Sometimes Sun gets dinged for being too rigid in our standard configurations. The web store has "small", "medium", "large" and sometimes "extra large" configurations that can be modified to add memory, drives, PCI cards and service options. The online list of parts and configurations is not as exhaustive as some of our competitors, although just about any supported configuration can be had if purchased direct or from a reseller.

I have a customer that was telling me why he loved to buy from Dell. "I just go on to Dell's website," he gushed, "select whatever configuration of a server I want, and it shows up in a day or two. Sometimes I buy them five or ten at a time just to have on hand." This is a pretty big customer. In fact, huge would not be an understatement as they are one of the top law firms in the country and globally for certain fields.

I thought to myself, "I wonder what your CIO would think if I told him you said that."

It seems like most customers I talk to are trying to standardize components in their data centers. Managing a different configuration for every machine got old a long time ago as patch management and configuration management received a much needed dose of rigor. More importantly, however, it raises the question of predictability. How can an IT environment have any level of predictability if  purchases are made on a whim? Assuming that purchases are made to support a business initiative, it should be well known what computing resources would be needed and when.

Really everything that is done by IT departments is to ensure predictability in one form or another. Predictability to handle load is called capacity. Predictability of behavior during a hardware error is fault management or fault tolerance. Predictability of staying in business during a disaster is (no, not disaster recovery) business continuity. Process is the part of the IT world that allows people and product to come together in predictable ways. Clustering is a process by which nodes can cover for each other. Predictive self-healing is a process that Solaris 10 uses to predict hardware failures and maximize availability. Virtualization is a process used to predict utilization.

The point is that if there is no process that ties purchasing choices (or any IT choices for that matter) back to business initiatives than predictability becomes very hard to achieve. When it comes time to report the costs of supporting the business back to the CFO, COO or CEO, the level of predictability is directly proportional to the level of confidence the CIO will have.

If we accept this than it's little wonder why the top concern among CxO level executives for 2007 is "improving and demonstrating business/IT alignment." (Forrester's Business Technographics, July 2006.)

I think that business are wise to understand how requirements should drive purchasing and not throw those decisions, along with caution and predictability, to the wind.

Comments:

How can an IT environment have any level of predictability if purchases are made on a whim? Servers are commodities now. The only real way to lose both agility and predictability is to buy into a non-standard premium product line.

Posted by Mikael Gueck on July 27, 2007 at 03:57 AM EDT #

Mikael,

If servers were "truly" commodities then you would see data centers filled with every brand out there, including non-branded white box. That just doesn't happen, at least not in my region. Clearly there is some value to a brand and sticking with fewer vendors. Clearly there is value in the expectations that people assign to product quality, support and price.

When I see a customer who bids out his server purchases to 50 vendors on an open market every time he needs one I'll believe they have become a commodity. Until then, I'll keep selling value.

-Dan

Posted by Daniel Stux on July 27, 2007 at 06:25 AM EDT #

If that's the market you want to go after, good luck with that.

I, currently, belong to the huge majority of people who don't have big enough of single purchases to garner the interest of a commission-based salesperson, so buying a commodity from a vendor that provides me with the never-to-be-understated value of being instantly accessible with the final discounted pricing, is kind of a given. Our data center has equipment from HP, Dell and Sun. Hell, we even have some Alphas still operational. The freedom to operate without political, contractual or technical constraints from a vendor has great operational value, which is partly why Linux has had such a huge win here.

In closing, value doesn't help anyone merely by existing in some warehouse corner, it has to be put into action.

Posted by Mikael Gueck on July 27, 2007 at 05:40 PM EDT #

No mention of sun salesman? where is he?

Posted by 82.44.63.99 on July 29, 2007 at 07:27 AM EDT #

"Our data center has equipment from HP, Dell and Sun. Hell, we even have some Alphas still operational. " I can certainly see your point: your organization owns the gear, it's paid for, it still works -- lets continue to use it! But the flip side is relevant too: what do you do when that gear dies? Will you be able to recover the data and functionality to another machine? How quickly? If you run into a snag, will you be able to get help? What does it cost to have that functionality unavailable, even for a short time? When using older (or unsupported) h/w and s/w you may indeed save money on the up-front costs, but I think you lose money as soon as the business becomes dependent on those services and you are one day unable to deliver. Worse, as a technical professional, you lose the confidence of your management. When they authorized you to stand up some aging hulk and put some relevant business function on it, they were putting their faith not in the machine, but in YOU. And you will inevitably fail them in this regard. My opinion only.

Posted by Steve Harris on July 30, 2007 at 01:35 PM EDT #

Michael spotts has talked extensively about creating relationships based on the needs of the client. but he has found that with the buying of Storagetek in which Sun managed to loose a lot of the field there was a loss of faith in the client base. After extensive interviewing of the clients it has been nigh on impossible to recapture the needs of the clients as we left them hanging. Sun failed because it thought that cutting the field was the best way to keep costs low and lost the expertise of these people. i hope that they learn their lesson and do not make this mistake again.

Posted by anita on July 30, 2007 at 08:30 PM EDT #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed

This blog copyright 2007 by Daniel Stux