Despite recent cloud service outages, security a bigger concern than availability

Wow. No sooner did I finish writing about how the Google and Microsoft outages were not a reason to lose confidence in the cloud, than Amazon went down. The online retail site—and its associated cloud services—were down for just under half an hour Monday afternoon. I stand by my assertion that the sky is not falling, but there’s more to using the cloud than just availability.

Amazon.com was the third major cloud service to suffer an outage in the last week.

Over on WindowsITPro.com, Paul Thurrott summed up the hysteria over cloud outages nicely. “And of course, the cloud computing doubters—who, like global warming doubters are increasingly at odds with reality—will argue that such outages prove that our move away from on-premises hardware and local storage is nothing but a temporary trend.”Let’s start with some perspective, breaking down the math like I did yesterday for Google and Microsoft. Amazon was down for about 25 minutes (although I’ve seen reports from 15 minutes to 40 minutes). In the grand scheme of things, Amazon was down for an infinitesimally small period of time. Depending on the estimate you go with, Amazon lost about $5 million in retail commerce during that timeframe—or about two percent of what it cost Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos to buy the Washington Post, or about two thousandths of a percent of his net worth.

Thurrott also pointed out the irony of how many users turn to Internet-based services like Facebook or Twitter to complain about cloud outages and declare the impending death of this cloud fad.

The debate over cloud availability is silly. As I pointed out my post about the Google and Microsoft outages, local networks and servers are not impervious to outages, so the risk is essentially the same as it pertains to availability.

Security and privacy are more relevant cloud concerns than availability.

There are, however, other concerns that offer a much more valid argument against cloud services for some businesses. Chief among them is security and privacy.

The convenience of outsourcing the IT infrastructure to a cloud-based third-party comes with increased risk that your network traffic or stored data could be compromised in some way, either directly by the IT support personnel charged with maintaining your services, or inadvertently by exposing it to increased risk on Internet-based servers.

It doesn’t have to be that way, though. You can enjoy some of the benefits of cloud servers and storage without sacrificing control, or putting the data at increased risk by hosting your own private cloud, or using a hybrid approach that includes on-premise and cloud-based services.

For example, you could store your data locally in an appliance like the ioSafe N2. The NAS (network attached storage) device can hold terabytes of data in a redundant configuration inside a fire proof, flood proof enclosure. Best of all, the N2 connects to the network and to the Internet, and it makes the data available from virtually anywhere, and from any computer or mobile device.

Another option is to choose a hybrid cloud solution like Egnyte. Egnyte does provide cloud file storage, but it can also connect and sync with local storage platforms.

Just keep in mind that this approach has tradeoffs. In order to gain greater security and privacy, you have to take responsibility for managing and maintaining the servers and data, which is arguably one of the biggest benefits of cloud services for small businesses. Also consider the fact that the third-party cloud support personnel might know more than you do about security and privacy, so managing it yourself may give you an illusion of greater security and privacy, while actually putting your servers and data at greater risk.

Tony is principal analyst with the Bradley Strategy Group, providing analysis and insight on tech trends. He is a prolific writer on a range of technology topics, has authored a number of books, and is a frequent speaker at industry events.
More by Tony Bradley

View the original article here

Report: Android tablet app availability still trailing iPad

Android tablets may have come a long way over the last couple of years, but the app selection still can’t compare to Apple’s iPad, according to a new report.

Source: CanalysCanalys listed the top 50 iPad apps and whether they’re available for Android tablets. (Click to enlarge.)

To compare the two platforms, research firm Canalys made a list of the top 50 paid and free iPad apps in the U.S. version of Apple’s iOS App Store, based on aggregated daily rankings in the first half of this year. The firm then looked at how many of those apps are available for Android, along with how many are optimized for larger displays.

Canalys found that 30 percent of these top iPad apps were not available on Android. Another 18 percent were available, but not optimized for tablets. In other words, a little more than half of the most popular iPad apps are available as proper tablet apps for Android devices.

In fairness to Android, six of those unavailable apps—iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, Pages, Keynote, and Numbers—come directly from Apple. In some cases, Android users can even find alternatives that look great on their tablets: OfficeSuite, QuickOffice, Kingsoft Office, and Google Drive are all capable document editors that obviate the need for Apple’s mobile iWork suite. For photo editing, apps like Aviary and Photoshop Touch fill the void. Unfortunately, Android doesn’t offer anything for music creation on the same level as GarageBand, and there’s a shortage of good movie editing apps for tablets. (I know this because I’ve done my own head-to-head app comparisons.)

Facebook on an Android tablet can look pretty ugly...

It doesn’t take much time with an Android tablet to notice the other cracks in Google’s catalog. Twitter and Facebook both look ugly in Android form, especially on larger tablets where timeline updates stretch unnaturally across the screen. On the iPad, both apps make use of the larger screen with sidebars. ESPN ScoreCenter is another example of a poorly optimized app; unlike the iPad version, the Android app doesn’t let you use it in landscape mode and doesn’t make use of sidebars.

...especially when compared to the better-designed iPad version.

The only consolation is that these stretched out apps don’t look as bad on smaller tablets like the Nexus 7. Given that smaller screens account for the vast majority of Android tablet sales, most users won’t feel the burn as much as users of Google’s Nexus 10 or other large tablets.

But if Android is going to keep up with the iPad, its apps will need to look good on all screen sizes. It helps that the Google Play Store now promotes tablet-optimized apps, with a permanent “Tablet 101” spotlight and a “Designed for Tablets” toggle in every section of the store. Even so, Canalys’ report does a fine job of summing up the current state of iPad vs. Android apps.

View the original article here