
Sriram Subramanian48


























Does the entry of big vendors (Red Hat/ HP/ IBM) impact/ affect the smaller, but long term OpenStack players? Discuss?

Josh Barry
at the meta level, a rising tide floats all boats

Manju Ramanathpura
this is perhaps just the nature of open source. @Peter_Levine wrote an interesting article while back - http://techcrunch.co...

Why There Will Never Be Another RedHat: The Economics Of Open Source | TechCrunch
Open source software powers the worldβs technology. In the past decade, there has been an inexorable adoption of open source in most aspects of computing...
Open source software powers the worldβs technology. In the past decade, there has been an inexorable adoption of open source in most aspects of computing...

Manju Ramanathpura
my take is entry of large vendors will help everyone. I for one happy that Hitachi is one of those big vendors. But as I see around, we work very closely with lot of small vendors.

John Furrier
Enterprises need the "blanket of comfort" from the big vendors bc support is HUGE issue. There is no land grab other than support imho

Jesse Proudman
I think large vendors can make the small distribution game difficult.

Sriram Subramanian
great point

Sriram Subramanian
@blueboxjesse it did, with at least one earliest distros

Sriram Subramanian
but overall, they bring in the comfort and reliance that enterprise customers want

John Furrier
@ItsTheNetwork I don't agree with Levine there. The success of @hortonworks in hadoop is evidence you can make support work in #opensource no matter what generation it happens in

Jesse Proudman
They're still all delivering OpenStack incorrectly.

John Furrier
@ItsTheNetwork I love peter levine but he is drinking his own kool aid

Manju Ramanathpura
@furrier yeah - don't agree with that specific point on whether there will be another Redhat. To your point Cloudera is another company. But post make some great points around role / how big companies play in open source space.

Sriram Subramanian
i am with @furrier on this, disagree with Peter Levine

John Furrier
@ItsTheNetwork Don't for get @mapr just got $100m in funding for another use case.. plenty of beachhead for all in huge transformative markets

Josh Barry
there is only one pure play open source company that has made > $1 billion dollars. and it took them quite a while to do so.

Bert Latamore
The problem for the small companies is that the big vendors came in very early. Red Hat & Ubuntu had years to establish themselves and develop their versionsof Linux.

Sriram Subramanian
@joshbarry is that that the only metric?

Josh Barry
speaks to the difficulty of growing a pure play open source biz.

Sriram Subramanian
@joshbarry agreed; most importantly, customers are quite ready for pure play open source without the enterprise level support

Jesse Proudman
This is again because OpenStack is FUNDAMENTALLY different than every other type of OSS.

Jesse Proudman
@blueboxjesse The failure domain of an OpenStack installation is so much greater than any other standard OSS.

Sriram Subramanian
and one click installation FOR ANY complex software is mythical

Manju Ramanathpura
@blueboxjesse agree - more of a case of offering openstack as service - which is a point Peter Levine makes too ( The winning open source model turns open source 1.0 on its head. By packaging open source into a service )

Sriram Subramanian
then it's the case of having right expectations then

Bert Latamore
Also at least what people tell me is Open Stack is not yet really mature. It requires a lot of "connective tissue" between modules, which is what IBM, HP, etc., provide.

Jesse Proudman
@ItsTheNetwork Exactly. Hence why Distributions are doing it wrong.

Sriram Subramanian
@blueboxjesse fun "yellow card".