Fuck the cloud.

[Kitsune]

Technology buzzwords give me hives, doubly so when it's obvious that the person on the television clearly has no god damned clue what they're talking about.  Cloud computing is the current tech buzzword du jour that riles me up.  In theory, cloud computing's a dandy concept.  A re-imagining of the old dumb terminal days, with applications served from a central location so that you don't have to mess with installing software on the individual workstations.  That's fine.

Only, I deal primarily with businesses for my consulting work, and do you know what each and every business I've ever encountered has?  They have, without exception, at least one shitty custom-made application that's incompatible with fucking everything and utterly vital to their daily operation.  A custom database app for order entry.  Some bizarre program specific to their industry, designed by some insane guy in a cave, and probably only used by ten companies on the planet.  This shit barely runs as it is, it's definitely not going to handle being virtualized and run over a network.  I have customers stuck with IE6 forever because the asshat who wrote some crappy program couldn't be bothered to make it run on a browser newer than nine years old.

These customers will part with their clunky, buggy, incompatible-with-everything programs when you pry it from their cold dead hands.  They often paid vastly too much money for these custom applications, are still paying lots of money for support contracts, and are deathly afraid of having to train their employees to use anything else.  You read about XP mode in windows 7, the last-ditch virtualizing for running things too decrepit to work on a modern OS?  I've had to implement it on two customers' systems already, and the reason the number isn't higher is that the rest of them are too afraid to upgrade out of XP lest their albatross software stop working.

In some utopian future where people will abandon their crappy old software without worrying about the hassles of upgrades, we can move to cloud computing.  Alternately, anyone who needs only basic office applications can go right there today.  But real businesses are not in a place where it's feasible, and seeing vacuous-looking people ramble about 'the cloud' revolutionizing business makes me punchy.  The dumb terminal model wasn't any sort of utopia either; plenty of things can go wrong with a workstation to break its connection to the server and render it just as useless as if the programs were installed on its drive.  The IT manhours to keep everything running might be diminished, but they wouldn't be eliminated.

[01101010]

I honestly think that the new generation of workers coming into the fold now will not have this "conversion fear." Its the older generations that learned how to type on typewriters until they were forced to use a word processor and then a dreaded PC. They aren't savvy enough to "play" with things or aware that errors they commit are not the end of the world scenario.

[Merusk]

Heh, I've thought the same thing myself for a while, Kit, and I don't even work in IT.   Fuck, you can't get people in my industry to upgrade from office 97 or 03, you're sure as hell not selling them on cloud computing.  I was fairly certain mine wasn't the only industry like that, thanks for the verification.

We just got new machines for my department last week and it was like pulling teeth to get them.

UM: "But they're only 4 years old, why do you need to replace them?"
us: "Because the software we needed to upgrade to won't run on them.  We sit around doing nothing for 20-30 minute stretches while it locks-up our machines."
UM: "Yeah, about that why did you need to upgrade in the first place?"
us: "Because running on software from 2005 that isn't supported by the vendor anymore caused too many problems.  We couldn't get anything to print right, sending stuff to subs is a pain in the ass, getting it back from them is a bigger pain in the ass and there's all kinds of productivity features in the new software that makes our job easier."
UM: "This was all a lot easier when you guys just drew in Arris."
us: "You mean the DOS-based drafting program you're still forcing down our throats for legacy plans?  Yeah, tons easier. It doesn't even have a proper rotate or layer management command AND it's 13 years old.  Things take 3-4 times longer to draw in that."
UM "Maybe, but you didn't cost us so much money."

 

Yeah, right. We as a department cost less money than the company has given away in incentives to Realtors that have brought in 0 sales this year.  Somewhere in the neighborhood of $40k has been given away, ($20k cash, 20 iPod touches, (3) 45" TVs and assorted gift cards and baskets.) and  and our 4 new systems (Which are expected to last 5 years) + the subscription for ACAD cost about $12k.  

