Archive

Archive for the ‘I read on Internet’ Category

Very interesting business model check this getaround.com

May 28, 2011 Leave a comment

Sorry I did not write blog since long time. but today I found some thing very interesting and promising business I thought of sharing that with you. Check this website http://www.getaround.com this is almost similar to zipcar.com with a differentiator where Zipcar owns all cars . Zipcar currently had 8000 cars around united states with almost billion dollar market cap. This get around service started few weeks back already has 1600+ cars registered and getting ready to rent. I am impressed with the idea.

I am sure this business will be soon a hit.

The End of Outsourcing (As We Know It) Is cloud Computing going to change rules of the game??

September 5, 2010 Leave a comment

I still feel that Cloud computing will surely change rules of the game in outsourcing . Lets look one step at a time.

If one application needed develop for a corporation in this example I would take launching Order Processing, Distribution and Customer service ERP application for a Manufacturing company .which takes following infrastructure and Man hours of developing ,testing and making production.

I am talking about

As Google and Amazon.com become preeminent sellers of tech services, companies from Accenture to Microsoft and Xerox must adapt to cloud computing

By Arjun Sethi and Olivier Aries

In the next five years outsourcing as we know it will disappear. The legion of Indian service providers will be sidelined or absorbed. U.S. and European companies that pioneered this corner of the high tech industry will suffer similar fates if they don’t wake up. Who will emerge as the new leaders? Google (GOOG) and Amazon.com (AMZN), brands that we associate with search and retail, will become better known for outsourcing.

Ludicrous? Not if you follow this industry. Desktop computers yielded to laptops. Web portals AOL (AOL), MSN (MSFT), and Yahoo! (YHOO) are giving way to social media sites FacebookTwitter, and LinkedIn. Software once distributed by disk is now available as apps over the Web—often for less than the cost of a slice of pizza. And so it goes. The same Darwinian process is creating a fresh ecosystem in outsourcing, one that will usher in an era of consolidation and a new way of working with clients.

Traditionally, outsourcing companies sell customers deals that can span a decade and easily run to tens of millions of dollars. The service provider takes on the expensive, time-consuming task of building and operating the digital tools that the customer requires to vanquish the competition, often involving development of custom software to get the job done. To do that, service providers need aisles of powerful computers, armies of programmers, and lots of applications, which are housed either at the client’s site or located at a third-party data center that’s usually owned and paid for by the client but managed and maintained by the outsourcer. Accenture (ACN) is a good example of the old model of outsourcing, which involves long-term contracts; customized software, legacy software, or both; and on-site systems integration work.

RUTHLESSLY SEEKING ECONOMIES OF SCALE

In the new model, outsourcers provide standard, off-the-shelf software on a “pay-per-drink” basis. For that, they will leverage so-called cloud technology, which lets users tap into computing power available via the Internet, rather than on a desktop or computer server housed locally. The appeal is scale, flexibility, and efficiency: Thousands of server computers can attack a task more quickly—and cheaply—or handle a patchwork quilt of different technologies that companies use to run their businesses. This approach will let businesses outsource entire tasks such as the tracking of inventory, paying only for the information accessed or used.

Why is this happening now? Let’s start with the relentless pressure to cut costs. Outsourcing is about saving money. Sure the pitch usually revolves around improving business processes, but no client is going to pay more for the service than what it already costs to maintain their systems. Unfortunately, outsourcing vendors have maxed-out efficiencies, both from automation and from moving the work to lower cost-of-labor destinations, also known as “labor arbitrage.” To get to the next level of savings, a ruthless search for greater economies of scale is necessary.

That’s where the cloud comes in. It shifts the center of gravity in outsourcing from physical ownership of assets and process expertise. It focuses on the skills necessary to efficiently manage computing operations that can scale and at the same time are flexible enough to handle scores of different tasks.

These factors will set off a wave of global consolidation in tech services. There are too many companies in this space. Consolidation will be about protecting or building market share or adding technical skills, from connectivity and networking to deep expertise in the delivery of services-on-demand. This is why most Indian outsourcing companies are investing to get up to speed on the cloud. How quickly can they build sufficient scale?

It’s not merely Indian companies wrestling with these changes. Let’s handicap the winners and losers in the race to become players in the evolving outsourcing business.

The Losers: Mid-tier Indian outsourcers will be acquired by larger, more aggressive companies. Indian outsourcers are attractive because of their current client list, operations in low-cost countries, and process expertise. Most of them are too small to build enough scale and expertise in the backbone capabilities required in the cloud.

