Link: IBM Takes A Hands Off Approach With Red Hat

The reason for this hands-off attitude for such expensive acquisitions is simple: Both VMware and Red Hat live and die by the fact that they are neutral to any particular platform. While IBM may prefer Red Hat’s various elements of the stack – the Enterprise Linux operating system, the OpenShift container system, the OpenStack cloud controller, the JBoss application server, and the Ceph block and object storage – it cannot prevent Red Hat’s vast partner network from doing what they do, which is compete against IBM and each other selling Linux stacks. To not do so would be to destroy the value of the Red Hat business, just as Dell would destroy the value of the VMware business if it had only put VMware’s virtualization and cloud software on its own PowerEdge servers

Source: IBM Takes A Hands Off Approach With Red Hat

DellWorld 2019 coverage, selections

Dell executives have been blunt about their expectations for the impact of 5G and the edge. Dell Technologies Vice Chairman Jeff Clarke told conference attendees that 25% of all data will soon be consumed at the edge through evolving 5G applications. Dell himself was even more expansive, flatly predicting in this interview that compute of data at the edge will be bigger than the public or private cloud.

Source: In gambling mecca, Dell’s founder offers evidence that big bets on multicloud, AI and edge will pay off

Also:

Fifty-five commercial 5G networks will be deployed around the world by the end of 2019, said Malhotra, even though the standards won’t be complete until 2020. Pre-standardisation rollouts aren’t unusual: the same thing happened with 4G, he noted.

Meanwhile, a lot more than normal on the storage angle for all this hybrid cloud stuff.

And, some talk about the company itself:

“Sometimes it occurs organically and sometimes it occurs inorganically,” he said, smirking. “After the combination of EMC and VMware and Pivotal, we are far bigger than any of the individual companies added all together — the revenue synergies have been quite significant.”

Link: Broadcom CEO Dangles CA Technologies Bait, Investors Bite

Tan told investors during the company’s third fiscal quarter of 2018 conference call Thursday that he thinks Broadcom will be able to tap into CA Technologies’ current software customers to sell its switches, routers, and fiber optic equipment.

“Just as we have done with hypercloud players, we believe we can bring our compute offload solutions, our Tomahawk switches, Jericho routers, fiber optics, and our server storage connectivity portfolio directly to these same large enterprises that are buying CA software,” Tan told investors, according to transcripts. “Through CA we believe we have a big doorway to engage strategically with these customers and provide them direct access at very compelling economics to the same leading edge … storage and compute technologies that are used to enable the cloud service providers today.”
Original source: Broadcom CEO Dangles CA Technologies Bait, Investors Bite

Link: Broadcom can’t get there from here

“The tiny margin in CA’s enterprise software business, which contrasts with its richly profitable mainframe division, won’t help Broadcom hit its projected EBITDA targets, no matter how many ‘adjustments’ are made. In fact, the division stands in the way.”
Original source: Broadcom can’t get there from here

Link: CoreOS Is New Linux, Not A RHEL Classic Killer

‘Importantly, the OpenShift platform cloud software, which included Red Hat’s own implementation of the Kubernetes container controller, will be deployable on either the full-on Red Hat Enterprise Linux in pets mode or the minimalist Red Hat CoreOS in cattle mode. But it will be using the Tectonic version of the Kubernetes controller going forward as well as integrating the Prometheus monitoring tool and etcd for storing telemetry. Gracely tells The Next Platform that the implementation of Kubernetes had outside dependencies such as the CloudForms hybrid cloud management tool (formerly ManageIQ) and was not “native” to Kubernetes in the same way that Tectonic is, meaning free of outside dependenies.’
Original source: CoreOS Is New Linux, Not A RHEL Classic Killer

Link: Bringing CoreOS technology to Red Hat OpenShift to deliver a next-generation automated Kubernetes platform

“With the acquisition, Container Linux will be reborn as Red Hat CoreOS, a new entry into the Red Hat ecosystem. Red Hat CoreOS will be based on Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux sources and is expected to ultimately supersede Atomic Host as Red Hat’s immutable, container-centric operating system.

“Red Hat CoreOS will provide the foundation for Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform, Red Hat OpenShift Online, and Red Hat OpenShift Dedicated. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform will also, of course, continue to support Red Hat Enterprise Linux for those who prefer its lifecycle and packaging as the foundation for their Kubernetes deployments.

“Current Container Linux users can rest easy that Red Hat plans continue investing in the operating system and community. The project is an important base for container-based environments by delivering automated updates with strong security capabilities, and as a part of our commitment and vision we plan to support Container Linux as you know it today for the community and Tectonic users alike.”
Original source: Bringing CoreOS technology to Red Hat OpenShift to deliver a next-generation automated Kubernetes platform

Link: On Salesforce’s acquisition of MuleSoft

“[H]aving a decent integration platform in its arsenal enables Salesforce to tell better stories about the seamlessness of its own application portfolio, even as this continues to expand through acquisition (which, note, was where Oracle was with its Fusion Middleware portfolio and strategy when it bought BEA). It also potentially helps Salesforce further develop its Einstein proposition, by making it easier to get access to corporate data from more systems in more locations…. However, just as was the case with BEA, many of MuleSoft’s customers made that investment precisely because it could demonstrate its ability to connect anything to anything without bias, and nurture customers’ own heterogeneous ‘application networks’. I hope Salesforce can take MuleSoft’s existing value proposition forward as it creates the Salesforce Integration Cloud.”
Original source: On Salesforce’s acquisition of MuleSoft

