Private, Public or Hybrid – Why Not Let Customers Decide?


As competition in the cloud space heats up, things are looking better than ever for customers, as they have access to increasingly better solutions and hence, more choice. However, this competition is making at least one vendor uncomfortable – how else does one explain recent comments from an AWS executive that private clouds are “ill-advised” and “archaic”?

In my customer conversations, the most consistent theme that comes up is the reality that every customer has a unique cloud roadmap. This is not very surprising, as each customer is trying to optimize across a set of factors that are unique to its business. For example, if one customer’s biggest headache is securely managing the thousands of consumer mobile devices being used by employees within the company’s network, another may be more concerned about realizing the maximum return on an investment in server hardware. All of this is coupled with the realization that the IT world is extremely fluid, and CIOs and other IT decision makers need to be able to make today’s investments adapt as the environment around them changes.

With Microsoft’s Cloud OS vision, customers get one consistent platform for infrastructure, apps and data. And they get to decide where they want this platform to live – in their datacenter, their hosting service provider and/or the Microsoft public cloud. In other words, customers get to choose their cloud roadmap, and Microsoft supports them with a consistent experience no matter where they are. Customers around the world are seeing the value of this approach. So while Aston Martin decided to invest in Microsoft’s private cloud solution based on Windows Server and System Center for its own datacenters, Trek chose a public cloud solution based on Windows Azure as its best fit. Yet another customer, Telefónica, has chosen to implement a public-private hybrid solution to meet its unique needs.

My point here is not to defend an exclusively private or exclusively public cloud as the best choice for customers, because doing so implies that Microsoft (or any other cloud vendor) knows customers’ businesses and needs better than them, which is just not true. It’s also why Microsoft believes in providing customers with choices, and letting them decide the path that meets their needs best. If you haven’t done so already, I encourage you learn more about our Cloud OS vision, and why we believe our approach gives customers the most flexibility. 

Comments (18)

  1. Warren Postma says:

    I am disappointed that Microsoft is calling Windows Server 2012 R2 a "cloud operating system", and yet, it has less functionality for us, than Server 2012, which had less functionality than Server 2008 R2. This is a bad direction, where the hype, and the product platform reality are moving in opposite directions.

    Our clients like to "rent" cloud systems that we manage, on a monthly basis. These clients like to log into what used to be called Terminal Server sessions, which you now call RDS.  In Server 2012, with RDS, and with some KB articles, it was possible to deploy RDS on a workgroup single-server scenario.   In Server 2012 R2, RDS deployment is blocked (you can not add the role/feature using the add role/feature wizard) until the machine is on a domain.   For our uses, a domain would be exactly backwards. We do not want these single-server cloud machines to have any domain or trust relationships with any other machines, nor do we want to use Group Policy on them.  Of course, with Windows Server 2012, the only way we found that we can deploy RDS in a workgroup scenario is using Group Policy, which is gross, and indicates a lack of understanding by Microsoft of how some of their small clients use their products.

    RDS is a server technology, but it is not purely useful for Domain environments, it is useful and functional, in a workgroup environment, especially on the Cloud, until you broke it all. So much for making a cloud platform.  We have no reasonable alternatives, so Microsoft is leaving us up a creek.

    Warren Postma

    warren at rentp dot com

    RentalPoint Software Inc,

    Software Development Manager

  2. Warren Postma says:

    I am disappointed that Microsoft is calling Windows Server 2012 R2 a "cloud operating system", and yet, it has less functionality for us, than Server 2012, which had less functionality than Server 2008 R2. This is a bad direction, where the hype, and the product platform reality are moving in opposite directions.

    Our clients like to "rent" cloud systems that we manage, on a monthly basis. These clients like to log into what used to be called Terminal Server sessions, which you now call RDS.  In Server 2012, with RDS, and with some KB articles, it was possible to deploy RDS on a workgroup single-server scenario.   In Server 2012 R2, RDS deployment is blocked (you can not add the role/feature using the add role/feature wizard) until the machine is on a domain.   For our uses, a domain would be exactly backwards. We do not want these single-server cloud machines to have any domain or trust relationships with any other machines, nor do we want to use Group Policy on them.  Of course, with Windows Server 2012, the only way we found that we can deploy RDS in a workgroup scenario is using Group Policy, which is gross, and indicates a lack of understanding by Microsoft of how some of their small clients use their products.

    RDS is a server technology, but it is not purely useful for Domain environments, it is useful and functional, in a workgroup environment, especially on the Cloud, until you broke it all. So much for making a cloud platform.  We have no reasonable alternatives, so Microsoft is leaving us up a creek.

    Warren Postma

    warren at rentp dot com

    RentalPoint Software Inc,

    Software Development Manager

  3. Warren Postma says:

    I am disappointed that Microsoft is calling Windows Server 2012 R2 a "cloud operating system", and yet, it has less functionality for us, than Server 2012, which had less functionality than Server 2008 R2. This is a bad direction, where the hype, and the product platform reality are moving in opposite directions.

    Our clients like to "rent" cloud systems that we manage, on a monthly basis. These clients like to log into what used to be called Terminal Server sessions, which you now call RDS.  In Server 2012, with RDS, and with some KB articles, it was possible to deploy RDS on a workgroup single-server scenario.   In Server 2012 R2, RDS deployment is blocked (you can not add the role/feature using the add role/feature wizard) until the machine is on a domain.   For our uses, a domain would be exactly backwards. We do not want these single-server cloud machines to have any domain or trust relationships with any other machines, nor do we want to use Group Policy on them.  Of course, with Windows Server 2012, the only way we found that we can deploy RDS in a workgroup scenario is using Group Policy, which is gross, and indicates a lack of understanding by Microsoft of how some of their small clients use their products.

    RDS is a server technology, but it is not purely useful for Domain environments, it is useful and functional, in a workgroup environment, especially on the Cloud, until you broke it all. So much for making a cloud platform.  We have no reasonable alternatives, so Microsoft is leaving us up a creek.

    Warren Postma

    warren at rentp dot com

    RentalPoint Software Inc,

    Software Development Manager

  4. Anonymous says:

    Pingback from Cloudy with a Chance of Confusion – Windows Server Division weblog – TechNetKlub

  5. Anonymous says:

    Pingback from Cloudy with a Chance of Confusion – Windows Server Division weblog – TechNetKlub

  6. Anonymous says:

    Pingback from Cloudy with a Chance of Confusion – Windows Server Division weblog – TechNetKlub

  7. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  8. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  9. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  10. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  11. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  12. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  13. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  14. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  15. Anonymous says:

    I was reading a magazine last week when I stumbled upon ads from three different IT vendors, all promoting

  16. Anonymous says:

    本周早些时候 ,我探讨了微软对“混合云”一词的含义。本文就来解释一下这个词汇。

    我们的定义已经很明确了,接下来我想进一步讨论该策略与其他云提供商的策略有何不同,为何其他云提供商无法或不会提供该策略

  17. Anonymous says:

    本周早些时候 ,我探讨了微软对“混合云”一词的含义。本文就来解释一下这个词汇。

    我们的定义已经很明确了,接下来我想进一步讨论该策略与其他云提供商的策略有何不同,为何其他云提供商无法或不会提供该策略

  18. Anonymous says:

    本周早些时候 ,我探讨了微软对“混合云”一词的含义。本文就来解释一下这个词汇。

    我们的定义已经很明确了,接下来我想进一步讨论该策略与其他云提供商的策略有何不同,为何其他云提供商无法或不会提供该策略

Skip to main content