I've seen the same thing at multiple places for the custom/ homebrew crap as well.  Hell, at the current place the purchasing/ scheduling software will actually do several of the reports and track the information that the managers want, but they insist the office staff re-enter it in Excel.  Why? Because the managers can't be assed to learn the software to run the report AND they "don't like the look of the report."  Yeah, that's efficient.

Technology will always be seen as a burden by UM. It might become feasible as folks our generation and younger move into upper management. At least then you'll have people who understand that modern technology has a life cycle. It's a computer, not a slide rule/ ledger/ typewriter that will last you until your business closes down or you retire.  However, that's not happening quickly and if anything seems to be slowing down. Particularly as folks stop retiring because their 401(k)s went in the toilet and they decide, "I'll just work until 70 or so.."  

[Tarami]

We've had cloud computing before. It was called terminals. Then every company realized how awesome it would be if everyone could store and run their own shit, so we got PCs.

It's a fad. Worst case scenario, it'll have some companies adopt, then regress to desktop computers when they realize that their entire operations is standing still because their ISP is having a bad day.

[Tarami]

Crap, double post instead of editing.

[naum]

We've had cloud computing before. It was called terminals. Then every company realized how awesome it would be if everyone could store and run their own shit, so we got PCs.

Not to declare the olden days were absolute nirvana but in that scenario, one did not have to worry about replacing machines, updating software suites, etc.… …you might have to lug out a replacement terminal once in a blue moon.

The software on the mainframe got battered but it ran for years (and still runs in most corporate settings underneath all the snazzy client front end and/or glitzy web 2.0 UI).

Now, with current economic downturn, machines are required to server longer — at my current job site, we used to replace machines after 3 years but that policy got shelved back in '08. Hilarity to ensue when Adobe CS5 gets installed on 5+ year old machines.

[Ollie]

We'll see many software service providers pushing for the cloud model, since it's an effective way of combating piracy. Odds are, they'll want to jam it down consumers' throats way before it's feasible from a technological standpoint.

As far as technology and management goes, it's a bit of a generational issue, as Merusk and 01101010 said. Nothing a bit of time won't solve.

Our summer house doesn't even have a phone line, let alone an internet connection. Good luck selling me cloud-only apps, let alone an OS.

[Kitsune]

In theory, hosting an application in a single place is definitely an improvement over managing/patching/installing it on twenty workstations.  The potential in cloud computing is great.  But only if all of the applications that a company needs can actually be run that way.  And unfortunately, the people who make the computer decisions for businesses are going to be the middle-aged guy with the huge SUV who owns the company, not the young computer-savvy up-and-comers, so don't expect it to change very soon.  Additionally, I've run across a surprising number of younger computer users who are retarded about computers, so that's no guarantee of progress even when the late gen x/gen ys reach management positions.

[Ironwood]

We had this thread already.  I remember, because a lot of people were pushing the same stupid ideas of their own about what it actually means.

Stop fighting the future.

[Righ]

we got PCs.

It's a fad.

FIFY. It might be the only fad you're used to, but everybody having their own limitless processing power and storage upgraded every other year is a fad, and one that's fast coming to an end.

[tgr]

From my perspective, cloud computing will probably be a nice alternative to webhosters and dedicated server hosters as they are right now, and maybe even some companies. I am, however, not convinced it's the be all end all, for one simple reason: shit will go down. And when shit does go down, it means all the users connected to that "cloud" is not able to use it.

If this isn't a concern, or it's a calculated risk they're willing to take, then by all means, go cloud. If you're concerned about this (as I would be if it were my own company), then maybe cloud isn't for you.

[Ironwood]

Fuck this, I'm just repeating myself.

[Grimwell]

A leading reason we left cloud computing behind was the boom of the home computer. The odds of anyone in the 1990's being able to run a network with a dumb terminal at home were so long it's not even worth making some analogy to show it. People bought a computer for their house and it needed to stand up on it's own. Thus Windows.

It spilled into the workplace because that was what everyone was used to and the path of least resistance. Plus, the money the licenses made was worth the piracy losses that companies at the time faced. This was a horrible time to be a network admin, because you had to get all these PC's with multiple configurations and generations of hardware/software all to play nice on the same network. When I worked for a financial company, I was literally supporting everything from a 486 to a brand new for XP Pro machine on the same network. It wasn't fun seven years ago, I can only imagine that it's less fun now.

