Cloud Hosting

Snowflake, the buzzy cloud computing company, just delivered the biggest software IPO ever by betting on a future in which all businesses increasingly rely on big data and AI to make decisions. Its stock began trading on Sept. 16 at $245 per sharemore than double the $120 price Snowflake set the day earliergiving it an opening valuation of $67.9 billion.

The startups main value proposition is that it makes it easier and cheaper for businesses to analyze data theyve shelved away on the cloudincluding the massive datasets needed to train machine learning algorithms. Because Snowflake structures its software differently, it can run resource-intensive AI programs more efficiently than its competitors, including juggernauts like Amazons AWS and Microsofts Azure.

Snowflake is very important because they can challenge the Amazon AWS power, said Per Roman, managing partner and co-founder of investment firm GP Bullhound. Amazons cloud service controls nearly half the global market, and takes much of the web down with it whenever it experiences disruptions.

Snowflake is only able to take on a dominant, entrenched competitor like AWS because it has come up with a better solution for one problem: allowing companies to cheaply expand their reliance on AI to help them with an ever-growing set of business decisions. That is the vision Wall Street valued at roughly $70 billion today.

AI requires two key ingredients: huge troves of data and a lot of computing power. If you have both, you can monitor the performance of your business in granular detail (and in real time) to predict future conditions. Snowflake can help companies do this kind of analysis more often and at a lower cost: In July, Snowflake handled 507 million requests per day from companies looking to track key data points in real time, according to its IPO filing.

Snowflake differentiates itself from competitors like AWS through its software architecture. The company divides its massive pool of computing power into three groups: One is dedicated to storing data, another is just for analyzing that data, and the third is a brain that keeps the other two running. The system can dedicate more resources to storage or data analysis on the fly, depending on demand.

AWS offers similar services, doesnt separate data storage and analysis, which means clients effectively pay for more analytical computing power they may not use. Snowflake, by comparison, only charges clients for exactly as much storage and computing power as they need. Snowflake also makes it easier for companies to share data with clients and partners, or to buy and sell datasets on an internal marketplace.

Roman said that every company is trending towards a future in which theyll rely on cloud services to store and analyze data. All enterprises, from the largest in the world to your small mom-and-pop shop, need to migrate their computing storage and systems into the cloud, he said. Snowflakes soaring valuation suggests that investors have bought into this bet on ubiquitous AI.

But as businesses are increasingly adopting AI to inform their strategies and automate everything from resume review to ER triage, a string of high-profile scandals has made corporate executives think twice about their use of big data. Shifting public opinion, new government regulations, and the cost of compliance could change companies calculus about AIand send Snowflakes valuation drifting back down to Earth.

Read the original here:
Snowflake's IPO is a bet on companies using AI for everything - Quartz

By moving data storage to the cloud, businesses can focus more on the core competencies of supporting their business model.

For instance, cloud services simplify the data center backup and recovery processes, enabling a smaller staff to manage them. You no longer must manage a large backup infrastructure but, instead, can handle recovery with a few mouse clicks. Large cloud providers offer data redundancy across geographically disparate data centers, in turn, making your data safer.

Among the greatest benefits of the cloud are the rapid deployment of resources and timely decision-making. These advantages are particularly relevant today with COVID-19 and so many people working from home. Entire environments can be spun up in hours versus months. Cloud services are perfect for rapidly changing workloads and quick responses to emergencies.

Nevertheless, there are many challenges when extending the storage infrastructure into the cloud. What follows is a look at 13 areas where challenges arise in managing cloud storage vs. a local SAN, including:

Cloud storage challenges often relate to the choice of a cloud provider. With a local SAN, there's more variability and flexibility in dealing with problems. It's important to know how to handle the challenges of cloud storage vs. a local SAN. The best approaches require due diligence and a proactive process to make the correct choices for your business.

Costs are difficult to plan for and manage with cloud deployments. The ability to rapidly expand resources is a key cloud advantage in the cloud storage vs. SAN debate, but costs can skyrocket when it's so easy to create new environments.