Link: On Salesforce’s acquisition of MuleSoft

“[H]aving a decent integration platform in its arsenal enables Salesforce to tell better stories about the seamlessness of its own application portfolio, even as this continues to expand through acquisition (which, note, was where Oracle was with its Fusion Middleware portfolio and strategy when it bought BEA). It also potentially helps Salesforce further develop its Einstein proposition, by making it easier to get access to corporate data from more systems in more locations…. However, just as was the case with BEA, many of MuleSoft’s customers made that investment precisely because it could demonstrate its ability to connect anything to anything without bias, and nurture customers’ own heterogeneous ‘application networks’. I hope Salesforce can take MuleSoft’s existing value proposition forward as it creates the Salesforce Integration Cloud.”
Original source: On Salesforce’s acquisition of MuleSoft

A look at the integration vendor landscape, or “iPaaS”

MuleSoft’s IPO kicks up some interest and, here, a brief check-in with SnapLogic and Liaison.

Including some market-sizing:

The iPaaS market is expected to reach $2.9 billion in 2021, which Consoli said is a fraction of the overall integration market, which stands at about $12 billion today

Link

VZ/Yahoo!: “The next step is: How do we differentiate our strategy?”

Kara Swisher has a short interview with Verizon/AOL’s Tim Armstrong on the Yahoo! buy, which is still “pending of course.” It’s hard to take any interview about a pending acquisition on super face-value (no one wants to show their hand), but there’s some good indication that Verizon followed the “we’ll sort out the strategy details post-sale” plan. Armstrong himself says they’ll be working on figuring out differentiating, and “sources” say:

Verizon has had little insight into a number of issues, including the terms of the contracts with key employees, that it will need to make plans for the future.

I like the theory that the goal is, really, just to optimize the existing business:

“The deal that we contemplated is about growing the company and did not start with synergies,” said Armstrong. “We will be walking through a pretty direct process about what is structure and then cost structure and there will be synergy, but it is not at the top of our list.”

That seems like a low-risk plan. They’d be the biggest site by eyeballs in the US, which ain’t bad.

Also, more coverage from Reuters on the “RemainCo” company of Alibaba and Yahoo! Japan, and a cameo from Rita McGrath in a Will Oremus’s piece at Slate:

“It’s a beautiful example of a company that has a lot of indispensable pieces, but they don’t add up to an indispensable whole,” says Rita McGrath, professor of management at Columbia Business School. Yahoo’s problems, she believes, stemmed from “a fundamental unwillingness to choose” what kind of company it wanted to be.

And, 451 has their report out, by Rich Karpinski and Scott Denne. Some highlights:

  • “AOL generates roughly $1bn from its owned media properties – Yahoo pulls in 3.5x that amount.”
  • My summary of one of their points: as mobile use grows and grows, over the next 5-10 years, there’s a window for new top-dogs to emerge and take market-share. Seems like a legit theory. 451 describes the market here as: “opportunities in telecom data as a service, a market combining digital advertising, proximity marketing and an array of big-data insight services that 451 Research forecasts will grow to a $79bn addressable opportunity by 2020”
  • They’re not big on the advertising technology and networking component in Yahoo!.
  • There’s some indication that Verizon’s digital business is doing well, so maybe they’re pretty good at integration acquisitions.
  • There’s also details on the financials of “RemainCo.”

Tumblr not working out for Yahoo!

Originally purchased for $1bn in 2013, after failing to meet the $100m 2015 revenue goal, written down:

A bit of simple arithmetic puts Tumblr’s value after these writedowns at about $290 million. This is not only less than a third of its purchase price, but it’s also less than the value of Tumblr’s assets when it was acquired two years ago.

Source: Marissa Mayer promised “not to screw up” Tumblr, but she totally has

CPI case study: IBM and SoftLayer would be greater together

Data from 451 Research’s Cloud Price Index suggests that IBM is missing a trick. By going all-in and baking SoftLayer with Bluemix, IBM would gain a leading position in the market in terms of completeness of services and global availability, as well as finally delivering a single user experience.

Owen over at 451 suggests that IBM hasn’t yet merged SoftLayer into Bluemix totally, missing out on a high ranking in cloud providers (by functionality, geographic availability, etc.). Also: “The company claims $10.2bn in cloud revenue, a growth rate of 46% Y/Y, and 20,000 new users per week.”

Source: CPI case study: IBM and SoftLayer would be greater together

How’s Microsoft doing with Yammer?

If we look at it from Yammer’s perspective, it’s been a good year. Being part of the Microsoft family has helped it grow its total user base by 60% in the last 12 months to almost 8 million users, and its number of paid networks has grown by 200%. Plus, Yammer’s 2012 full year sales almost tripled year over year, helped by a stellar Q4 performance.

Microsoft & Yammer: still a long way to go

Integration is gonna be a problem for cloud

Enterprise software integration is hard and risky. Once you’ve invested in integrating your enterprise applications with one another (and/or with your partners’ applications), that integration becomes the #1 reason why you don’t want to change your applications. Or even upgrade them. That’s because the integration is an extension of the application being integrated. You can’t change the app and keep the integration. SOA didn’t change that.

Integration is lockin