cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Will Stevens <williamstev...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: OpenStack Revenues Approaching $3.4B: 451 Research
Date Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:52:55 GMT
I don't want to come across as anti-OpenStack because I am not.  We use
some components of OpenStack.  The problem I see is that everyone investing
in OpenStack has to prove its value, which has resulted in extensive smoke
and mirrors.  Because of this many companies have invested heavily
in OpenStack adoption, but many of these projects fail once they get into
the nuts and bolts.

In contrast, CloudStack hardly has the marketing funds to present the
basics to the market.  While this has its own problems, when people choose
CloudStack, they know what they are getting.  It is feature rich while
still being manageable in size and scope, making it viable for companies at
any scale.

It is also worth pointing out that OpenStack and CloudStack are not solving
the same problems.  CloudStack solves for a subset of
what OpenStack (claims to) solve for.  I think the scope of what OpenStack
has tried to solve for is one of the reasons it has become so hard to adopt.

OpenStack will continue to be a contender simply due to the massive amount
of money invested into it.  At some point in the future it will likely be a
viable option for medium to large companies, but that is not the case yet.
We will see how the next 5 years play out...

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Erik Weber <terbolous@gmail.com> wrote:

> Depending on the upgrade, it can take anywhere from a few minutes to a few
> hours to upgrade cloudstack.
>
> HP stopped providing its public openstack cloud..
>
> Erik
>
>
> Den torsdag 28. april 2016 skrev Yim, Philip <Philip_Yim@alliedtelesis.com>
> følgende:
>
>> I'm new to the thread but does cloudstack solve this problem ?
>>
>> Philip
>>
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:36 AM, Will Stevens <williamstevens@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I would be curious to know how many billions of $ of consulting and
>> operational costs were incurred to boost the $3.4B of revenues.  :)  I
>> wonder which number is bigger...
>>
>> You still can't upgrade an openstack cloud, so if you want to go to a new
>> version, you have to build a new cloud and migrate all of your workloads.
>>
>> I am not saying you can't make money with openstack, but I would rather
>> be an openstack consultant than an openstack provider, and that says a lot
>> about the actual technology...
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Sunando Bhattacharya <
>> sunando@indiqus.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I really don’t know on what basis we are saying that openstack doesn’t
>>> work… $3.4Bill of revenues !!!
>>>
>>> Fact is openstack is production-grade and catching up fast on most
>>> counts with ACS, and actually ahead on some features like NFV.
>>>
>>> Lets call a spade a spade
>>>
>>> *Sunando Bhattacharya*
>>> *M* +91 97111 52299
>>> www.indiqus.com
>>>
>>> <https://www.indiqus.com/blog>
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/indiqus-technologies-pvt-ltd->
>>> <https://twitter.com/INDIQUS>
>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Indiqus_technologies/about>
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/indiqus>
>>>
>>>
>>> *This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
>>> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential
>>> and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the
>>> original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are
>>> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
>>> communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been
>>> obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error,
>>> please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep
>>> e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are
>>> virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of
>>> viruses.*
>>>
>>> On 28 April 2016 at 8:26:21 PM, Giles Sirett (giles.sirett@shapeblue.com)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 to that will
>>>
>>> Kind Regards
>>>
>>> Giles
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> D: +44 20 3603 0541 <+44%2020%203603%200541> | M: +44 796 111 2055
>>> <+44%20796%20111%202055>
>>>
>>> Giles.Sirett@shapeblue.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> giles.sirett@shapeblue.com
>>> www.shapeblue.com
>>> @shapeblue
>>>
>>> On 28 Apr 2016, at 15:39, Will Stevens <williamstevens@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Openstack is just bitter because they still don't have a product that
>>> works and our product works just fine.  Just goes to show that more money
>>> doesn't always solve the problem...  :)  All that money and almost no
>>> success stories.  Kind of sad really...
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 1:09 AM, Madan Ganesh Velayudham <
>>> madanganesh@actonmagic.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Greetings,
>>>>
>>>> Just bumped onto this article, thought of sharing:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.eweek.com/cloud/openstack-revenues-approaching-3.4b-451-research.html
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>> The decision to turn over OpenStack to a foundation in 2012 stands in
>>>> contrast to the CloudStack platform and its parent, Citrix. Citrix
>>>> donated
>>>> <http://www.serverwatch.com/server-news/citrix-walks-away-from-openstack-moves-to-apache-cloudstack.html>
>>>> CloudStack to the Apache Software Foundation, but it was never set up with
>>>> the same true, multi-stakeholder, stand-alone foundation as OpenStack's.
>>>>
>>>> "If Citrix would have done a foundation around CloudStack, *we would
>>>> now be at a Cloudstack Summit, not OpenStack Summit*," Sadowski said."
>>>> Sadowski said.
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> The bold highlighted line was hurting a little bit!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Madan
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Madan Ganesh Velayudham
>>>> Founder & CEO
>>>> ActOnMagic
>>>>
>>>> *Cloud Governance, Analytics, Management Simplified with ActOnCloud!*
>>>> www.actonmagic.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and
>> may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
>> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
>> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
>> all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient,
>> please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access,
>> review and disclosure by the sender's e-mail System Administrator.
>>
>

Mime
View raw message