Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cloud Open Source News

VMware Releases Open Source Cloud Foundry 91

Posted by samzenpus
from the silver-lining dept.
Julie188 writes "VMware shook the cloud world with an announcement that it was releasing an open source platform-as-a-service called Cloud Foundry. Not surprisingly, the new cloud platform takes direct aim at Microsoft's Azure and Google's Google Apps platforms. Cloud Foundry is made up of several technologies and products that VMware has acquired over the recent past and is released under an Apache 2 license. While VMware isn't the first-and-only player to launch an open source cloud initiative (Red Hat has DeltaCloud, Rackspace and Dell have OpenStack), some believe that with VMware now in the open source cloud business, pressure could be mounting for Microsoft and Google to release versions of their cloud that could be hosted somewhere other than their own data centers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

VMware Releases Open Source Cloud Foundry

Comments Filter:
  • by Jeremiah Cornelius (137) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @06:27PM (#35813022) Homepage Journal

    Run your whole public cloud infrastructure and application fabric on the same technology platform as you use to manage your internal data centre.

    This is a better by far option than Microsoft - who's idea is to land an Azure container at your doorstep. And it scales from the tiny to the gigantic.

    The heart of this stack seems to be gold old Tomcat. The path to an application layer that is aware of on-demand elasticity seems very good.

    • by Belial6 (794905)
      The trolls can come out at the name of "Lotus", but that is exactly what IBM offers with their cloud based Domino servers. Internal/External it's all the same.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Run your whole public cloud infrastructure and application fabric on the same technology platform as you use to manage your internal data centre.

      This is a better by far option than Microsoft - who's idea is to land an Azure container at your doorstep.

      Clearly you haven't been paying attention to Microsoft over past few months. SCVMM 2012 is all about building hybrid clouds that span your datacenter and Microsoft's Azure services.

    • I see this as the wholly Grail of cloud services. Cloud Foundry will be groovy.
  • It runs on deuterium ore!

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Why would anyone want to store their contents on a remote server where they are at the mercy of a third party. I could understand if they were selling home servers that allowed you to sync all of your appliances to a central server but... In the cloud. Just seems like it is time to ask

    What could possibly go wrong?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      there are benefits to not owning your own servers. Cost being the biggest one.

      Less labor costs, health care benefits, and retirement packages up front because someone else hires the monkeys to maintain the hardware. If you are a corporation, you have to pay taxes on all assets owned by the company. Not owning the hardware means less taxes to pay on assets. Less hardware also means less real estate you have to own to house that hardware, which in turn means less real estate taxes.

      the savings goes on and o

      • by Anonymous Coward
        Got it. Outsourcing. That's worked well for us in the past.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by kiddygrinder (605598)
          it's different to outsourcing in that the idea is to give it to someone who has better facilities or can just manage servers flat out better, rather than just shovelling work off to someone who can do it cheaper. not every company should be running their own datacentre.
          • by Belial6 (794905)
            That makes no sense. The only reason that you wouldn't have just as good of facilities or can just manage servers flat out better internally is because you don't want to spend the money to make it happen. It absolutely IS shoveling work off to someone who can do it cheaper.
            • <sarcasm> I know! Why not do it yourself?!?! Take fuel for instance. All the companies that buy gas and diesel for their vehicles instead of drilling their own oil, refining it and transporting the refined fuel to their vehicle fleets themselves are just lazy. And those lazy jerks won't even cut down the tress and make paper themselves. Those punks go and buy paper made by someone else to stick in their printers. </sarcasm>
               
              Now do you see the logic?

            • by PybusJ (30549)

              Yes, but it's more due to economy of scale rather than lack of willingness to invest. If you're setting up that server management infrastructure, better to split the cost across many users rather than one. You're no doubt negotiating better deals on your hardware too, and if you're a big provider with the flexibility to locate your data centre where power is cheap, even better.

              Where I work we are gradually moving from departments hosting their own servers in separate small server rooms or random cupboards

          • "it's different to outsourcing in that the idea is to give it to someone who has better facilities or can just manage servers flat out better"

            As in "oh, I wouldn't even think to outsource a service in order to give it to someone who has better facilities or can just manage the outsourced service flat out better"?

            "rather than just shovelling work off to someone who can do it cheaper."

            As in "oh, I wouldn't even think to move to the cloud just in order for my IT running cheaper"?

            "not every company should be ru

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I'm not sure if someone mentions it later, but the cost structure is an even bigger driver than most people realize. If you buy the servers and the software for them, that's classified as a capitalization expenditure, which means that only the depreciation of the asset can be deducted over time (most IT resources is 4 years). However, if you get the same thing as a service, it's fully deductible every year. Which means that cost-wise for the equipment, instead of a large upfront cost with many years to r

    • "Why would anyone want to store their contents on a remote server where they are at the mercy of a third party."

      Why would anyone want to store their money virtualized and on a remote server where they are at the mercy of a third party?

      You will laugh at it, but that's exactly the proposition I heard about the other day. I think to remember the guy proposed to name his business offer "bank".