Leading Indian players like MphasiS (MPHL:IN) and eServe (ESV:AU) have already fallen prey to Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) and TCS, respectively. Some larger players such as Infosys (INFY) and Wipro (WIT) are at risk of losing their competitive advantage. Even the largest Indian companies are still several orders of magnitude smaller than their U.S. competitors—HP, Xerox (XRX) Microsoft, and Google. These include companies such as Patni (PTI), L&T Infotech, and Satyam (recently acquired by Tech Mahindra. Therefore we expect Indian vendors to try to gain scale via acquisitions or alliances among themselves.

The Winners: Amazon and Google are the future leaders in outsourcing. They are already providing services to such enterprises as Eli Lilly (LLY) and Pfizer (PFE). They own data centers on an enormous scale and know how to operate them efficiently. They will gain capabilities they don’t yet have—such as industry-specific know-how and low-cost workforces—by acquiring Indian or other global outsourcers. Meanwhile, Google announced a partnership with Computer Sciences (CSC) and Amazon announced a similar one with Capgemini. Indeed, Amazon has made so much headway in cloud technology that this area of their business will generate, according to an estimate recently published by UBS (UBS), something in the order of $750 million in 2011.

Then there’s the generational issue to consider. Amazon and Google are household brands for the generation of managers and leaders that is now rising in U.S. management ranks. In their youth, these leaders entrusted personal e-mails, music files, pictures, and social interactions to these companies. We believe it will be a logical extension for this generation to hire these companies as trusted managers and hosts of their corporate services.

The Possible Winners: Software giants such as Microsoft, Oracle (ORCL), and SAP (SAP) have knowledge around enterprise platforms and applications that can unlock further efficiencies for clients. They also have robust and captive client portfolios. Their success will depend on the speed at which they build up capabilities they are currently missing in connectivity, infrastructure, and experience in the cloud itself. It will also depend on their appetite for risk. We are talking here about nothing less than reengineering their DNA. For example, even Microsoft has begun to forsake its license-based software to introduce new, cloud-based, office software. At the same time, Salesforce.com (CRM) has aggressively grown by shifting its CRM applications around this cloud-based model.

Those on the Fence: Xerox, HP, and Accenture have the technical and financial resources to expand their capabilities. Recent acquisitions—HP/EDS, Dell/Perot Systems (DELL), and Xerox/Affiliated Computer Services—show that they see the writing on the wall. Nevertheless, it’s uncertain that these behemoths will shift seamlessly from large integration projects to cloud-based solutions. Unless companies such as HP, Xerox, and Dell continue to increase their momentum into the cloud, they may find their multibillion-dollar acquisitions go to waste.

The outsourcing market is on the verge of experiencing its most massive transformation since the concept arose more than 20 years ago. For outsourcers, cloud computing creates an unprecedented opportunity to reshape how services get delivered. For clients, it opens up a new era characterized by the arrival of new players that are eager to build relationships and showcase their capabilities. That means more choice and a new model that will sustain the price advantage that outsourcing has hitherto provided.

How to secure your Database in the cloud

September 5, 2010 Leave a comment

I was researching recent days how we can use Database in the cloud how customers will take on Security when it comes to Cloud Computing combined with Database hosting and Backup solutions in the cloud. The fact is that it is a change in the way we do business. When the change is playing more control on price and CAPEX any business owner will start looking at alternatives.

Here is an excellent article which every one should if you are interested exploring opportunities or using for your projects in the future. This article is written by Mr. Slavik Markovich founder of Sentrigo databae sercurity Firm.

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Cloud-Computing/How-to-Secure-Sensitive-Data-in-Cloud-Environments/

What is the future of DBAs and Sysadmins In Cloud Computing Era

August 18, 2010 Leave a comment

I have been reading and following about the future of DBA and Sysadmins jobs role in an enterprise where cloud computing is used.

So when an enterprise start using cloud does that mean that company does not require any more DBAs to look after Disaster Recovery and Performance issues. In the same way do they also Sysadmins to manage Operating systems and other issues with the server.

In my opinion DBAs and Sysadmins still required in an Enterprise

Lets assume this way there are 2 big players providing Data Services in cloud. 1) Microsoft 2) Amazon

but those Cloud Service providers provide only infrastructure to run computing cycles.
they will not provide any service towards tuning your database or reducing CPU cycles on those queries in fact the worst code and worst queried will bring money for them because customers pay for their usage on CPU cycles and Data storage etc.

