Google's Story of Google Apps, 65-85% less energy, US GSA migrates 17,000 for a $285,000 savings (90% energy reduction)

Google had a viral video on The Story of Send.  Google just released a post that fits in the same theme with what could be "The Story of Google Apps."

The blog post is backed up with a paper.

The data that gives this story credibility is the win Google had for Google Apps with the US GSA.

Lower energy use results in less carbon pollution and more energy saved for organizations. That’s what happened at the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), which recently switched its 17,000 users to Google Apps for Government. We found that the GSA was able to reduce server energy consumption by nearly 90% and carbon emissions by 85%. That means the GSA will save an estimated $285,000 annually on energy costs alone, a 93% cost reduction.

The specifics of the GSA story are here.

It wasn't too long ago that any small business that wanted e-mail was seriously looking at putting an e-mail server on site.  What small business does that now?  Along with that came Office licenses.  Google is targeting this whole Office document e-mail system with cloud services that are much more efficient.

A typical organization has a lot more servers than it needs—for backup, failures and spikes in demand for computing. Cloud-based service providers like Google aggregate demand across thousands of people, substantially increasing how much servers are utilized. And our data centers use equipment and software specially designed to minimize energy use. The cloud can do the same work much more efficiently than locally hosted servers.

All of this is built on Google's green data centers.

We’ve built efficient data centers all over the world, even designing them in ways that make the best use of the natural environment, and we continue working to improve their performance. We think using the super-efficient cloud to deliver services like Google Apps can be part of the solution towards a more energy efficient future.

Posted by Urs Hoelzle, Senior Vice President for Technical Infrastructure

(Cross-posted on the Google Green Blog)

MacBook Pro or MacBook Air; Are you a Creator or Consumer?

Forbes has an article with a write who looked at the MacBook Pro Retina and chose the Macbook Air.

What is disappointed with articles like this is the author doesn't take the time to explain their needs, and why the MacBook Air was right for them then the MacBook Pro.

One of the simple questions to ask is whether you are Creator of content or a Consumer?  The growth of the iPad is due to how much people are consumers of content.  Any one who uses the iPad as their authoring tool slows their productivity.

The writer of the Forbes article is a Tech Journalist which would put him in the category of creator, but also a creator that pretty much sticks I would guess to words.  Why?

In his article he says his choice is a MacBook Air with 128GB of memory.

I got the low-end model with 4 GB of RAM and 128 GB of storage because that suited me well enough on the 11-inch I had, especially now that I can store data in the cloud.

As soon as you take lots of photos, let alone add videos, the 256GB of storage is a challenge.  Loading photo imaging and video imaging apps will also push the 4GB RAM limit.

Almost everyone talks about the Retina display.  What I am looking at is what Mac do I get for a wide range of researching topics (lots of windows open), image and video editing.  Getting used to the MacBook Air where the SSD drive was done well, getting 512 GB of storage is a priority.  Getting 8GB of memory makes sense with the 512 GB of SSD.

A Macbook Air has a 4GB limit.  the 512 GB SSD is an expensive option that gets you quickly up to the price of the MacBook Pro.

For me, I decided to get a MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM, 512 GB SSD, and Retina display.  I spend time bouncing between MarsEdit, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Aperture, Final Cut Pro.  I travel, but I don't spend a lot of time on my laptop while travelling, rarely using my computer while on a flight. 

Few of you do what I do, so buying MacBook Pro Retina based on my buying one doesn't make sense.  

Why should you buy a MacBook Pro or MacBook Air because another writer says it is right for them?  How many of you are journalists?

Why I ordered a MacBook Pro - More RAM, SSD, and Pixels

I love my MacBook Air that I bought as part of a switch from Windows.

The MacBook Pro is announced and I wasn't interested at first, but after thinking for a bit, I could use three things.  More RAM, More SSD space, and More pixels.

There is plenty of news like how the MacBook Pro is aimed at the heart. Really? You think this is the issue?

The new MacBook Pro with Retina Display is not a particularly practical unit. It appeals to your heart, not your head. I will grant the argument that it is practical for a very small set of media professionals. The $2,199 low-end model, though, only comes with a non-upgradable 256 GB SSD drive. A media pro can blast through that piddling amount of storage space in no time at all.

With a heavy heart, I have decided not to the buy the gorgeous new MacBook Pro with Retina Display. I lust after the idea of 2,880 by 1,800 pixels gloriously showing off my awesome photos of the Grand Tetons, Half Dome and small children running from the cold droplets of a sprinkler system under a hot summer sun.

The MacBook Pro is getting bad reviews as hard to service.

Apple's new Retina display MacBook Pro has been taken apart and examined from the inside, revealing that the RAM is soldered onto the logic board and cannot be upgraded, and that the proprietary solid-state drive memory was supplied by Samsung.

The details come from iFixit's extensive teardown of the next-generation MacBook Pro, which the site published on Wednesday, just two days after the new notebook was announced. The solutions provider took particular issue with the design of the new MacBook Pro with respect to repairability, giving it a lowest possible score of 1 out of 10.

