Canonical BootStack Will Build & Manage Your OpenStack Cloud

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Canonical BootStack Will Build & Manage Your OpenStack Cloud

Mark Shuttleworth announced earlier this year "Your Cloud" as a paid service by Canonical to build and manage OpenStack cloud deployments. Your Cloud has turned into BootStack and is rolling forward for those that wish to have Canonical build out and manage their cloud computing environment...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc3OTg

[mark45]

Does anyone really give a shit about the cloud (which is the latest buzzword replacing the former buzzword SAAS, which replaced the former buzzwords "the network is the computer") ?

[pal666]

just $5475 per host per year lol

[bulletxt]

just $5475 per host per year lol

I'de like to know what the fuck are they doing with MIR. Are we sure it still exists?

[steveriley]

Does anyone really give a shit about the cloud (which is the latest buzzword replacing the former buzzword SAAS, which replaced the former buzzwords "the network is the computer") ?

Ellison got his rant all wrong. He admits he doesn't know jack about cloud, and proves it whenever he opens his mouth. Cloud doesn't replace SaaS -- SaaS is type of cloud. Cloud deployment models typically come in three flavors:

• infrastructure as a service (IaaS) -- think Amazon Web Services
• platform as a service (PaaS) -- think Windows Azure, although they're rapidly adding IaaS functionality
• software as a service (SaaS) -- think Salesforce.com

Cloud is really not all that difficult to understand, either. NIST's definition is pretty much universally accepted:

The NIST definition lists five essential characteristics of cloud computing: on-demand self-service, broad network access, resource pooling, rapid elasticity or expansion, and measured service. It also lists three "service models" (software, platform and infrastructure), and four "deployment models" (private, community, public and hybrid) that together categorize ways to deliver cloud services. The definition is intended to serve as a means for broad comparisons of cloud services and deployment strategies, and to provide a baseline for discussion from what is cloud computing to how to best use cloud computing.

As to whether anyone gives a shit about cloud, that's a definite yes. The nattering nabobs of negativity ignore cloud at their peril.

[mark45]

Ellison got his rant all wrong. He admits he doesn't know jack about cloud, and proves it whenever he opens his mouth. Cloud doesn't replace SaaS -- SaaS is type of cloud. Cloud deployment models typically come in three flavors:

• infrastructure as a service (IaaS) -- think Amazon Web Services
• platform as a service (PaaS) -- think Windows Azure, although they're rapidly adding IaaS functionality
• software as a service (SaaS) -- think Salesforce.com

Cloud is really not all that difficult to understand, either. NIST's definition is pretty much universally accepted:


As to whether anyone gives a shit about cloud, that's a definite yes. The nattering nabobs of negativity ignore cloud at their peril.

No, SAAS stays for software as a service which includes any solution, including mainframes, just like the cloud, you're just exploiting the multiple definitions that many asshole PR agents issued during the last years.
How many CIOs are reading phoronix to stay informed? For us end users in the post Snowden era (for the informed ones, the "paranoid" ones, it was known long before) the cloud services should be avoided like the plague, the latest news - about those naked celebs whose "private" data from the cloud were stolen and published, and let's ignore that private data in the cloud is an oxymoron, since almost each big cloud is controlled/read by the CIA/whatever and by the host company and often secretly resold to other companies for data mining.

[steveriley]

How many CIOs are reading phoronix to stay informed?

Probably more than you think.

For us end users in the post Snowden era (for the informed ones, the "paranoid" ones, it was known long before) the cloud services should be avoided like the plague

Do you have a private network connection -- and I mean physical, built from your very own copper or fiber -- from your current physical location to every web server you access? No? I didn't think so. People have been using shared connectivity for decades. With access control mechanisms, encryption, and digital signatures, you can prevent eavesdropping and malicious modification of data in transit. The same techniques apply to shared compute and storage.

You're also missing the business aspect here. Moving to a hybrid or public cloud allows an IT department to shift money from capital expenditure (cap-ex) budgets to operational expenditure (op-ex). This is a financial orgasmatron. No more depreciation, no more stranded assets, easier tax accounting...the benefits go on and on.

the latest news - about those naked celebs whose "private" data from the cloud were stolen and published

And whose fault is that? Personally, I encrypt all my naked selfies. And my encryption key is longer than yours.

and let's ignore that private data in the cloud is an oxymoron, since almost each big cloud is controlled/read by the CIA/whatever and by the host company and often secretly resold to other companies for data mining.