I feel DBA job will continue to be there but DBAs will have to manage the cost cutting on bills which corporate gets on monthly basis for the database server.In simple words we buy electricity from utility company we pay monthly based on usage at the same time some one at home will take lead to save the energy at home or office to cut the cost to make sure they get less bill from utility company. The same way if there is no DBA a corporate will spend more money on CPU cycles and Datastorage. This process will create value for DBAs as the cost cutters who will looks after each query which was getting executed in the cloud to minimize the monthly bill from service provider.

I strongly agree with the article written by Brent Ozar   Long Live DBA

Jason Massie (aka StatisticsIO.com) wrote a blog post this week called The Death of the DBA.  He talks about why the coming cloud computing craze creates career chaos.

I have the exact opposite opinion: I can’t wait for databases to move toward the cloud because it makes database administrators even more vital.

Reason #1: Cloud computing costs real money, and DBAs can help cut costs.

When you move your database into the cloud, your cloud vendor starts billing you on a per-month basis for CPU time, memory, and storage space.  Normally, when DBAs say they cut costs for a company, they’re talking about funny money: if we optimize indexes and cut storage space by 10%, we don’t suddenly get cash back.  When software is a service, though, we will see real savings, a real reduction in our next monthly cloud bill.

Cloud vendors won’t get involved in tuning indexes, cutting storage space, optimizing memory and cleaning up CPU cycles because they make money off bad application design and bad production decisions.  Want to make a bunch of duplicate indexes on your Amazon EC2-hosted MySQL server?  Knock yourself out – Amazon’s happy to let you do it, and they make more money off every bad decision.  Go long enough without a DBA, and the applications will start racking up big monthly bills.

Reason #2: Disaster recovery becomes even more important.

How many of us have been shafted when some kind of third party provider suddenly closed up shop in the middle of the night and disappeared?  Think back to the online storage craze in the initial dot-com boom: everybody and their brother was offering online storage space for free or for cheap.  Some of the providers are still around, but most of them folded up and died, taking user data along with them.

Disaster recovery no longer just means preparing for your own business failures: with cloud computing, it means preparing for the failures of your cloud vendor too.  No cloud vendor is too big to experience problems: check out the Amazon S3 outage in July 2008 and the Amazon S3 outage in February 2008.

Reason #3: Web hosting hasn’t killed the need for sysadmins.

Web sites have been hosted at third party hosting providers for more than a decade, but try calling your hosting company and getting good help with a problem.

I just recently chatted with a sysadmin who sat through a grueling contract renegotiation with their hosting provider.  They’re spending tens of thousands of dollars per month on hosting, and the hosting provider touted all kinds of advantages like redundant internet connections across multiple datacenters.  Come to find out – they only had a single datacenter, and were thinking about growing to another one.  The hosting provider also mentioned that they had the right to move machines between datacenters at any time without warning as part of planned maintenance windows.

Without a skilled sysadmin, these unfortunate problems wouldn’t have come to light, and the poor client would have only found out when their machines went down and came back up with new IP addresses.  This is a huge security risk for the client, who has to pay external security auditing firms to verify that their private data is in good hands.  They would have to redo their security audits and fork out big bucks.

Does third party hosting solve solutions and offer value?  Absolutely.  But does it eliminate the need for administration, security auditing, day to day maintenance, planning, and app design?  No way.

Reason #4: The economy of scale means it can be cheaper to manage your own servers.

Say three companies came out right now offering SQL Server hosting services:

  • Company A offers no-frills hosting for $X per month
  • Company B offers hosting with backups & restores for $X * 1.5 per month
  • Company C offers managed hosting with backups, restores and performance tuning for $X * 3 per month

Your company has to evaluate each hosting option, and the larger you get, the more sense Company A makes.  At a certain number of databases, you’ll save money by doing the management yourself.

Company C can’t offer management features without paying for DBAs.  The DBAs have to work somewhere, and you can bet that Company C will heavily mark up their DBA costs because everybody has to make money somehow.

Reason #5: Security & SOX compliance.

I did a short stint at a major financial firm who wouldn’t even allow their employees to get their email over the web.  Imagine putting their financial data on databases in “the cloud” – no way.  Private companies might be able to get away with it, but after a couple of security scares (think lost tape backups) the paranoia will set in.

I can already visualize the ads for consulting companies.  “Think your data is safe in the cloud?  How do you know Mr. Hacker Guy isn’t connecting a USB drive to your server right now?  Pay us and we’ll find out.”

Reason #6: Do you stand next to your servers now?

