It's interesting to see how "potential customer" interests have
changed over the last 5 years.
In 2003, when I was first meeting with customers, talking about this
product we were working on, everyone agreed that they had challenges
in their network with remote users. The challenges varied — either
performance of centralized applications/servers, or backing up their
remote servers (ok, and a few who wanted to centralize). But
everyone blamed bandwidth as the culprit for poor
performance. Often they couldn't afford the larger links, but
sometimes they had already upgraded and were scratching their heads as
to why it didn't help as much as last time.
So, since they viewed it as a bandwidth problem, we'd explain our
killer compression (SDR), and they'd spend 90% of the meeting focused
on that, then graciously allow us to talk about what we
wanted to discuss, which was how transaction prediction (and VWE)
would ameliorate the effects of latency and really speed things up.
Sometimes light bulbs would nearly visibly go off over people's heads,
usually I got a "hm, I'm sure that'll help too, now back to SDR, what
happens when..."
Later they'd test the product (as no one believed our speedup
claims...remember WDS hadn't even been invented as a term and we were
this dinky startup), and be amazed. The vast amount of their
speedup, of course was due to transaction prediction, the majority of
the time.
So, how about 2008? Last week I was meeting with a large financial
enterprise, discussing their challenges. They knew that latency was
the root of application performance problems, and we spent most of the
time talking about that (still did discuss SDR — as they'd rather not
get more OC3s). But they were puzzled with their test results —
things were clearly faster (i.e. stopwatching user actions), and the
reports showed dramatic bandwidth reduction on the Steelhead, but the
routers reported the WAN links were still full — where were the
"savings" coming from. Anyone see the answer to this mystery?
Well, the data reduction enabled more traffic to flow, and the
transaction prediction stopped applications being bottlenecked on the WAN, also
enabling more traffic to flow, so... People got more done — in
the same amount of time — thus the WAN was "full again." It's sort of
Parkinson's
Law experienced in a different domain (and with a more hopeful spin).
So, how far have we come? It's mixed, the great news is that people
are aware of latency and it's insidious effects. We still have a ways
to go with the second order implications of this though, i.e. that
filling a WAN link can actually be a good sign. And someone needs to
come up with a way to measure ROI on knowledge workers — surely them
getting more done in a day is valuable to the enterprise.
So, what do you think...Latency*chattyness is now well understood, or still breaking news?