      Ha! good luck trying to convince people to pass control of their hard earned money away to a "bank". *That's* hard, no

      • It's so hard to do that most people are only willing to do it because the 'bank' is heavily regulated and all deposits are guaranteed by the government up to an amount larger than most people will put in the 'bank', so there's no real risk for typical users.
    • by gbjbaanb (229885)

      you're forgetting the whole point of Cloud platforms.... a monthly subscription to store all your customer's data. Profit!!!!

      There's next to none in letting those pesky customers run their own clouds, I mean, apart from a licence to run a server and a few CALs, that's it. Pathetic - where will your corporate growth come from then?

      So basically VMWare is sticking it to Microsoft, again. Virtual PC used to be a licenced product until VMWare Server appeared for free. VMWare took virtualisation and made it a com

  • Press release (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nimey (114278) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @06:57PM (#35813208) Homepage Journal

    The summary reads like a press release. "Shook the cloud world", indeed.

    • by Raenex (947668)

      The summary is just plagiarized from the article. I hope the guy who wrote that article at least got paid for his puffery.

    • by mjwx (966435)

      The summary reads like a press release. "Shook the cloud world", indeed.

      Several Goomba's knocked off floating platforms. Recovery efforts are under way.

  • Was it too complicated a word so we needed to dumb it down to the picture used to represent it in network diagrams?!
  • by GuruBuckaroo (833982) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @07:28PM (#35813410) Homepage

    We move all our department stuff into the Data Center. Consolidate all of our equipment into one spot, less field work, fewer techs.

    We move our Data Center into the Cloud. Less equipment in our Data Center, even fewer techs and admins, reclaim power cooling and space.

    Now we move the Cloud back into our Data Center? What's next, distribute our data center into the branches so it's disaster-tolerant?

    ... wait...

    • by rosciol (925673) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @07:43PM (#35813502)

      Not quite. This move is all about options and preventing the dreaded 'lockin'.

      Developers ask: If I bet my development on a single PaaS provider, won't I be tied to them indefinitely?
      VMware says: If you use our open source stack that can be hosted by us, or by you, you won't be tied to a particular framework or hosting provider. We'll happily host you if our service fits your needs but, if your needs outgrow us or we fail to meet your quality expectations, you can always run the exact same stack out of your own datacenter or someone else's.

      What remains to be seen is how good the performance is and how easy it is to use the platform.

    • by Rich0 (548339) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @09:10PM (#35813950) Homepage

      Well, a big thing in cloud providers is that there is no red tape in provisioning. I go to EC2, fill out a one-time form to set up an account (about as complicated as buying a pair of shoes on the site), and I just pick an image and tell it how many servers of what size to fire up, and in a few minutes I have a list of DNS addresses to ssh into.

      If I could have that at work it would be wonderful. Right now getting even a new virtual server seems to take forever. I'm all for resource accountability, but there is no reason provisioning should be so manual.

      I'd love to see something like this at work. And, of course it gives you the ability to send peak demand offsite easily.

      • by gbjbaanb (229885)

        in the Corporate world it is even easier:

        I go to Amazon and fill in a form to set up an account, but first I need to get my boss to sign off on the purchase cose, and as its a recurring billing and cannot be explained under capital expenditure, he needs to get a sign off from his boss but it doesn't fall under his budget so he sends it to the MIS department for sign-off, but they don't see the need to run someone else's computers as they already provide server resources in a virtualised on-demand system but

  • by ugen (93902) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @08:22PM (#35813722)

    When is this "cloud everything" fad going to be over? It's a data center that someone else runs for you. Big deal. (Sure, when you put it that way - it does not sound nearly as cool and does not sell so well, does it)

    • by seifried (12921)
      When is this "Electrical company" fad going to be over? Trusting someone to run a large scale electrical grid is insane, everyone will keep generating their own electricity! Computing power, storage and bandwidth is becoming a commodity, "cloud" is just a fancy word for infrastructure/commoditization (well and some other issues like elasticity, etc.).
      • by nbossett (1835098)
        For now, centralizing computing resources in "the cloud" doesn't have the same obvious and conclusive upper hand in the vast majority of common uses that centralized electricity generation does. Some fundamental shift in economics of power generation (such as extremely cheap and durable solar panels) might change the situation, but that hasn't happened yet. For comparison, lots of individuals and businesses at all size levels find local computing resources to be the best solution for them. Even massive c
        • by seifried (12921)

          For now, centralizing computing resources in "the cloud" doesn't have the same obvious and conclusive upper hand in the vast majority of common uses that centralized electricity generation does.

          It's rapidly happening. You want to do some computing, you can either build a compute farm/etc. (and a server room/building, cooling, electrical, etc, etc.) or just run it on EC2 (which means setting up some non trivial software to handle firing up all the images, monitoring them and their results, setting up storage, etc.), or better yet outsource the whole mess to Cycle Computing (which in turn uses EC2, but handles all the setup/etc. which is non trivial). Compare Cycle Computing at $1,060 an hour (for 1

        • Another big difference is that small scale electricty generation has high running costs and swithing between two sources of electricty can be done very quickly after the initial source fails. This means that even if you find the centralised provider too unreliable on their own it STILL makes sense to use them most of the time and only use your local generation as a backup.