The good DBAs I know don’t work in the datacenter (except when it’s time for OS reinstalls, and these days a lot of that is handled with imaging and deployment tools).  They work from a cubicle, office, or coffeeshop miles away from their servers.  We don’t have to put our hands on the servers, and they could be anywhere.  I’d love for my databases to move to the cloud, because it makes it easier to justify telecommuting.  Preferably from a beach.  With margaritas.  (Might be able to expense those during meetings, too.)

Bottom Line: The cloud is coming, but it’s not going to rain on the DBA party.

Now is a great time to be a DBA, and while I think there are disruptive computing forces on the horizon, I don’t think the cloud is going to put an end to the DBA career.

So what about the future is going to change the DBA career in say, five or ten years?  Well, as RAM and solid state disks get cheaper, I can foresee the day where databases run entirely in memory and just back up to disk.  Performance tuning becomes less of an issue, and we get to focus on functionality instead of the number of bytes an index will take.

Think back ten years ago in general computing & programming: people were still writing programs in assembly because they needed the speed.  Now, raw speed of an app isn’t as much of an issue for general programmers and they get to focus on which cool new language will make the programming faster, not the code execution.

To me, that’s really cool and exciting.  It means in a few years, we might be able to do more data mining and predictive analysis with even the most basic, everyday databases.  I might be able to say, “Man, remember when we had to worry about the number of indexes on a table?  Wow.  Yesterday sucked.”  That’s awesome!

Five types of Entrepreneurs

June 27, 2010 Leave a comment

Home-run Sluggers:

Home-run sluggers want to change the world in a big and obvious way, says serial entrepreneur John Warrillow. They are not thrilled with incremental success, and the trend toward serial entrepreneurship is not necessarily appealing to them. Sluggers would rather make a single business their life’s work, and make it big (if at all.) They are not as amenable to early exits or succession planning. Fred Smith of FedEx is an obvious example of a slugger.

On-base Hitter

Think of business owners who have a series of successful business start-ups to their name as you would hitters in baseball who have a high on-base percentage. Like the on-base hitter, these entrepreneurs are content to achieve success in bite-sized bits on a regular basis, rather than all in one flourish. Rene Lacarte fits this description. The founder of PayCycle and Bills.com has launched a serious of similiar businesses in the online payment field. Each has been a success, though none has been a bullseye.

Fact Finders
Fact Finders, as defined by the Kolbe personality test, are entrepreneurs who seek details before making decisions. Just as picking at a single yarn in an old sweater unravels it, each answer to a fact finder’s question triggers a new set of questions. The fact finder seeks out the answers to his or her questions before making decisions.

Follow-Through

Follow-Through entrepreneurs love systems, according to the Kolbe test. In fact, creating a system is how they react when confronted with the chaos created by any start-up enterprise. Follow-Through entrepreneurs think in a linear fashion, where Step 1 leads to Step 2 and so on. Their companies tend to operate by methodology (think Six Sigma) and to reward employees for continuous process improvement

Implementers

Implementers, the Kolbe test says, live in the physical world and enjoy building and fixing things. They are innovative by nature, and always looking to build the proverbial better mousetrap. Implementers thrive in environments that allow them to work with their hands

I thought it is useful to some people who can rate them as one of the above. I found this article on inc.com