Do an audit to estimate your cloud infrastructure costs, including the ones involved with:

Outbound data transfer is charged at the normal rate. Inbound data transfer is free. It will cost more to bring servers and data back on premises than to move them to the cloud. There's no direct comparison among providers because each offers different options, including pay as you go, reserved volume discounts and instances per second used.

You should have an exit strategy because data lock-in is the most difficult risk to mitigate, especially in a cloud deployment where it's difficult to switch vendors.

Obtaining automated and detailed usage reports for cost tracking and reporting is challenging. Third-party management and reporting tools, such as Datadog, Dynatrace and SolarWinds, can be helpful.

Cost management in a local SAN environment centers on hardware lifecycle management, service contract management and managing the capital expenses that go with those items in the budget. Lifecycle management and proper planning of hardware replacements is key to reducing costs when managing a local environment; hardware support costs can spiral after five years.

Other cloud storage challenges come up when considering migration issues. A cloud migration plan must consider all the workloads to be transferred to the cloud and the sequence for migrating them. Consider using professional services to help design and build a step-by-step approach, which, in turn, enables the implementation team to learn as it goes and to create detailed documentation.

A local SAN migration plan must consider the underlying network infrastructure and compatibility. For instance, the old SAN or Ethernet network might be 10 GB and the new 25 GB. Software migration tools can help. Vendors often provide these tools free, but they can be difficult to use. Third-party tools, such as Datadobi, also are available. Migrating to an entirely different hardware platform requires attention to security, protocols, IP and name changes, and shares. Proper planning is key whether planning a migration in the cloud or locally.

Why move back from the cloud? Many factors may drive the need for some resources to move back on premises. Keeping data in the cloud can become less cost-effective over time. Other issues can come up related to data control and security, performance, I/O requirements and vendor lock-in.

Proper planning for high-performance applications or ones that have specific data-compliance requirements is critical. Some of these applications are better suited to the local SAN environment.

There's no standardization of cloud service-level agreements (SLAs). Each provider has its own SLA metrics, restrictions and exceptions related to service availability and standards. Consider your organization's availability, response time, capacity and support requirements. Pay close attention to all legal requirements for data security and determine who's accountable for failures.

Local SAN management requires custom SLAs based on local resources and mutual agreements between the business groups and the SAN management team. It's important to review and create manageable and realistic agreements that the local IT team can support with back up from vendors.

In a cloud environment, security risks are important to consider when customizing for the integration of mobile deployments, deployment of content in multiple markets and the handling of personally identifiable information. Legal agreements may be needed with a cloud provider to ensure the compliance of any customization.

The same considerations apply with a local SAN. Proper planning for business applications is critical, and the environment must be customized for specific application needs, such as disk I/O and network bandwidth. However, it's up to the local team to ensure the environment is properly customized for all business requirements.

Other cloud storage challenges relate to security and compliance. For one thing, cloud computing widens the potential attack surface. While the cloud provider is responsible for physical security, business continuity, DR and network security, additional security controls and responsibilities are left to the customer.

Security and regulatory requirements often dictate what can and can't be moved to the cloud. With the numerous state, federal and international requirements -- including Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Criminal Justice Information Services, HIPAA, GPDR, and the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act -- it may make sense to store data locally.

When considering cloud storage vs. SAN, security requirements are similar. Again, it's the difference between a vendor contract ensuring compliance and a local team making sure the requirements are met. You need to understand your security goals, what each provider offers and who's responsible for what.

From a cloud deployment perspective, consider your environment and how the provider's offerings fit in to your workflows. Microsoft Azure may make sense for an organization that's already using a lot of Microsoft software. Amazon or Google cloud services might make sense if you use either vendor's other services.

From a local SAN management perspective, architecture design hinges on striking a balance between price and performance to meet business needs. Other considerations include business continuity, security, reporting, backup and recovery.