Why did I order a MacBook Pro after all this news?  

Versus my MacBook Air.  More than 4GB of RAM would be really nice.  The 4GB is getting painful.  256GB of SSD is just too constraining.  Everybody talks about the display with more pixels, but that is less of an urgent need.   My eyes aren't screaming for more pixels.  Seeing the world a bit fuzzy is OK for abstract thinking.

So, I took the leap and placed an order for 16GB of RAM with 512 SSD.  This is a significant upgrade from the MacBook Air I have.  The Air is fine, but I need more RAM and SSD space.  I don't live all in the cloud.  Do you?  

Wouldn't it be great if Microsoft told the XBox Live Data Center story

Harvard Business Review has a post on how cool XBox is. 

Xbox Live is easy to miss. It's a $2 billion revenue business embedded within the $9 billion revenue entertainment/devices business of the $73 billion revenue of Microsoft overall. If Xbox Live was a standalone business, its 40 million members would be dwarfed by user base of Linkedin, Twitter, Zynga and Facebook. But while Xbox Live's membership is less than 20% of the size of Zynga (a comparable gaming company), it likely has nearly double the gross profit that Zynga generates. Not bad for the old guy.

I discovered Xbox Live first via my brother-in-law Joel, a technology executive and gaming enthusiast from Seattle, and my junior high buddies, Emmett and Reid, from Hawaii. I hadn't played video games in years, but Xbox Live was a game changer. We were able to play each other and talk to one another despite living thousands of miles apart. It was a way to compete with one another as we caught up. We could also compete as a team against others, much like playing pick up sports at the park or having poker night. I positioned it to my wife (who was less than enthusiastic) as a way of keeping up with my friends from home. This worked at first, although the jig was up when she would ask how Emmett's family was doing and I'd respond with, "Um...I forgot to ask, but his sniper skills are just fine."

This got me thinking.  How cool would it be to have the XBox Live guys to give a talk at a data center conference.  Being ex-Microsoft, I have some friends over there, I could give it a try.

I wonder which data center conference I would try to get them in.  Huh, the one that says I don't have media status and cannot attend as media and has a focus on its analyst  services and vendor sponsorship.  Nah.  To be clear there are two data center conferences I think of when I eliminate the media status issue.

What conference would be supportive and give a good spot for a presentation and have a large attendance?  The list is short.

Part of the HBR story is how the XBox live story is an inspiration for old established companies.  I think I just thought of some other people who I could contact at Microsoft.

Best Part for a Data Center Geek's ride of Harry Potter Dragon Challenge - View of Cooling Towers

7x24 Exchange in Orlando just finished and I have a bunch of posts queued in my head.  One is on the party on Tues night.

“An Evening at Universal Orlando®”

Get ready for an incredible event with 7x24 Exchange—a special event that fills three different venues at Universal CityWalk® in Universal Orlando® Resort. Take a side trip to New Orleans at Pat O’Brien’s®, explore the home of the king of reggae at Bob Marley–A Tribute to FreedomSM, and take the stage atCityWalk’s Rising Star nightclub.

Immediately following, you’ll enjoy desserts, rides and entertainment in The Wizarding World of Harry Potter™. In addition to taking in the sights and sounds of the incredible Hogsmeade™ village, you’ll also have access to thrilling attractions like Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey™, Dragon Challenge™and Flight of the Hippogriff™!

It’s an entire evening of magic and excitement—and it’s all yours!

Now, you can argue that this type of event is not needed at a Data Center conference.  There are plenty events that you pay more for and don't have theme park parties. One of the benefits of a good party though is people share their experiences.

The gang I hang out got the first ride on Harry Potter Dragon Challenge.  Skip the alcohol go straight to the best ride.  No lines.  Well there was a line of 8 people in front on us for the front row.  We rode the third row which was fortunate because the third row has the seat for "big shoulder guys" which meant we could accomdate the big shoulder guy in our group, not me.  The ride was awesome.  We then went for beers, wandered around.  We went back later and rode it again, but waited the extra 5 minutes to get in the front.  The front row is way better than the back seats!

How much better is the front?  You can see the cooling towers!!!  And, the experience is much better being thrown out in the front.

Later we were chatting with a water treatment systems sales person, chatting about the Dragon Challenge.  She told us how great the ride was and the ride operator said the best seat was in the back.  We laughed.  No way.  The best seat is in the front.  And, you can see the cooling towers.  We went back for one more ride.  She saw the cooling towers, and agreed she was oversold by the ride operator that the back was the best.  

How much better the front vs. back seat is a common debate amongst roller coaster fanatics.  

For data center geeks though, a view of the cooling towers clearly makes the front better than any of the seats to the back.

If you go to Harry Potter Dragon Challenge, sit in the front, see the cooling towers.  oh, that may be hard and painful waiting an hour or more.  You should have joined us at 7x24 Exchange.  We rode Dragon's Challenge 4 times, including the last ride of the night at 11:30, sat in the front three times and got multiple views of the cooling towers.

And, we have told this story many times to friends we ran into who were at the park as well.  A good party supports the sharing of the experience.