Author: Sharone Zitzman

  • Azure vs. AWS for the Enterprise

    Azure vs. AWS for the Enterprise

    In a previous post we discussed Azure & OpenStack, the less-explored hybrid cloud, and we thought we’d segue on the hybrid cloud theme, and follow up with an additional post focusing on a question we’re often asked …

    Azure or AWS?

    It’s one of the most common questions enterprise customers today face as they look to go to the cloud. According to this year’s Gartner’s Magic Quadrant report, the two cloud powerhouses are the clear market leaders, and as they each add new services to their arsenal and expand their service offerings, customers must decide which one is best-suited for their business needs. This, of course, is in the context of public cloud, whereas the question of OpenStack vs. VMware usually arises in the context of private cloud. And with reports popping up all the time that demonstrate growing numbers around every hybrid cloud mix-and-match scenario, many enterprises are debating on what to bet their cloud strategy.

    To begin this comparison, it’s important to understand how each has evolved. Azure was built as a holistic platform and has been geared toward the enterprise from the beginning. It began as a platform as a service (PaaS), making it easier for developers to build applications without worrying about the servers on which they’re running. In addition, part of the Azure approach always has been to think about how to integrate each service to the platform as a whole and support enterprises’ IT flexibility with keeping specific workloads on-premises while complementing their IT requirements with services running on the cloud.

    AWS, on the other hand, started scaling from the infrastructure from the beginning. Its approach has been to continually be ahead of the innovation curve and offer services that IT operations can easily comprehend and use to support their compute and storage requirements on demand.

    Market Share Comparison: The Path to Growth

    It’s not hard to see why both AWS and Azure have grown into their roles as the market leaders. Today more than 70 Amazon services can be utilized, including the basic compute, storage and network building blocks, as well as “up the stack” services such as database as a service and even frameworks to easily scale mobile applications, databases and more. AWS has a massive public cloud with the largest data centers in the world, and excels at allowing their customers to choose the building blocks they need to create a variety of service offerings.

    That said, Azure is growing as well, and quickly gaining ground on AWS. Microsoft has moved aggressively to match AWS by enhancing and building up its array of offerings. The company has been selling to the enterprise market for decades and, as a result, has garnered strong relationships with many large global organizations. These efforts and relationships seem to be paying off, as a recent survey of 100 CIOs by Morgan Stanley predicted that Azure would be the largest infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) vendor by 2019.

    Enterprise-Grade Product Capabilities

    AWS and Azure both provide comprehensive enterprise cloud services, and they both do it well. The core features of AWS include a large suite of infrastructure and application services that enable running nearly everything in the cloud, from traditional enterprise applications to large web-scale workloads. AWS is the clear winner these days in terms of the number of services it offers; the services are well-connected and provide full cloud capabilities for most enterprise needs.

    Azure is also fast closing the gaps with the enterprise cloud market, including with large-size virtual machines, StorSimple Virtual Array, itsNAS offering and the SQL Data Warehouse. In addition, with its recent announcement of Azure Stack, and via solutions such as Cloudify, Microsoft strengthens hybrid architecture and workload mobility between on-premises and public cloud workloads.

    Other factors that are driving enterprises to adopt Azure include the Azure Security Center (ASC), which provides a centralized view of security policies and configurations from multiple Azure subscriptions; the ability for customers to save time and effort through unified operations tools such as SQL Manager, Visual Studio and other such services; and seamless VM migration to migrate servers between disparate environments.

    Growth Strategies

    Microsoft also plans to invest heavily in cloud growth going forward, with a big push and investment in new features and infrastructure. Microsoft’s Intelligent Cloud unit continues to be the focal point of the company’s growth strategy, as the company claims that nearly 60 percent of Fortune 500 companies use at least three of Microsoft’s cloud offerings.

    Both AWS and Azure, in fact, are investing heavy capital expenditures on worldwide data centers and servers. AWS, for example, has just announced a new Asia Pacific region in Mumbai, India, with two availability zones. And with the introduction of new regions in the U.K., Microsoft has announced 34 Azure regions around the world, with 28 generally available today—more than any other major cloud provider. With certifications such as MCSE and many more, Microsoft has more certifications than any other cloud provider in the industry.

    Both AWS and Azure are poised to continue growing, and both companies have big futures in the cloud market. It’s clear, however, that in the cloud game today, Azure is narrowing the functional gap. Azure gives enterprises the ability to use existing Microsoft software licenses under the Enterprise Agreement (EA), giving enterprises better terms and packages. Microsoft enterprise users are potentially ‘power users,’ and prefer a DIY approach versus pre-packaged and opinionated options. This leaves the market open to more collaboration, such as through the use of Docker Swarm. With this type of approach, users have control over the way they run their apps on various platforms, with open-source orchestration to allow consistent management and control of their applications and services.

    — Sharone Zitzman

  • DevOps TLV June &  July Updates

    DevOps TLV June & July Updates

    Ahoy there – so here are a few quick updates from the DevOpsphere in Tel Aviv

    Events

    DevOps Days Tel Aviv 2015 is officially announced…join us on October 7-8th in sunny Tel Aviv for yet another excellent two days of all things Dev, Ops, culture, psych and more.  We’re looking for awesome talks, you can pitch your ideas here, and if you’d like to support the cause, you can find sponsorship information here.

