[qi:004] Late last week, we watched the big names in the IT industry play their little reindeer games over a proposed Open Cloud Manifesto put forth by IBM. I have to say, it wasn’t worth it. As far as Manifestos go, this one is pretty benign. Who cares if it was agreed to or drafted in secret — it doesn’t commit participants to anything.
No standards, no rules — merely a general idea that clouds should work together and data should be able to travel freely back and forth among clouds. The strongest sections note that clouds should be transparent in terms of offering up the location where a company’s data sits, and issue a call to avoid vendor lock-in.
Microsoft’s decision to leak and deride this most timid of Manifestos is like getting back at someone who gathers a few world leaders together to get them to all decide to “be nice to each other.” It’s a nice gesture, but it’s not going to change the way the world works, so why is Microsoft pissing on everyone’s efforts? Check out the intro to the Manifesto:
This document does not intend to deﬁne a ﬁnal taxonomy of cloud computing or to charter a new standards effort. Nor does it try to be an exhaustive thesis on cloud architecture and design. Rather, this document is intended for CIOs, governments, IT users and business leaders who intend to use cloud computing and to establish a set of core principles for cloud providers.
This isn’t the towering rhetoric that will slay an entire proprietary code base. The entire manifesto is here, but seriously, this is not worth the crazy shenanigans that preceded it. We do need standards, and it would be nice if they were available under a creative commons license, but I for one am going to stop wasting digital ink on this Manifesto madness. Data should be able to travel easily and freely from cloud to cloud. And people should be nice to each other. Now let’s get on with our lives, OK?