When looking at the challenges of cloud storage, compatibility is more of a cloud deployment issue than a local one. In the cloud there are more SaaS and PaaS options. Application compatibility testing is critical, but it's also complex. When testing identifies compatibility issues, other options such as infrastructure, PaaS and SaaS can be considered. Ensure that an assessment and compatibility test is completed prior to any migrations.

Business continuity and data recovery can be easier in the cloud because of built in recovery options. The biggest challenges for data recovery from the cloud are related to operational recoveries, including bandwidth consumption, the cost of bringing data back and the time it takes to recover data. Many critical workloads may need to remain on premises for these reasons.

Local data recovery is often more complex because an alternate disaster recovery location is often needed above and beyond the built-in tools in a storage system. This can mean buying twice as much hardware and supporting a separate DR site. Understanding the needs of the business is crucial, as long-term backup and failover options may be needed in addition to local snapshots and basic operational recovery at a single local site.

Consider the level and form of support you'll need before you choose a cloud provider. The most important options vary among providers. They include 24/7 support and response time, tools to monitor and report on your environment, consultative agreements, dedicated account managers and engineers, and proactive reviews with subject-matter experts.

Local SAN architecture has the same considerations, but you must ensure there are enough staff members with the appropriate training to support the infrastructure, as well as the appropriate support contracts in place to get help from vendors when needed.

Lock-in is a consideration for both cloud and local deployments. When assessing a vendor, review your migration goals and current infrastructure costs and resources, and look at each vendor carefully. You should have an exit strategy because data lock-in is the most difficult risk to mitigate, especially in a cloud deployment where it's difficult to switch vendors. Set up your data for maximum portability.

Manageability can underscore the challenges of cloud storage vs. SAN. Cloud services can reduce infrastructure manageability. For instance, direct access to server consoles and direct control over what's running on shared infrastructure is limited. All service providers support different orchestration tools and integrate with different services. An organization must consider what level of control it requires over its environment.

In a local SAN deployment, vendors generally offer management tools. There are also numerous vendor-neutral options. It's critical to do demos and find what suits your needs.

Cloud computing enables IT staff to rapidly develop complex systems and deploy them across the globe, but this approach can create reliability risks. Cloud providers are continuously developing new ideas and including them in their services. The rapid rate of change can cause service failures. Consider globally redundant cloud offerings for maximum recoverability and reliability.

Local deployments require more planning and management to ensure business continuity, generally with multiple sites and redundant hardware. Options to consider include replication to third-party cloud vendors and the creation of a local business continuity plan with redundant hardware at a privately owned alternate location.

Read the original here:
How to deal with the challenges of cloud storage vs. SAN - TechTarget

Organizations across industries have been forced to adapt and adjust digital transformation initiatives to meet the needs of a changing world. While the healthcare industry has a history of embracing new technologies and digital transformation (DX) more slowly than other industries, COVID-19 has served as a driving force for the recent acceleration of such initiatives.

With a shortened timeline to launch new technologies, security and business continuity flaws can quickly arise. Therefore, it is critical that healthcare organizations take the necessary steps to review their IT infrastructure to ensure that new / existing technologies meet the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) as well as perform critical data security and backup functions to ensure business continuity.

As the healthcare industry adapts to new patient and physician needs, the demand for cloud-based solutions and telehealth offerings has increased. In 2019, only 11 percent of U.S. consumers used telehealth offerings, but now, 46 percent of consumers conduct their healthcare appointments via telehealth platforms. Additionally, according to Dattos 2020 State of the MSP report, upwards of 70 percent of respondents, including managed service providers (MSPs) who work with healthcare institutions, are projected to use Microsoft 365 cloud services within the next two years and anticipate cloud migrations to be the top business driver in 2020.

Some of the most recent healthcare organizations shifting to cloud computing services include Cerner, Allscripts, and MEDITECH. But what these companies, and many others, may not realize is that the cloud solutions they choose such as Google G suite and Microsoft 365, dont provide the level of security and business continuity processes needed to protect sensitive data, while remaining HIPAA compliant.

