While organization leaders recognize cloud’s ability to reduce total cost of ownership (TCO), they often have difficulty evaluating the many other business benefits of cloud. Often this process is based on some combination of gut instinct and hard data. But the more quantifiable the data, the easier the decision; and the more the potential benefits can be sized, the clearer the opportunity. Since the process of embracing the cloud may be done in increments or by degrees, decision makers will want to weigh which aspects of their operation should be migrated to the cloud—or clouds—and what return on investment to expect from the decision.
A cloud revolution is brewing, and it promises to radically transform the way we compete, collaborate, and consume business services.
Join the live webcast with Sprint, CSC and ETS on the impact of cloud computing on business models and bottom lines.
Wed. April 25, 11 a.m. – 12 p.m. PDT – No registration required: www.ustream.tv/ciscotv2
What are the factors motivating businesses to rise up to the cloud opportunity? One key advantage is business agility: Cloud offers the ability to address unpredictable application events weighing on a company’s data center, meeting the challenge from sharp, sudden usage spikes. At the same time, cloud promises more efficient ways to address new products, customers, and selling situations.
In other words, cloud drives top-line growth and improves the bottom line.
This is the question I continue to ask myself as I look back at my career at various companies in multiple industries. As I look back, I remind myself of the industry changing trends that we’ve gone through in past few decades: the rise (and fall) of the mainframe, the PC, numerous different networking protocols and technologies, and various standards that come and go. On top of all this I recall, dozens of system architectures and hundreds of programming languages. And these days … Open Source Software, Si-photonics, mega/giga/tera-bit interfaces, smart phones and tablets, big data and real time analytics, cloud computing, everything fully virtualized.
Let’s pause here to think about the game changers. The architectures, processes and ideas that once pushed industries forward seemed to eventually disappear into the next big thing. Distributed Object Technology (RFC), Loosely Coupled Technology and Architectures (SOA). Agile, or is it Dev/Ops? As you can see, there are major differences here. Each technology trend brings tremendous value and is of critical importance but, like so many of these examples there is that fundamental difference, that many of these trends evolve and merge into much bigger vision. It’s also present in how we view SDN and how we are including it in what we’re building at Cisco.
Cisco Catalyst 4500E, our leading modular campus access switching platform, continues to maintain over 65% market share globally for modular Power over Ethernet (PoE) ports by addressing customer requirements through a continuous stream of innovations – witness the 60 Watt PoE capabilities (Cisco Universal Power Over Ethernet, or Cisco UPOE), and Supervisor Engine 7L-E which we delivered last year. We also launched Cisco Catalyst SmartOperations at Cisco Live London earlier this year in February as part of a broader launch across multiple switching platforms.
Public Sector customers continue to debate the trade-offs of prioritizing lowest price switching, point product solutions, over designing and deploying Cisco network architecture solutions which provide a lower Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).
On February 23, 2012, Deloitte Consulting presented the findings of an in-depth research study that examines the operational, financial, and risk factors associated with the use of single-vendor and multivendor approaches in different types of complex networks which may be viewed here along with the report itself.
They key findings are summarized in the following 7 items:
- Within the context of total IT spending, the use of single-vendor or multivendor architectures does not present material cost differences on a long-term basis. Initial cost savings realized in multivendor network implementations are mitigated by the incremental operating costs over the life of the equipment.
- Enterprise networks are considered critical production systems, key to business operations. Networks must be managed with an appropriate operational risk perspective.
- Customers prefer a single vendor to be responsible for all network components and services. The operational risk associated with network support, not the cost, is the primary factor when influencing the decisions to use single or multivendor architectures.
- Staffing costs are not significantly impacted by the use of multiple vendors; it is more influenced by the mix of functions supported and the types of network services provided.
- Using products from different vendors can bring down initial costs for certain products, but adds higher operating risk in service, support, and operational integration.
- The use of multiple networking vendors introduces additional operational risk based on the need for customers to assume increased risks for integration, interoperability and support.
- When using multiple vendors’ products, customers frequently do not recognize the interdependencies of functionality, long-term costs, and impact on operational risks
And be sure to watch Director of Public Sector Systems Engineering, Dave West on youtube present his version of why low-cost, ” Good Enough” Switching is not Good Enough for Public Sector Customers looking for a reliable, secure, highly available, well supported and investment protected network.