Some of my favorite debates on the blogosphere concern the future of things. On his blog The Bigger Truth, fellow blogger Steve Duplessie (ESG) gives his thoughts on [Why the Cloud will Vaporize]. This was countered with TechTarget's Joseph Faran response, [Why Cloud Computing is Here to Stay]. Chris Mellor on The Register covers [HDS's pay-per-use private cloud storage] and [Nirvanix's hybrid cloud taster] offerings. Fellow blogger Alex McDonald has a hilarious send-up, poking fun at EMC's latest in their series of commercial failures, [Atmos Online, The Jezhov Of The Cloud].

Of course, EMC isn't the first, and won't be the last, vendor to [hear the sirens] of Cloud Computing and crash their ships on rocky shores. Just because you manufacture hardware or write software does not guarantee your success as a Cloud service provider.

(FTC disclaimer: I work for IBM. IBM is a successful public cloud service provider, as well as offering products that can be used to deploy a private, hybrid or community cloud, and provides technology to other cloud service proviers.)

An amusing excerpt from Steve Duplessie's post:

"Side Note: There is no such thing as a private cloud. A private cloud is called IT. We don’t need more terms for the same stuff."

I have to agree that when vendors like EMC say "Journey to the Private Cloud", skeptics hear "How to keep your IT administrator job by sticking with a traditional IT approach". Butchers, bakers, candlestick makers and the specialty shop "arms dealers" of Cloud Computing IT equipment may not want to see their market shrink down to a dozen or so service providers, and drum up the fear that "Public Cloud" deployments will "disintermediate" the IT staff.

But does that mean the use of term "Private Cloud" should be discontinued? The US National Institute of Standards and Technology [NIST] offers their cloud model composed of five essential characteristics, three service models, and four deployment models. Here's an excerpt:

"Essential Characteristics:

• On-demand self-service
• Broad network access
• Resource pooling
• Rapid elasticity
• Measured Service

Service Models:

• Cloud Software as a Service (SaaS)
• Cloud Platform as a Service (PaaS)
• Cloud Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)

Deployment Models:

• Private cloud.
• Community cloud.
• Public cloud.
• Hybrid cloud"

Like traditional IT, a private cloud infrastructure is operated solely for an organization, so I can see how many might consider the term unnecessary. However, unlike traditional IT, a private cloud may be managed by the organization or a third party and may exist on premise or off premise.

How many traditional IT departments meet the five essential characteristics above? Instead of "on-demand self-service", many IT departments have complicated and lengthy procurement and change control procedures. A few might have "measured service" with a charge-back scheme, and a few others prefer to use a "show-back" aproach instead, showing end users or managers how much IT resources are being consumed without assigning a monetary figure or other penalty. Rapid elasticity? Giving any resource you asked for back can be just as painful because re-purposing that equipment follows the same complicated and lengthy change control procedures.

Last December, I wrote a post covering a conference session by US Department Information Services Agency (DISA) on their [Rapid Access Computing Environment].

Just like the term "intranet" refers to a private network that employs Internet standards and technologies, I feel the term "private cloud" is useful, representing an infrastructure that meets the above criteria, employing Public Cloud standards and technologies, that can distinguish itself from traditional IT in key ways that provide business value.

What I do hope "vaporizes" is all the hype, and all the misuse of the Cloud terminology out there.

technorati tags: IBM, Cloud Computing, Private Cloud, Public Cloud, ESG, DISA, RACE