Wednesday Sep 26, 2007

If you are painted as irrelevant are you a threat?

What is a better position to be painted as?  Company A: that alternative mouse trap or Company B: that former high flyer but "irrelevant" entity.  It doesn't matter what industry: automobiles, home appliances, beer industry, retail, etc. We have all heard the competition paint their competitors.  Sports teams like to use the "no respect" card to motivate the team.  Satisfaction is gained when the "team" shows the pundits and the odds makers differently.  In fact some like to be the underdog so they can fly under the radar and be taken for granted.  It is a great position for professional sports as any team can be beat on a given night when you are playing the best.  Roger Clemems was supposedly washed up 11 years ago when he was traded by the Boston Red Sox to the Toronto Blue Jays.  How many Cy Young awards did he win after the trade?  Four of them. How many Cy Young awards has he won in total?  Seven of them.  Being painted as all washed up and irrelevant was a motivator.  "He is too old", "Doesn't have the edge anymore", "Lost his spark", "Has too much money", etc. He saw it differently than his pundits and competition.

If you are a company and get painted the same way:  former high flyer, lost its vision, could not adapt after the .BOMB, financially unsound, etc. Those are certainly motivators.  If a company was in the software and hardware business what would they have to do show that irrelevance is determined by the customer not the competition at the end of the day. 

The company would build hardware that is optimized for virtualization on multiple fronts.  Virtulization is not a one recipe fits all problem.  Have your hardware be hyper visor aware.  Make sure your hardware can run the dominate industry operating systems even if one of them happens to be proprietary. Memory density and I/O connectivity should be features that differentiate.    Common industry standard components and subsystems that span across multiple microprocessor architectures is attractive.  If different microprocessor-based blades can share a common backplane all the better.  The company should then make sure that their software is virtual machine aware to be a great dom0 as well as run as a VM in someone else's dom0 even if it is proprietary.  This software would also allow different flavors of VM capability.  For example virtualize and entire OS 'on' your environment or virtualize particular applications 'in' your environment with zoning.  Lastly make sure your software environment runs on competitor's hardware. So far the company would have multiple hardware capability teamed with multiple software capability.  This sounds like motivation. 

Next the company would be able to put the two above items together and build compelling solutions for customers.  Imagine the products that one could build. For example build a server that can eat and serve storage easily because the architecture is closely coupled and the os is optimized.  Or a server that can horizontally consolidate multiple instances of linux by taking advantage of high cpu thread counts and the VM aware os.  How about taking it one step further.  The above 2 examples are based off of general computing.  So now let's extend the solution with embedded capability.  Create dedicated products with the same hardware and software from above-- but leverage their ability to virtulize...  That is both compelling and scary especially if the software licensing terms allow anyone to have access to all the code. 

Cy Young like stuff...

About

The blog of Bob Porras - Vice President, Data, Availability, Scalability & HPC for Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Search

Categories
Archives
« April 2014
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   
       
Today