As my colleague Roberto De La Mora recently wrote, the cloud is the place to collaborate in today’s business world. Whether your organization needs private, public or hybrid cloud environments, Cisco and our broad network of partners can provide solutions that best suit your business needs.
And what if your collaboration needs include telepresence? Where does telepresence fit into the cloud?
With Cisco, telepresence fits into your cloud infrastructure wherever and however you need it. According to Forrester, “videoconferencing innovation today is geared toward extending connectivity…through cloud-based services or new lower-cost on-premises deployment models.”
Just keeping the lights on is no longer good enough
We know how important it is that your data center is performing at its best. So outdated platforms have no place there -- consuming more energy than necessary, taking more space than needed, and not keeping up with the pace of business.
With the never-ceasing progression of technology, cloud, desktop virtualization and big data have become hot topics among IT and business professionals. And benefits such as improved manageability, efficient and flexible IT service, and lower maintenance costs give good reason for this. So just keeping the lights of IT on is not good enough.
Whatever IT strategies you are considering, consider that Unleashing IT brings you the latest in IT, so you can make informed decisions. Thought provoking content is available in both print and online. It includes company profiles as well as an abundance of resources that can be viewed and downloaded.
Service providers in developing countries have the potential to kick-start economic growth by helping small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) take advantage of information and communications technology (ICT), especially cloud services. The “greenfield” nature of ICT in many emerging economies creates the opportunity to “leapfrog” to cloud computing.
For some time, governments have recognized the role of broadband in supporting economic development. The World Bank states that for every 10 percent of broadband penetration in a developing economy, there is typically a 1.38 percent increase in GDP.
Each year, there have been tangible improvements in broadband networks across emerging markets. However, in Read More »
Steve Watkins is a Consulting Systems Engineer for Cisco Intelligent Automation for Cloud. He came to Cisco as part of the newScale acquisition in 2011. He has been helping customers manage the migration to IT as a Service (ITaaS) since 2004.
Showback and Chargeback have become increasingly hot topics for IT, especially infrastructure teams. This is fuelled at least in part by the general acceptance of cloud computing, including private clouds and SaaS applications. Chargeback (and even Showback) are great ways of affecting behavior of the consumers of IT. It keeps consumers from demanding an unreasonable amount of services, and encourages them to use of what has already been invested in. There is also a growing mandate from Finance to make IT accountable for its spend, or at the very least to justify any requests for further investment. So infrastructure teams find themselves in the unexpected position of defining prices for the services traditionally offered. Most have no idea where to start.
Several vendors have produced offerings to help manage the showback/chargeback business case. This post will not discuss any vendor in detail. Instead, I want to talk about philosophy.
Broadly speaking, there are two major approaches to creating a price model for IT. There is the Utility-based model, in which pricing derived from actual consumption of CPU cycles, RAM, bandwidth, storage, etc. In this model, if you stood up a virtual machine for one week you would only pay for the actual amount CPU cycles and storage you consumed.
Alternately, there is Service-based pricing, which advocates a fixed price based on either the service itself or some other unit of measure such as hours, etc. In this model, if you stood up a virtual machine for one week you would pay for how many hours the VM was active, whether you used it or not.
I always council my customers to adopt service-based pricing. I think utility-based pricing is the wrong approach for IT departments, especially infrastructure teams. Here are my reasons:
1.INFLEXIBLE – Utility pricing is asset based, and therefore assumes that the assets will remain more-or-less the same. The model breaks down when you introduce changes, like renting infrastructure from public providers or changing service levels. What about if I offer VDI next year? That may mean two different types of pricing models, which gets even more complex. A service-based pricing scheme works with all services.
2.POOR CAPACITY MANAGEMENT – by only charging for the CPU cycles you actually consume, it encourages users to stand up systems and leave them in place.. which is exactly what we don’t want. Think of renting a car: you rent a car for 4 days but only drive it for a total of 3 hours, you still have to pay for all for days. If I just paid when I actually drove it, I would keep it all the time. We want to encourage users to return unused assets. Which leads to..