This is because the cyber threat landscape is expanding rapidly. In fact, 75 percent of healthcare organizations have experienced a cyberattack in their lifetime; 53 percent in just the last year. COVID-19 related fear and uncertainty adds to the chaos with malicious hackers employing techniques related to the pandemic to infiltrate healthcare organizations. In order for healthcare cyber security teams to be able to effectively address the threat landscape, improve their overall security posture and protect patient data, it is critical that they take a proactive approach to IT by implementing an effective software-as-a-service (SaaS) protection solution.

While moving to the cloud is an important and necessary step to meet DX demands, several risks must be considered and monitored throughout the process. First and foremost, data created in cloud-based offerings like Microsoft 365 and Google G Suite are just as vulnerable to accidental deletion, ransomware, and other corruption as data stored in on-premise applications. Additionally, many SaaS application user agreements state that data protection, data-level security, and long-term retention are ultimately the responsibility of the end-user.

This is why many cloud-based vendors like Microsoft typically recommend a shared responsibility model, a third-party backup solution (such as SaaS protection), in its Services Agreement. In other words, adding SaaS protection will secure the organizations data against service interruptions, loss of service due to natural disaster or power outage, and prevent unnecessary downtime, which is especially crucial for healthcare organizations which are currently at an increased risk of attack or disruption.

Not only do healthcare organizations have to worry about cyber and data corruption threats when moving to the cloud, but they also have to keep in mind federal regulations, such as HIPAA. For many industries, storing data for extended periods of time is a nice-to-have, but for healthcare, it is legally mandated. Healthcare organizations are required to store patient data for seven years, so loss of data isnt an option.

As the industry shifts to the cloud, cloud solutions such as Microsoft Office 365 will house data for 90 days, which simply wont cut it in healthcare. For example, if an employee were to leave a healthcare institution, the data on their device and account will only be stored for up to 90 days. That means data generated from various patient encounters would be wiped clean, which is in violation of HIPAAs requirements for every healthcare organization to store any and all patient data for seven years.

The healthcare industry as we know it has changed forever. Those institutions that learn and adapt to the changing landscape will come out of the pandemic stronger than ever. Healthcare organizations need to be equipped to meet the growing demand for cloud-based offerings, and securely meet those expectations.

Adopting a cloud-based solution is a crucial first step in a successful DX strategy, but without the proper proactive security measures in place progress stalls and weaknesses become more apparent. Its only a matter of time before its simply too late to patch weaknesses and critical patient data is lost for good, or worse stolen and exploited.

By investing in an effective SaaS protection solution, healthcare organizations can put their worries aside when it comes to data storage and security vulnerabilities and focus on providing the best possible care to their patients.

See more here:
Securing healthcare organizations when moving to the cloud - Techradar

Since the beginning of the pandemic, there has been a huge disconnect between the economy and the stock markets. Despite second-quarter GDP dropping by 33%, the stock market quickly recovered its losses. Most of the markets gains were concentrated in tech as it was the most resilient and many companies actually saw an increase in sales.

At one point, the Nasdaq was almost 20% above its pre-coronavirus levels. However, in September, we got a much-needed correction with the Nasdaq dropping by nearly 15%. While there were concerns that a bubble was forming in tech, recent earnings reports validate much of the gains in stock prices.

As the tech industry is set to grow substantially in the future, investors should use the market dip to add exposure to technology. ETFs such as Vanguard Information Tech ETF (VGT), iShares Expanded Tech Software Sector ETF (IGV) and First Trust ISE Cloud computing Index Fund (SKYY) can help investors get an all-round exposure to different tech companies.