6 Questions to Ask Before Starting a Business

June 17, 2010 Leave a comment
1. Do you believe you have what it takes?
We don’t mean personal characteristics — or not just personal characteristics, anyway. Do you believe you have all the skills, energy, money, people, and knowledge to start a business? Founders who carefully identify and evaluate their resources in pursuit of a well-defined goal display “entrepreneurial self-efficacy,” a trait many academics believe to be the best predictor of success.
2. Are you able to let other people down?
A founder may set out in a rowboat, but pretty soon, he is piloting a cabin cruiser with investors and employees on board and their families huddled belowdecks. Risking your own fortunes is easy compared with risking the fortunes of those who believe in you. “These people may not completely understand the business,” says J. Robert Baum, an associate professor of entrepreneurship at the University of Maryland. “They may not understand the level of risk. But they think they’ll be OK because you are so smart. Breaking their dreams is very painful.”
3. How do you handle setbacks?
When you are smiling, the whole company smiles with you. In their book Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting With Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee explain that emotions are contagious: Morale rises and falls with the mood of the leader. Consequently, people who succumb to black moods or depression can fatally infect their own companies.
Because some people have an inflated idea of their resilience, Mayer suggests performing a kind of reference check on yourself — ask people who know you well how you handle adversity.
4. Are you really an inventor, rather than an entrepreneur?
Raising a child is generally more challenging than creating a child, and the same is true of new products. Some people mistake the act of invention for the tough part. “Too many times, these inventor types spend an inordinate amount of time on the patent and making the prototype just so,” says Mike Drummond, editor in chief and co-owner of Inventors Digest. “They think once they’ve done that, the world will beat a path to their doorstep. My take is that product development is a team sport. Inventors don’t get that. Entrepreneurs do.”
5. Can you accept that your company may outgrow you?
Some entrepreneurs love to brag that they don’t need an exit strategy, because they are not going anywhere. But at some point, your business may need you less than you need it. That’s particularly true at fast-growth companies, at which entrepreneurs may not have enough time to develop the necessary leadership and business skills. Mayer has seen founders bring in presidents or senior executives from the outside, only to sabotage them. “They do it by not giving them the necessary information,” says Mayer. “They do it by not stepping back and by involving themselves with managers in a way that is inappropriate in the chain of command. They can be disruptive during meetings.”
6. When you look in the mirror, does an entrepreneur look back?
If so, and if that’s the reason you are starting a company, beware. Many traits — persistence, creativity, and risk tolerance among them — are commonly ascribed to entrepreneurs. But having those traits doesn’t much improve the odds that you will succeed. “Research into entrepreneurs’ personal traits says things like persistence and need for achievement explain only about 5 percent to 10 percent” of the difference between people who start companies and those who don’t, according to Baum. “They are less important than external predictors like the spirit of the times, the economy, and changes within an industry.

I like this article on inc.com so i posted to share with all my friends.

Can human live with out food and water? This story says yes

May 12, 2010 Leave a comment

It is really interesting this human lived for 70 years which he claims he did not take food and water.

It was on msn home page today when I saw it I was surprised started reading about it found some thing i should share with all of you so here it is.

http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/05/10/2299480.aspx?GT1=43001

70 years without eating? ‘Starving yogi’ says it’s true

Posted on Monday, May 10, 2010 7:00 PM PT
By Brian Alexander

Prahlad Jani, an 82-year-old Indian yogi, is making headlines by claims that for the past 70 years he has had nothing — not one calorie — to eat and not one drop of liquid to drink. To test his claims, Indian military doctors put him under round-the-clock observation during a two-week hospital stay that ended last week, news reports say. During that time he didn’t ingest any food or water – and remained perfectly healthy, the researchers said.

But that’s simply impossible, said Dr. Michael Van Rooyen an emergency physician at Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital, an associate professor at the medical school, and the director of the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative – which focuses on aid to displaced populations who lack food and water.

Van Rooyen says that depending on climate conditions like temperature and humidity, a human could survive five or six days without water, maybe a day or two longer in extraordinary circumstances. We can go much longer without food – even up to three months if that person is taking liquids fortified with vitamins and electrolytes.

Bobby Sands, an Irish Republican convicted of firearms possession and imprisoned by the British, died in 1981 on the 66th day of his hunger strike. Gandhi was also known to go long stretches without food, including a 21-day hunger strike in 1932.

Image: Prahlad Jani claims he has survived without food and water for more than seven decades
Sterling Hospitals / AFP – Getty Images file
Prahlad Jani was studied for two weeks.
Jani, dubbed “the starving yogi” by some, did have limited contact with water while gargling and periodically bathing, reported the news wire service AFP. While researchers said they measured what he spit out, Van Rooyen said he’s clearly getting fluid somehow.

“You can hold a lot of water in those yogi beards. A sneaky yogi for certain,” he said. “He MUST take in water. The human body cannot survive without it.” The effects of food and water deprivation are profound, Van Rooyen explained. “Ultimately, instead of metabolizing sugar and glycogen [the body’s energy sources] you start to metabolize fat and then cause muscle breakdown. Without food, your body chemistry changes. Profoundly malnourished people autodigest, they consume their own body’s resources. You get liver failure, tachycardia, heart strain. You fall apart.”

The yogi, though, would already be dead from lack of hydration. If he really went without any liquids at all, his cardiovascular system would have collapsed. “You lose about a liter or two of water per day just by breathing,” Van Rooyen said. You don’t have to sweat, which the yogi claims he never does. That water loss results in thicker blood and a drop in blood pressure.

“You go from being a grape to a raisin,” Van Rooyen said and if you didn’t have a heart attack first, you’d die of kidney failure.

there is another which talks about the same story check this link below.
Categories: I read on Internet