With mainstream vendors (e.g. RedHat OpenShift, IBM Cloud Application Services, Oracle Public Cloud, ActiveState Stackato) promoting quickly pushing bits into the Cloud, smart development teams have established a clear Cloud Platform comparison criteria and a process to determine if the run-time PaaS will exhibit cloud characteristics and offer a Cloud Native instead of a Cloud Washed experience.
PaaS and DevOps tooling is an opportunity to raise infrastructure abstraction. DevOps tooling integrated with PaaS should shield developers from hardware infrastructure concerns and expose business entities. The Cloud washed PaaS environments commonly do not shield application developers, integrators, and architects from infrastructure details (i.e. memory configuration, location, number of machine instances). While short-term benefit is derived by ‘quickly pushing bits into the Cloud’, the design and development experience remains the same.
Cloud Native PaaS run-time environments should significantly exhibit essential Cloud characteristics. The NIST Draft – Cloud Computing Synopsis and Recommendations defines Cloud characteristics as:
• On-demand self-service
• Broad network access
• Resource pooling
• Rapid elasticity
• Measured service
How do these characteristics influence run-time behavior and determine whether PaaS offerings are cloud washed or cloud native?
To serve enterprise organization needs, PaaS, NoOps, and fast code deployment must be grounded in effective automated governance. Automated governance enables application and infrastructure services to efficiently scale across numerous consumers and providers while effectively monetizing, maintaining, and securing consumer-provider interactions. Effective automated governance mitigates risks, improves performance, and facilitates correct actions.
WSO2 Carbon application platform is built on a solid Apache Open Source Foundation. Apache Open Source delivers innovative components and an extensive ecosystem of developers, educational resources, and committers. Apache projects often surpass proprietary platform vendor offerings, and lead Apache project sponsors (e.g. Google, Twitter, Yahoo, Huawei, AMD) run their Internet scale business on open source project code.
When development teams adopt Apache open source projects, the teams undertake a challenging platform development task list:
- Integrate Apache projects into the application platform
- Synchronize project dependencies and versions
- Maintain build repository and configuration scripts
- Patch project codebase to fix defects
- Upgrade projects and obtain new features
With the availability of cable and satellite content delivery over the last few decades, we’ve become accustomed to choosing from hundreds of channels and pay-per-view options. However, the emergence of the cloud for content delivery has led to an explosion in the volume, forms, and sources of broadcast content available, which will fundamentally change the dynamics of the industry.
As business leaders focus on growth during 2012, they are identifying business expansion and transformation opportunities. The resulting IT mandate to rapidly evolve mobile and social interactions is forcing CIOs to re-invent their software delivery. By following a straightforward four-step plan, CIOs can improve productivity, enhance agility, deliver timely solutions, and help fulfill strategic business growth goals.
When investing in technology infrastructure, organizations commonly desire a positive return on investment (ROI) within six to twelve months and a lower PaaS TCO over the investment lifespan. Does deployment topology sizing, tenant count, tenant density, and service mix significantly impact expense and influence ROI timeframe?
In John Rymer’s recent blog post, Progress Software Lowers Its Sights, he breaks the news that Progress is divesting perceived ‘non-core’ middleware products. On the selling block are Progress Sonic ESB, Savvion BPM, Actional services management, and FuseSource. Progress’ recent strategy shift places Sonic ESB, Sonic MQ, and FuseSource implementations at risk of obsolescence. The list of probable acquirers could mean product termination and forced migration.