Vanguard Information Tech ETF (VGT)

VGT invests in notable tech companies of varying market sizes operating in any of the three segments hardware, software, and consulting. This top-heavy ETF allocates a large proportion of its assets to large-cap tech companies, thereby reducing the volatility of the fund. VGTs major holdings include Apple, Inc. (AAPL), Microsoft Corp (MSFT), and Visa, Inc. (V), which make up for 39.6% of its total assets. It has $36.87 billion worth of assets under management (AUM).

VGT has an expense ratio of 0.1% versus the category average of 0.51%. It has returned 23.3% year-to-date and 49.8% in the past six months. VGT pays an annual dividend of $2.87, which yields 0.94% based on its current price. The ETFs dividend payout grew at a CAGR of 19.5% in the past three months.

VGT has gained more than 85% since hitting its 52-week low of $179.45 in March. The ETF hit its 52-week high of $340.74 in September.

How does VGT stack up for the POWR Ratings?

B for Trade Grade

B for Buy & Hold Grade

B for Overall POWR Rating.

It is also ranked #24 out of 94 ETFs in the Technology Equities ETFs group.

iShares Expanded Tech Software Sector ETF (IGV)

IGV primarily invests in mid-cap tech companies operating in the United States. These up-and-coming companies have huge growth potential, and thereby this fund is ideal for investors looking to make substantial capital gains. However, IGVs top holdings include several well-known tech companies with huge market valuation and they help mitigate the overall risk of the portfolio. This passively managed fund with an annual turnover of 0.46% tracks S&P North American Technology- Software Index. It has an AUM of $5.04 billion, with major portfolio holdings such as Adobe (ADBE), Microsoft, and Salesforce.com Inc (CRM) accounting for 25.8% of it.

IGVs expense ratio of 0.46% is relatively lower than the category average of 0.51%. The ETF has gained 28.4% year-to-date, and 50.3% in the past six months. IGVs annual dividend of $1.24 yields 0.41% based on its current price.

IGV has gained more than 90% since hitting its 52-week low of $176.23 in March. The ETF hit its 52-week high of $337.08 in September.

Its no surprise IGV is rated a Buy in our POWR Ratings system, with a B for Trade Grade and Buy & Hold Grade. It is ranked #28 out of 94 ETFs in the Technology Equities ETFs group.

First Trust ISE Cloud computing Index Fund (SKYY)

SKYY primarily invests in cloud computing tech companies operating in the United States and globally. It has an AUM of $4.81 billion and invests in companies mainly listed in the ISE Cloud Computing Index. However, it is an actively managed ETF, with an annual turnover of 85%. SKYYs top holdings include several fortune 500 companies such as Amazon (AMZN), Microsoft, Alphabet (GOOGL), and Alibaba (BABA). It has $4.81 billion worth AUM.

SKYY has returned 27.1% to its investors year-to-date, and 55.5% in the past six months. SKYY has an expense ratio of 0.6%, slightly higher than its category average. But given its year-to-date performance, its worth spending a little higher for this fund. It pays $0.18 annually as a dividend, which yields 0.23%. SKYYs dividends have increased at a CAGR of 39.2% in the past three years.

SKYY gained more than 90% to hit its 52-week high of $86.15 in September since hitting its 52-week low of $45 in March. SKYY is rated a Buy in our POWR Ratings system, with a grade of B in Trade Grade and Buy & Hold Grade. It is currently ranked #29 out of 94 ETFs in the Technology Equities ETFs group.

Want More Great Investing Ideas?

7 Best ETFs for theNEXTBull Market

Is the Stock Market Correction Over?

Chart of the Day- See the Stocks Ready to Breakout

VGT shares were trading at $296.82 per share on Friday afternoon, down $4.98 (-1.65%). Year-to-date, VGT has gained 22.28%, versus a 3.60% rise in the benchmark S&P 500 index during the same period.

Aditi is an experienced content developer and financial writer who is passionate about helping investors understand the dos and don'ts of investing. She has a keen interest in the stock market and has a fundamental approach when analyzing equities. More...

Read the original:
VGT: Buy the Dips in These 3 Tech ETFs - StockNews.com