    Join us for the first ever StatsCraft conference taking place July 30th at Google Campus Tel Aviv, spearheaded by my own DevOps Days co-organizer (and devopsy.kinsta.cloud contributor Nir Cohen) – an event on all things monitoring – with great sessions on Riemann, Graphite, ELK – with hands-on workshops you won’t want to miss.

     Meetups

    If you missed the June Docker meetup on Docker in Production, you can find the recording here, the slides from the last AngularJS meetup here, and stay tuned for some hot DevOps Israel meetups already in the works.

    If you’re in the area and would like to get involved in the community be sure to reach out – @shar1z, would love to hear from you.

  • The Hypocrisy of Vendor Neutrality

    The Hypocrisy of Vendor Neutrality

    Disclaimer: I’m going to name the product and company I work for in this article.  I assure you this does not mean this post is a product pitch.  Really, I promise.

    In my capacity as the open source community manager/dev relations/community evangelist/[Enter Alternate Title Here] at Cloudify, I’m a huge advocate of knowledge sharing. My personal credo is that the single most important element in a product’s success is spreading the wealth of knowledge — empowering your users to be autonomous, and even hopefully achieve a level of understanding that surpasses the original development team. Intelligence of the masses. Better code. Better product.

    To this end, I’ve been trying to cultivate a culture among our R&D to document document document everything you do.  I’m not talking about a product’s traditional documentation. I’m talking about those less formal processes of trial and error and learning that are never formally written down anywhere – and are lost when the person moves on to new endeavors, or even forgets after a time.

    I’m also a big fan of internal wikis…but that’s an even tougher culture to cultivate.  On top of toiling endlessly to write a great product, and then adding the necessary product tools to make sure people can actually use it – from docs to tutorials – the last thing devs want is the added overhead of actually having to document the technical aspects of the process.  So I relent.  But I have a dream, nonetheless.

    Backtracking to the actual topic at hand.  So in terms of interesting stuff my team is always doing – and working with excellent, awesome, interesting and cutting-edge open source tools – we write a lot of blog posts.  Really good ones (if I may say so myself) – technical, hands-on, useful…actionable posts.  Kind of like meta-documentation.  On top of these posts, and the existing tools we leverage in our daily work – we’ve actually discovered a lot of gaps with known tools, and have written additional open source tools that help us get the job we need done – not even as our primary work at hand, just as an added bonus.  And I’ve found a scathing irony/hypocrisy when it comes to propagating this knowledge to the masses.

    True story.  One of our devs did an excellent job of porting Vagrant .box files to AWS.  He wrote a really great post about it.  There was one caveat though, in the first line he had mentioned why he had needed to do so in the context of his work. He made the major faux pas of mentioning the product he did this for.

    I submitted the article to a prominent tech publication – and the response I received was:

    “Sorry your product is mentioned in the first paragraph of the post…we’ll need to pass”.  

    That was the only mention of the product in the entire post (btw, in this new post, we were actually asked to add a bit more info on the technologies mentioned in the article, hence the augmented intro. The initial post started with the pain point).  The entire post focused on Vagrant and AWS  – these products they had no issue with.  But the mention of our product in the first paragraph.  Tsk tsk tsk.

    Now, I truly and deeply understand that there are plenty of blog spammers out there.  Doing all kinds of SEO shenanigans to build traffic, and writing fluffernutter posts.

    But seriously just reading the article, and personally I felt this was one of the best written ones I’ve had, you can tell this one does not even remotely fall under the same category.

    So then I started to have a discussion with a team member who really likes to write posts.  And I love him for that.  And we asked the crazy question of… when do you reach that critical mass that you can freely mention your product and its values in the context of other technologies and technological needs without being perceived as pitchy?

    Why are certain technologies from the Vagrants to the Dockers (open source) and the AWS to VMwares and even Apples (not even remotely open source) given a stage to discuss the benefits of their products without being perceived as pitchy – while others are completely passed over or even scorned for their mention?

    Is it a critical mass thing? A tipping point? Is it what delivers traffic?  How can you know a product won’t deliver traffic if it’s not allowed to be mentioned? How can a product garner adoption if it isn’t known about?

    And let’s be honest, nearly all open source tooling these days has a monetization angle – people can’t work for free, it just isn’t a sustainable model.  So every single tool out there has what to gain.

    So who are those powers that be that decide which product is worthy of being mentioned, and those that are only possibly allowed to be mentioned (best case scenario) in the author’s bio?

    The even bigger irony is that these sites that are offered these technical posts, and are monetizing themselves off of these contributions, and building their own reputation and traffic and traction and SEO…

    I’m not intending to sound bitter. I know these sites receive A LOT of content, and have to be very strict with moderation.  I get it.  I also know that while pastures may seem green to us on this side of the keyboard – tech sites from the prominent GigaOms to the more niche Dr. Dobbs are shutting down left and right.

    And this is where I have to give a shout out to the DZones, devopsy.kinsta.cloud and Developer.coms of the world – who do understand the technical worthiness of posts that albeit mention a now esoteric product, but provide information of technical value to their readers, and publish them.

    Who knows – maybe the sites that have the foresight to give respect to new tooling will have gotten in on the ground floor of the next Docker.  (Because you just can’t have a technical post without mentioning Docker.)