Live Blog -- CLoud Launch: Morning Panel

Reuven Cohen made an empassioned point about how there is no such thing as a "Canadian cloud" and put Canadian telecom providers on the spot for their lack of flexibility in offerings and mobile plans. Apparently, Reuven maxed out his mobile data plan pretty quickly...

Also according to Cohen, the NIST definition was created as a way for the US FedGov to procure the typical cloud based services as a direct result of a mandate from Vivek Kundra, first Federal CIO. According to one audience member, this has only helped bigger companies sell into the government and has excluded SMBs.

Misha Nossik added that risk aversion has prevented Canadian governments from adopting cloud computing even though they are trying desperately to hang onto their empires. Competition and efficiency is a major driver for cloud adoption in the US whereas Canada might not be facing this same pressure (yet?).

It seems that, with respect to government, maybe we should be discussing the need to consolidate services and share them on the whole rather than just outsource everything in an effort to use cloud computing. Here, there is a distinct lack of a cloud computing roadmap and maturity model to judge progress. Is it possible that, if we were to show the way to move forward and show the current state at various stages, adoption would be greater and simpler to promote?

Audience member invoked the Patriot Act in his point about how our legislation and regulations can help Canada's ability to become "data Switzerland". Cohen pointed out that this has been done before and that it was a failure because no one wanted it. With respect to Canada, he said, the cost structure is simply not competitive while Andrew Fisher added that the scale is simply not there (yet?).

It boils down to how Canadian companies can add value to cloud computing and an audience member agreed by adding that when [we] created the Canadarm, [we] decided we would not be NASA but would add value in a different way. Shahab showed how the Province of New Brunswick has become the call centre capital of Canada in this same way. Rough consensus, either by active advocacy or by passive non-opposition, seems to be that SaaS is where Canada can excel and add the value we're so desperately looking for.

Let's get some clarity and focus on our capabilities, first, I say. Then we can talk about where to add value. We can't get anywhere without first knowing where we start from and then knowing where we're going.

Thanks to Nossik for stopping the self/Canadian bashing.

Live Blog -- Cloud Launch: Andrew Fisher

Andrew Fisher of Wesley Clover pointed out that "Personalisation is a major driver of cloud...I can pick and choose exactly what I want...[and pay for on a] per user or feature basis." [This] "...drives a lot of the cloud services available today."

Fisher echoes Matthews' statement that barriers to entry are dropping but, in Canada, our investment tends to be more angel driven than VC driven. Clearly, the time is right to invest in startups that make use of cloud computing as well as those who are innovating in cloud in Canada. Smaller teams, as Fisher says, are easier to deal with and are more focused and dedicated, but the risk is that they aren't able to scale as rapidly as they are needed to.

Point taken. Investment can take the form of procurement from a startup as well as outright acquisition. This is probably more likely to promote growth in the industry in Canada.

Live blog: Cloud Launch -- Driving the Cloud

One last thought from Terry Matthews about cloud computing: "Opportunities around the world with cloud and mobile are just unbelievable. More than I can talk about today because it's everywhere..." He discussed how mobile has evolved and become so important in day-to-day life.

Mobile is clearly a major driver of innovation for cloud computing. The requirements for platforms, instant scalability, and innovation are high while barriers are dropping. The challenge is for us to promote adoption and facilitate the innovation.

More on the SKYY ETF

After giving this some thought, it occurs to me that an exchange traded fund (ETF) might not be such a great thing for cloud computing: it does nothing to advance work being done on the technical or organizational fronts. This is simply a vehicle for investors and the fund's creator, First Trust (FT), to make money while not really risking anything. In effect, the companies tracked by this ETF do not benefit from it as they would from an IPO.

FT created SKYY to capitalize on cloud computing while not actually investing in any company. I can hear all of you capitalists and free marketeers having apoplectic fits. Don't get me wrong: I understand that in a capitalist society you make money when and how you can and continue to do so for as long as possible. When it was launched, FT stood to make about $20 a share and they made their money. (SKYY is currently trading at $18.24, its lowest point since its launch on July 6,2011.)

While the capitalist agenda resonates and makes it easy for investors to avoid risk by investing in a "diversified" fund, it does nothing to help companies and their customers who are on the forefront of the technology and business issues, confronting them on a daily basis. Dollars invested in a vaporous (pardon the pun) investment vehicle could have been spent on shares offered by the various tracked companies or, better yet, in companies that will IPO in the near future.

Leveraging someone else's work to make a dollar can be thought of as being dishonest or unethical. Yet here we are, making use of legitimate companies' efforts, without regard for the blood, sweat, and tears shed by its employees, all in the name of making a buck. Investors: put your money where it will make the biggest impact and invest in innovation. The returns for the economy will be greater.