http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/1064 William Vambenepe's stage Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:33:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/1064#comment-666 William Vambenepe — Cloud + proprietary software = ♥ Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:40:42 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=1064#comment-666 [...] an earlier post, about virtual [...] [...] an earlier post, about virtual [...]

]]> http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/1064#comment-665 William Louth Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:18:53 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=1064#comment-665 I should add that maintenance to me (and to most customers I work with) centers largely around the Application rather than the (App)liance itself. The key goal in maintaining a system is preserving reliability of the application in relation to change - change that is dynamic (workloads, activities) and encompasses more than just static config files related to the os. It is pretty hard maintaining a system that does not allow me to adjust to changing requirements, operating contexts and processes. I should add that maintenance to me (and to most customers I work with) centers largely around the Application rather than the (App)liance itself. The key goal in maintaining a system is preserving reliability of the application in relation to change – change that is dynamic (workloads, activities) and encompasses more than just static config files related to the os. It is pretty hard maintaining a system that does not allow me to adjust to changing requirements, operating contexts and processes.

]]> http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/1064#comment-664 William Louth Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:39:57 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=1064#comment-664 Could you please explain what you mean exactly by "require a lot less maintenance" because this seems to ignore the obvious maintenance issues with any such appliance - by its very nature it is tied to a particular workload & activity (not multi-purpose, multi-functioning), dependent on the release cycle of a single vendor (for all stack components), is a complete unknown in terms of performance and capacity planning with not reference model elsewhere in the industry, and the quality of its IT management/monitoring/diagnostics capabilities are generally coupled to the appliance vendors own in-house skills (generally weaker than industry thought leaders in the particular domain). Your view of maintenance seems to be one of "no maintenance possible" at least from the customers perspective which might be fine in a ideal work but the enterprise space is anything but ideal (or standard) and such appliances fail to scale on many levels in the wild including mind share. Could you please explain what you mean exactly by “require a lot less maintenance” because this seems to ignore the obvious maintenance issues with any such appliance – by its very nature it is tied to a particular workload & activity (not multi-purpose, multi-functioning), dependent on the release cycle of a single vendor (for all stack components), is a complete unknown in terms of performance and capacity planning with not reference model elsewhere in the industry, and the quality of its IT management/monitoring/diagnostics capabilities are generally coupled to the appliance vendors own in-house skills (generally weaker than industry thought leaders in the particular domain). Your view of maintenance seems to be one of “no maintenance possible” at least from the customers perspective which might be fine in a ideal work but the enterprise space is anything but ideal (or standard) and such appliances fail to scale on many levels in the wild including mind share.

]]>