On VMWare’s comments on IBM’s “monolithic architecture”
It’s interesting. I don’t know whether [VMWare President Sumit Dhawan ] is looking in a mirror. Which one is more monolithic? With Red Hat, you can go buy Ansible, you can buy Linux, you can get OpenShift … but I’m not surprised. Apparently, we have a target on our back.
I’ll go back to the original thesis on the money piece. So, two, three years ago, I said the world is not going to go to singular public cloud. The world is going to multiple [clouds]. Why multiple? because of resilience, and where the footprint is. There are multiple public and private clouds — that’s where the enterprise is going to be. You’re going to have multiple public [clouds] for resilience. And local or private for all the reasons of regulation or laws … Enterprises might say, “For some workloads, I need to be flexible. I need to have the ability go across a few public [clouds] or the private, and them if I’m on public and something changes, I might want to be back in private, and that’s the space we’re going to play in. That’s the opportunity we’re going after. Maybe, as I said, if someone is looking in the mirror, with monolithic, non-open source [offerings], or you can say, “Hey, Linux is already the operating system that really cares about containers, and can go across both private and public, and get into the catalogues of all the big public guys. For example, Red Hat sits in the catalogs of both Amazon and Microsoft. You can put things on top and let’s go give people this ability to go process this environment.