This might have been echoed on the board already, but I would like to actually see an enumerated list of cloud computing/decentralized software that has actually gained any traction. This seems to be a phantom story that people keep discussing, but I don't see any actual products anyone consistently uses. Google apps are available, but lack the complete functionality of excel and word that most people require. Moreover, computer power is such that these programs aren't that computer resource intensive (in my estimation) as they can be run on a $500 laptop. Other industry specific software (especially engineering software) can be quite demanding on a machine ... but I don't see anyone showing the path for actually running a Finite Element package in the "cloud" - just to give an example. There is the whole security issue as well - I don't think companies want Google providing a free service but scanning their content to find better ways to market to them. If a cloud computing, secure industry was to develop - it would probably be a service one would pay for --- and now suddenly this decentralized approach isn't so cheap.

Gmail is one. Salesforce's various offerings are another. Amazon's S3 hosting services (which store data for Tumblr, Twitter, and others). I don't think anyone's arguing cloud services will be free for all; most companies entering the business are looking to make money off of them. But their margins will be much lower than MS's on, say, Office.

I am a retired optical engineer and because of the nature of optical design , iterative multi-threaded calculations, we were one of the first professions to use computers extensively. Before the advent of computers, astronomers designing telescopes would hire up to 10 females with mathematics degrees to calculate algorithms used in optical ray tracing. When I first started working for Ball Aerospace ,designing lenses and telescopes, I would spend up to 10,000/month in computer charges on ans optical design program located on a CDC computer in Rochester New York. Every time you made a mistake it cost you a grand. Now I have an optical design program which I paid 3000 dollars for and it sits on my desk and costs the company I am working for nothing in computer charges. The same goes for all the electrical engineering programs like Pspice and all the mechanical design programs like Autocad and Solid Works. You pay a one time purchasing price and that's it.

Cloud computing is going backwards and not forward. I use word processors, project managers and spreadsheets on my personal computer and except for the word processor , I used these programs on remote main frames and they were expensive to use. Now I purchase once and I pay only one time.

One argument I have heard presented for cloud computing is that it is more secure than personal computing. I mean what if my personal computer crashes. Haven't these people heard of external hard disks

Why would I keep my sales information, the most critical and sensitive part of my business on the Web?

I agree fully. Where cloud computing would make the most sense is for a company to host their own internal cloud. Save a ton on IT costs and keep users from mucking up their machines and getting them infected with viruses.

There's no such thing as an "internal cloud". "internal clouds" are simply a combination of three IT initiatives:

• server consolidation via virtualization
• Self-serve portals
• Datacenter automation tools

Essentially that is "Infrastructure As A Service" shich is what IT has always been. Its just a bit faster and needs a bit fewer staff...So?

That's not "cloud computing".

Now if you want to add the "Software As A Service" component to that, now you are back in the realm of SOA for Enterprise - and all of the massive management headaches that brings.

Corporate use of Gmail (and Microsoft's and IBM's competitive offerings) have very little to do with the end of the desktop. Gmail for now serves the needs of some users - but the Anti Net Neutrality approach that Google is taking to its GoogleVoice offering is precisely why having your inbox purely in the cloud is not the best solution.

Similarly Amazon's S3 service has very little to do with desktop storage. It is for applications like Flickr etc. But you still want local copies of images that you have created.

As for pricing, I just bought 1.5 Terrabytes of disk storage for $140 at Costco. I could have gotten it for $20 less at NewEgg. And $85 for a 1TB INTERNAL drive

S3 pricing is $0.15/GB/Mo with $0.20/GB transfered.

1 Terrabyte is 1,000 GB. $0.15 x 1000 ==> $150/mo. PER MONTH. 1,5 TB is $225/Mo And if I add in the costs of loding in the data - $200, I'm behind the curve already.

So What you are claiming Farhad, is that Desktops are going away because we are all going to be willing to pay 40-50 times more for our storage? (3 year lifespan on hard drives).

Yeah uhuh. GMail enterprise costs roughly $50/seat/yr. IBM's Lotus Cloud Suite is about $36/seat/yr, Microsoft's is $40/seat/year.

But that ONLY gets you email. Furthermore I'm still running Outlook XP for my email client. That's 6 years at $40/yr ==> $240... Hardly "lower margins". Microsoft's Enterprise Agreements run on 3 year terms. So that's $120/seat. that's a HIGHER margin than what the EA discounted desktop brings.

Sorry Farhad, you really don't quite understand this space either.

Although the pitch is "pay for what you use" - the actual underlying market phenomenon is the same old "subscription vs. retail" pricing issue. A subscription invariably costs more when you amortize it out over the lifespan of the products. Paying $3/mo seems like a great deal. Until you price it out over all the months you buy the service. Its the Ron Popeil model of

"Only 5 Payments of"

Or the Car Leasing model etc. etc. etc.