From the business and administration standpoint, the cloud is the most efficient answer, the mainframe days were clunky for interface, not for sensible administration. It is the future, and people who work remote or VPN in from home to do work related tasks will essentially be turning  their fully functional PC into a dumb terminal for that work session and then back to a full PC when they are done.

BTW, I turn 39 this year, and I think that makes me middle-aged right? This quote is shit:

And unfortunately, the people who make the computer decisions for businesses are going to be the middle-aged guy with the huge SUV who owns the company, not the young computer-savvy up-and-comers, so don't expect it to change very soon.

My generation rode that PC boom up. Yes, back then we were geeks and a minority, but the odds on one of us being in position to make that business decision to go back to the cloud isn't all that bad. Have a little hope eh? 

[Lantyssa]

It spilled into the workplace because that was what everyone was used to and the path of least resistance. Plus, the money the licenses made was worth the piracy losses that companies at the time faced. This was a horrible time to be a network admin, because you had to get all these PC's with multiple configurations and generations of hardware/software all to play nice on the same network. When I worked for a financial company, I was literally supporting everything from a 486 to a brand new for XP Pro machine on the same network. It wasn't fun seven years ago, I can only imagine that it's less fun now.

We use subnets and a bazillion routers.  What used to be an entire campus on one Class B (10-base T -- that was a nightmare!) is now cut down to x.x.x.254 subnets, plus additional filtering at the switch level, and tons of groups are behind their own routers.  OS' have much more robust networking these days, too.  Taking care of the network is a lot easier now.  A lot!

[Teleku]

This thread makes me giggle.

Ironwood is right.

[naum]

This thread makes me giggle.

Ironwood is right.

But it is noteworthy how computing paradigms seem to cycle.

I'm old enough to remember when relational databases and SQL (until the dawn of the web age, mid 90s, for many shops) were met with disdain by mainstream database administrators — that the relational model was a toy, totally unsuitable for enterprise applications, unable to accommodate transaction levels and entirely unstable in the reliability realm. Now in 2010, it's the SQL loyal adherents shouting down the NoSQL (i.e., object/key-data stores like Cassandra, Tokyo Cabinet, Mongo DB, Couch DB, etc.…) champions, scolding the young whipper snappers that their DB models are toys, not up to par for serving serious mission critical business systems.

[Zaljerem]

The computing model seems to go from "distributed" to "centralized" and back about every 10 years or so.

[Dtrain]

Taking care of the network is a lot easier now.  A lot!

This sounds like something a network administrator would would say in Animal Crossing. I can even imagine it with all the blippy wierd moonspeak those little turds speak. I never should have played that game - it raped part of my consiousness, and I'm still not even sure what part.

[eldaec]

This too shall pass.

[Ironwood]

All the more reason to understand NOW.

[TripleDES]

The company I work at decided it needed a new system  to manage the outputs of production lines, decided it needed some fucking AS400 mainframe in mid-2000 and developed god knows how long on an TN3270 app for the people to use. It's fucking unflexible, everyone's complaining about it, the mainframe's having tons of hilarious issues and DB400 is fucking slow. God, I'm so glad I quit working in IT altogether, because things like this make me rage. Seeing how fucking popular a certain cheap Unix clone was the time they've decided to get a fucking AS400 and developers without a clue. Since all terminals are fullfletched PCs, they could have developed smarter client-server based solutions, or just run fucking SSH on it and have been way more flexible on the server end.

Only thing that's worse is that they've only moved away from paper trails that late.

[Righ]

AS/400 or iSeries or System i are minicomputers. 

There are right times to be client-server, right times to use peer networks and right times to use monolithic systems but the trick is to identify that these times are dictated by purpose, not vendor driven sales cycles. The bad news is that IT is filled with more cowboys than even the building trade, so if you have a clue you'll spend most of your life trying to get heard over the cacophony of idiots bluffing by pitching vendor driven 'solutions'.