprietary API” is simply plain nonsense, given the Oracle v. Google ruling that public APIs can not be copyrighted. That’s right. If it is a public API, it’s “open” by default. You possibly can copy, imitate, and modify on your heart’s content.
Second, there’s a long spiel about “open” being about “flexibility… not a licensing model,” and a “philosophy that encourages customers to do business with you because they would like to, not because they must.” Except, none of those are generally accepted uses of the term “open,” nor do they resemble anything except Rackspace’s existing business model.
Most importantly, these points appear geared to convince the reader that nothing would be more “open” than Rackspace’s public cloud. Here I fear we wander away into fantasy land. Hosted services cannot possibly be any further closed or proprietary, no matter what software is used to run them.
Why is that this? If the license of the software you utilize to run your hosted service determines your “openness,” then aren’t Amazon and Google already the most important open clouds around? They’re certainly two of the world’s largest consumers of open-source software. But they do not have an “open” API? Except there’s no such thing as an open API, is there?
Hosted services remove freedom and enforce a specific amount of lock-in, way over you may receive from open-source software or open hardware. In case you run your application on Amazon Web Services, Google Compute Engine, or Rackspace Cloud, you may be locked into their closed systems. You can not see their code or any proprietary changes, you cannot replicate them, and also you can’t walk away with their alterations. Your freedoms are severely curtailed.
Open isn’t whatever you call it
“Words have meaning, and names have power.” Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra brought us this little bit of wisdom. The price in terms and our notional understanding of them is they allow for communication. Communication is impeded when terms are grossly overloaded. All of us saw this with the term “cloud” itself. IBM’s recent blog posting takes “open cloud” to the recent extreme, equating it to scalable storage architectures, interoperability, open APIs (already disproven while you see above), federation, data mobility, and openness in public clouds.
Open-source software is just not a normal, nor does it create standards. Standards can exist whatever the kind of software used. Typically for the reason that the interfaces (reminiscent of APIs) between systems aren’t protected, or because all participants have agreed to license a personal interface. Open cloud won’t make storage architectures more scalable, end in federation, or increase data mobility. These last two may certainly provide some freedoms if implemented, but they aren’t freedoms themselves, and having an “open cloud” certainly doesn’t create them.
Take, as an example, data mobility. Do you need to possess and move your data backward and forward between two systems? Needless to say you do. All of us do. But in practice, how often have you ever out-loaded your Salesforce.com customer data and imported it into another CRM system? You’ve not, because it’s hard. All hosted systems, irrespective of what sort of software they use, store their data in proprietary data structures and schemas. They should, because typically here’s how they invent and maintain competitive advantage. You cannot easily create data portability/mobility between any two hosted systems. The very same problems which have plagued enterprise integration efforts for many years also exist for all public clouds, SaaS, or other hosted services.
Open isn’t whatever you call it. Open has meaning. It’s about freedom for you and for me. Hosted services increase, not decrease, lock-in.
When the open cloud… isn’t
I want as much openness as i will get. I’m sure you do in addition. Openness equates to freedom, and all of us want more. But freedoms come at a value and always have. To that end, that allows you to maintain control, you’ll want to be prepared to keep up the code. By extension, that suggests the need arises be prepared to run the system. Nobody else permit you to be open. You need to help yourself.
The open cloud is simply what you are making it.
Randy Bias is co-founder and CEO of cloud software supplier Cloudscaling. He pioneered IaaS at GoGrid and is a founding member and current board member of the OpenStack Foundation.
Can the stylish tech process of DevOps really bring peace between developers and IT operations — and deliver faster, more reliable app creation and delivery? Also within the DevOps Challenge issue of InformationWeek: Execs charting digital business strategies can’t afford to take Internet connectivity with no consideration.