Twitter | Search | |
Matthew S. Wilson 13 May 19
Replying to @mjasay
Now, did we focus the most on supporting hardware that the most potential customers were using? Yes. Did other platforms with less customer attach potential pay Red Hat to port and support their gear? Also yes.
Reply Retweet Like
Matthew S. Wilson 13 May 19
Replying to @mjasay
Back to cloud: From customer conversations I have, it seems that more customers still self-manage open source, rather than use managed cloud services. Just look at available public data on revenue breakdown of commercial OSS oriented companies, and that only covers paying cases.
Reply Retweet Like
Matthew S. Wilson 13 May 19
Replying to @mjasay
So it seems that, while the managed open source as a service segments are growing fast, they are still a small fraction of these market segments. So not much changed from what you said above.
Reply Retweet Like
Matthew S. Wilson 13 May 19
Replying to @mjasay
However, one BIG difference is accessibility to services like those provided by AWS Marketplace to significantly reduce transaction friction for any seller who wants to offer something. Price is one factor that leads to self-managing, but transaction friction is also up there...
Reply Retweet Like
Matthew S. Wilson 13 May 19
Replying to @mjasay
But in your thought experiment population, open core means that customer value is in proprietary extensions, and the primary sponsor of the open core does not have incentives to making the core project easier to manage at scale, or take advantage of any particular cloud feature.
Reply Retweet Like
Matt Asay 13 May 19
Replying to @_msw_
Probably, but if the $ from the open core outpaced the $ from the proprietary peel? Not sure but just thinking it through
Reply Retweet Like
Matthew S. Wilson 13 May 19
Replying to @mjasay @adamhjk
I think that articulates the challenges of getting $ for the core open source in an open core model far better than me.
Reply Retweet Like
Jon Bock 14 May 19
Replying to @_msw_ @mjasay @adamhjk
The cloud providers generally support their ecosystems (including but not exclusively vendors commercializing open source) by giving away cloud usage credit to those vendors. That's relatively cheap for them and has a positive feedback loop. Giving out $ is much more expensive.
Reply Retweet Like
Jon Bock 14 May 19
Replying to @_msw_ @mjasay @adamhjk
Another challenge is the business models of most cloud providers are generally high volume with lower margin. Those margins are viable because there's less money invested in core technology development, most of the R&D investment goes to operations & automation.
Reply Retweet Like
jay of quarrel 💥 | nyc 14 May 19
Jon, i disagree
Reply Retweet Like
jay of quarrel 💥 | nyc
seriously, have you seen what we're all doing out here, its's far beyond maintain and a lot of building new blocks for devs/ops/etc
Reply Retweet Like More
jay of quarrel 💥 | nyc 14 May 19
this is across all three major clouds, if you aren't building you're dying
Reply Retweet Like
Jon Bock 14 May 19
Replying to @jaydestro @_msw_ and 2 others
Appreciated, no value judgement was implied. Building and running reliable services at cloud scale is enormously complex and I have huge respect for the engineers and engineering that the cloud providers have to deliver that--it's far too underappreciated.
Reply Retweet Like