A few years ago I was at a presentation at the Open Source Business Conference and listened to an idiot. He compared people who supported various open source models with babies and ridiculed "to meet the preferences of developers". I don't remember who he was, but everything he said is wrong. Here's why.
When the migration to the public cloud is complete, the number of transactions and thus the operations performed in the public cloud ultimately stagnate. Once this happens, each technology vendor's share in these processes and ultimately sales will be a function directly related to developer preferences (drum roll please).
We can see this modeled on the web. The number of hits on a popular website increased depending on the number of people on the Internet, regardless of the increasing popularity. This changes as soon as almost everyone is online. If the growth of Internet use is more like population growth in industrialized and developing countries, traffic will stagnate.
You can prove this on Netcraft or in the app market. When a product becomes popular, the category is bound to new entries. The rise of Instagram means practically no more Flickr. Even Google couldn't get Google+ to work. Ultimately, everyone competes for some of the existing traffic.
Slice the cloud pie
So developers are the people who generally make the technology decisions. You can say "well, the architect chooses", but over time the developers decide. Architects shouldn't choose technologies that turn developers off, but it seems that this happens frequently. In the long run, however, this tends to backfire. The company cannot hire employees, a project fails, the architect loses his job, and various decisions are made.
You can argue that the second most hated database is the most commonly used database, but what is its growth like? DB2, (rightly) the most hated database, has had a declining market share for years.
Developers generally also make really rational, short-term decisions that ultimately add up to long-term trends. How many times have you tried to use something and within 5 or 20 minutes found it was too frustrating and only picked the closest competitor because you could get it up and running quickly?
If developers make long-term technological decisions and apps are written by developers and made available in the cloud, who decides winners and losers in the cloud? I'm not talking about Amazon vs. Google vs. Microsoft, because ultimately the providers are decided based on cost and range. And who cares? I am talking about everything above this level. (Where Amazon, Google and Microsoft don't really compete with each other, but with third-party software providers.)
While the cloud is currently being billed to customers based on a strange mix of time and workload, we assume that they are all just a proxy for operations if we achieve efficiency. Let's say I pay a fraction of a penny for every database write, HTTP hit, and API call. If the migration of public clouds becomes relatively complete in a few years (as the trends suggest), the number of operations and fractions of pennies will ultimately stagnate or adapt to population growth in relatively wealthy countries.
So far, the long-term increase in cloud usage has been driven by new technologies and more people connecting. Sooner or later, however, we face an inevitable stagnation. Even with the Internet of Things, after every factory that is automated is automated and everyone has a ring, a nest, and an Alexa along with this dishwasher connected to the Internet, cloud operations will effectively stagnate.
What developers want
As the number of operating plateaus increases, developer preferences decide which providers or open source tools receive the largest share of cloud spending. This means that VMware should do well if most developers decide that they like Spring.
Of course there is a catch. Developers like open source tools and technologies. Amazon, Google and Microsoft also like open source tools – especially if they can capture the ultimate spend. While developers determine the type of these operations (i.e., a Spring API call), it can be IT operations that decide which implementation of Spring to use (provided perfect compatibility can be achieved). This implementation can be from VMware or one of the cloud providers or someone else.
In short, vendors should spend most of their time addressing developer preferences and the rest of the time ensuring that "as a service" is the best implementation. Developers love open source. So if you want them to use your software, you should probably make it open source.
Copyright © 2020 IDG Communications, Inc.