          With computing if you need the resources locally some of them time (say because your internet connection is unreliable) it makes sense to

    • When is this "cloud everything" fad going to be over? It's a data center that someone else runs for you. Big deal. (Sure, when you put it that way - it does not sound nearly as cool and does not sell so well, does it)

      Cloud computing is not a fad and it's not "a data center that someone else runs for you". It's a way to use resources using strategies that have emerged and become feasible only recently. Google, Amazon, and others have been running giant internal clouds for years, and recently have begun renting them out. For most folks, using these third-party off-site infrastructures is the best way to go. For others, it doesn't work but they don't have the in-house expertise or time/money/focus to roll their own. T

    • Re:Yawn (Score:5, Insightful)

      by subreality (157447) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @09:14PM (#35813964)

      It's a data center that someone else runs for you. Big deal.

      Said like someone who's never had to deal with a data center before. In the small to mid-size business range, running a data center seriously sucks. It involves at least one of: talent and capital that small businesses just don't have; renting a cage from someone who's charging an arm and a leg for mediocre service; or simply building a poor one in what used to be a conference room and dealing with crap power, cooling, cabling, etc, because those hassles are still cheaper than either of the two prior options.

      Hassle-free sign up for what you need as you need it with no lock-in is a SMB's dream come true. I don't think it's going away.

      • by rahvin112 (446269)

        It's the whole reason Amazon's service has been so popular. A pay as you go for only the services you need that you can fully customize. What VMWare is doing is offering an abstraction layer that allows you to do essentially the same thing at any data provider. This should make it possible to have an Amazon type service at every data center which will drive down costs and help everyone in the industry.

        Also VMWare will make some money on it no doubt.

      • by ugen (93902)

        I think you missed my point (as did most readers, which is unfortunate, this being /.).

        The "fad" is not in the data center as a concept, that's something that exists and surely will continue. Much like electric company, though - all it is is a *utility*. It's necessary, technically complex but not at all exciting and not particularly special.

        The *fad* is calling a data center by a mysteriously sounding and sales-created name in order to give it a different "feel" and generally sell more services, sometimes

        • I agree with you on that. Cloud this, cloud that. It's a little tiresome. I have accepted that this is just how its being referred to now, and it doesn't appear to be slowing down, in fact just the opposite. The funny thing is when people make reference to the cloud without really knowing what the cloud is. Like those commercials crying out "To the cloud" when the end user is just RDP'ing to their home desktop. What cloud are you using there? The internet? Oh right. The internet is always pictured

        • I hate it when they try to hype an old service with a new name, but I don't think that's the case here. Hosted storage and dropping your infrastructure into VPSes is a fairly recent idea, and the "cloud" term didn't come along much later. It's a new term that's reasonably descriptive of a new thing. Do you object to the trendy marketing term "cell phone" even though they're really just multi-base multiplexed radiotelephones?

          Who do you think is being upsold? I can't envision a buyer who didn't really wan

  • Bit of a difference there...
  • Sounds like something that would go down like a lead balloon.

    Do people even think before smashing words together? We must contraincentivise such dysutilization of Engspeak.

  • You can do something similar with Amazon Web Services and/or Eucalyptus [eucalyptus.com].
    • by intiha (1646093)

      You can do something similar with Amazon Web Services and/or Eucalyptus [eucalyptus.com].

      Yeah, that was what I was thinking. How is what VMWare now offering different from just deploying an Eucalyptus enterprise cloud? In other words, why is this a "game-changer" as the OP said?

    • You can do something similar with Amazon Web Services and/or Eucalyptus [eucalyptus.com].

      No you can't. This is a layer of the stack above AWS or Eucalyptus. In fact those are two of the target platforms for this.

      Those two give you an API for creating and destroying Virtual Machine instances. This leverages that ability to provide a scalable deployment stack for your applications. If you want to understand what it's about watch the videos on the site. Alternatively, have a look at http://heroku.com./ [heroku.com.] It's the same as that but it supports more languages/frameworks and it's open-source.

  • I'm not a fan of cloud buzzword, but could slashdotters take a second to read that this code has been released on APL license? APL license, you know, apache?

    This is a great development and its nice to see what the buying of SpringSource has already put in motion in VMWare. As pointed by others, this will be a good competitor to GAE, AWS and to whatever Microsoft is pushing.

    Even I might be interested in this, in private cloud sense at least; perhaps it would be the easiest way to horizontally scale our softw

  • Here's an idea for the new cloud entrepreneurs. Cultivate a botnet of 100K+ compromised PCs, then sell their spare cycles.
  • First I heard about DeltaCloud ... guess I'm out of it? OpenStack has been well-publicized.

    Has anybody here deployed one or the other? It seems likely that libvirt should eventually treat them all agnostically.

    The dream is to be able to move stuff in-house and out as needs change without worrying about deployment location or type too much beyond capabilities and cost.

Parts that positively cannot be assembled in improper order will be.

Working...