Friday, June 10, 2011

Human Fulcrum

Interesting approach from Human Fulcrum, very similar to the whole concept behind Prosultative Selling. Understand what it is you do, tell people, then see if they are interested.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011


If Larry ran Apple and Oracle made iPads…?

Should Larry Ellison take over Apple?Apple looks like they have another hit on their hands with iPad 2 and if reports of their enterprise adoption rates are accurate, we’ll only be seeing more of them in business. Now, perhaps, we see why Steve Jobs called it the most important product he’d ever worked on. But Steve Jobs is now on his third medical leave and while we all wish him well, many are considering what the future holds for Apple and its leadership.

Tim Cook is a brilliant businessman and one of the best operations men in the industry, but he’s not as charismatic as Steve Jobs. Jonathan Ive is arguably the most successful product designer in history, but he hasn’t shown general business savvy. Let’s face it, you can’t just bring Justin Bieber in to take over the Stones from Mick Jagger (Keith would likely smoke him by mistake) and you can’t just bring in anyone to run Apple. You need a titan, an icon…

So what about Larry?

We know Steve and Larry are very close personally, and Oracle was one of the first to port their database to the Mac OS (remember Oracle Card?) We know Larry has a history of doing business with friends like Scott McNealy and Mark Hurd. Could Steve Jobs be next? Could Larry take over Apple? Could Sun servers be the backend to iPads in the enterprise? Could it give Larry the domination and recognition he’s wanted for years? Could it… finally make Oracle cool?

Ellison is rumored to have offered to buy Apple back in 1997 in order to give it back to Jobs following Jobs’ ouster by the Apple board. Nothing happened then, of course, but 2011 doesn’t have to be like 1997. Unlike other acquisitions, however, Apple’s brand is far too strong to be simply subsumed. Co-branding might not work either. It certainly spared us Peopracle and Orieble in the past and would spare us Appacle now. Orapple isn’t so bad… or… Crapple? That has a certain ring to it. At least that way when my OraclePad starts to suck all the bandwidth and electricity out of my house, when it starts to slow down as I load more and more of my content data on it, when it yanks all the money from my bank account to cover licensing fees as I move from bedroom to den to living room, when it just won’t work anymore and the only answer the smart fellow at the Oracle Store tells me is to buy more blades… er, pads, Crapple certainly seems like the best name.

No, scratch that. It would never fly. Consumers won’t tolerate that kind of pricing, licensing, and obsolescence in their technology…

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Prosultative blog: Persisting In-memory: When the only constant is change

Prosultative blog: Persisting In-memory: When the only constant is change

Persisting In-memory: When the only constant is change

Persisting In-memory: When the only constant is change

SAND’s in-memory database optimizer solves the dynamic requirements of today’s environments. We see customers adding exponentially increasing data volumes, new data types every day from social feeds to mobile data to device logs, and all moving at ever greater velocity. To solve this in-memory database vendors have a solution for their customers — “buy more memory.” Yet customers are asking — “isn’t there somewhere to go other than cap in hand to the server vendor for more hardware to make the database fit?” Are they simply jumping from the row store fire into the in-memory fire?

To paraphrase Bill Clinton — “It’s the agility, stupid”. Current competitive in-memory data models are more inflexible and fragile than a piece of Waterford crystal. They cannot absorb new data at the rate business needs and so users are made to wait. And wait. And wait some more. There is a way to solve this. You can become the hardware vendor’s best friend (and the software vendor’s by licensing by blade, CPU, core or memory capacity). You can buy much, much, much more memory than you need, You can increase the size of the memory bucket so you can keep adding water and none spills out. You will have to suck up resources and cash that would otherwise be allocated to more strategically useful projects, but they probably will never know what you did, especially if you mutter “Priority infrastructure” a hundred times. You can keep patching the problem, that’s certainly one way to go. Or you can fix it. You can solve it through innovation.

There’s an alternative approach where to add and change data while ignoring the size of the bucket. At SAND we deliver Persistent Virtual Memory in-memory database. In the event you need to load more data more quickly than memory can handle — in effect over-filling the bucket — SAND identifies the high value data users access with regularity and ensure this persists in-memory. SAND then moves lower-value data into a holding pattern, keeping it on-line and accessible but ensuring the in-memory database runs with full utilization.

(See our SAND Analytic Database Performance white paper for more.)

Anyone stating they know exactly how much data they need now and in the future and therefore how much memory they need, hasn’t directly managed data. When you have a known unknown — when your only constant is change — you have to have an agile in-memory database approach.

Persistent Virtual Memory is it.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

The curious case of the canceled column store criteria

Did Mike Stonebraker change his mind about what the criteria are from a column store database (CDBMS) or did someone spill coffee on Vertica’s Wordpress install and short out his post? Either way I was surprised to see Mike’s blog — in which he opined on the criteria for column store databases — has been canceled, wiped out, deleted.

To be fair, Mike’s big blog drop wasn’t really up there with the other technology news this week. Steve Jobs sadly has had to take another leave of absence from running Apple (we wish him all the best of health and hope the best for him and his family). Eric Schmidt stepped down as CEO of Google and co-founder Larry Page has taken his place. iPads — a product that didn’t exist a year ago — are now being piloted or deployed by over 80% of Fortune 100 companies. That’s one of the fastest adoption curves in history and shows that even conservative enterprises can move quickly when they see value in technology.

Not as quickly as Vertica taking down Mike’s blog, mind you. (I felt the rush of wind all the way from Massachusetts.) Given that SAND responded rather eloquently and Curt Monash and Seth Grimes both weighed in with excellent points as well, I thought they’d keep it up for historical reasons if nothing else. That we all concurred the blog was a good start but it wasn’t a vendor’s place to lay down the rules to define the criteria for column store is besides the point. It was the one blog on Vertica’s site that actually generated interest and debate (the last 24 blog posts have less comments combined than the one they took down.)

Strange? Perhaps dissention is unacceptable; a case of “Silence when you speak!” If that’s the case, it must make Vertica development meetings interesting…