If that were truly the case, then AWS and Azure and Google and Rackspace and Joyent and and and.... would have been driven out of business years ago. Yes, Google's free services are risky, because they claim the right to make derivative works. But the business-grade clouds make no such claims, and they routinely subject themselves to more security and operational audits (example, example) than any on-premise J. Random Datacenter could ever afford to do or find the time for.

[Michael_S]

For us end users in the post Snowden era (for the informed ones, the "paranoid" ones, it was known long before) the cloud services should be avoided like the plague, the latest news - about those naked celebs whose "private" data from the cloud were stolen and published, and let's ignore that private data in the cloud is an oxymoron, since almost each big cloud is controlled/read by the CIA/whatever and by the host company and often secretly resold to other companies for data mining.

To be fair, people's credit card information gets stolen all of the time and nobody says "Just stop surfing on the web.". People's email addresses get hacked and nobody says "Why were you dumb enough to use email in the first place?" People's iPhones get remotely wiped, and nobody says "Well, that's your fault for using a smart phone."

So you really can't say "cloud services should be avoided like the plague". You can make the argument that social media is a bad idea, period. But hosting your email with Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner, etc... doesn't make it any safer from the hosting company or security threats than using something ad-supported like GMail. And giving up "the cloud" entirely - no smart phone, no Amazon, no Google Search, is just a ludicrous concept. If you believed in that, you wouldn't be here either.

It was not wise to involve naked or semi-naked pictures in anything internet connected, not unless your security skills are positively top tier. But that doesn't mean the people who did it deserve contempt and insults. They're still innocent victims. The criminals are still the people that stole their private pictures and posted them in public.

[drspinderwalf]

To be fair, people's credit card information gets stolen all of the time and nobody says "Just stop surfing on the web.". People's email addresses get hacked and nobody says "Why were you dumb enough to use email in the first place?" People's iPhones get remotely wiped, and nobody says "Well, that's your fault for using a smart phone."

So you really can't say "cloud services should be avoided like the plague". You can make the argument that social media is a bad idea, period. But hosting your email with Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner, etc... doesn't make it any safer from the hosting company or security threats than using something ad-supported like GMail. And giving up "the cloud" entirely - no smart phone, no Amazon, no Google Search, is just a ludicrous concept. If you believed in that, you wouldn't be here either.

Credit cards are quite unethical and laughably insecure in their construction and I don't see any fault in not wanting to use them. However, one is reasonably protected if a credit card is indeed stolen. Social Security numbers are a different question... I die a little inside when I have to enter that on the internet. I see your point.

As for the iPhone... that is indeed the purchaser's fault. It's in the EULA and it's well-known that Apple can do that.

There are a lot of items and services that are 'necessities' in modernity that are hardly essential at all.

It was not wise to involve naked or semi-naked pictures in anything internet connected, not unless your security skills are positively top tier. But that doesn't mean the people who did it deserve contempt and insults. They're still innocent victims. The criminals are still the people that stole their private pictures and posted them in public.

Agreed. Stupid idea to have those pictures uploaded but they are still the victim. However, doesn't the iPhone automatically upload pictures to your iCloud account? It's not impossible that they just didn't know that this happened. Knowledge is power!

[Michael_S]

Credit cards are quite unethical and laughably insecure in their construction and I don't see any fault in not wanting to use them. However, one is reasonably protected if a credit card is indeed stolen. Social Security numbers are a different question... I die a little inside when I have to enter that on the internet. I see your point.

As for the iPhone... that is indeed the purchaser's fault. It's in the EULA and it's well-known that Apple can do that.

There are a lot of items and services that are 'necessities' in modernity that are hardly essential at all.

I agree that many modern 'necessities' are nothing of the sort. My point is that when people using those inessential necessities get burned, they generally don't take a lot of abuse from random strangers over their mistake. But when it involves naked pictures, suddenly a lot more people are tossing insults at Hunger Games girl (or whoever) than the people who broke into their accounts and posted their private photos.

Agreed. Stupid idea to have those pictures uploaded but they are still the victim. However, doesn't the iPhone automatically upload pictures to your iCloud account? It's not impossible that they just didn't know that this happened. Knowledge is power!

Yup. It would be nice if we lived in a world where the average person doesn't need to learn a lot about how software and internet security works to be safe in their day-to-day dealings. But currently you have no choice - either live like it's 1985 and don't use the net at all, or else make an effort to understand security. Anything else is Russian roulette with your private data.