Ron Schmelzer at Cloud Computing Journal asks if private cloud computing is just some hype or marketing term, then he asks several industry insiders to define the term and offers their responses. The answers range from a company-owned location-independent virtualized service infrastructure to “it’s all hype, ignore it.”
Schmelzer himself offers the term “service-oriented cloud computing” as an alternative to the lingo “private.” But my observation is that each of the industry experts giving their impression – with the exception of the “it’s all marketing hype” argument – all had one thing in common: They defined private cloud computing as location-independent, virtualized, and governed by a single entity for that entity’s own purpose. That sounds like private to me.
Schmelzer goes out of his way to argue that private cloud computing is an unnecessary term. It may be, but it does define itself, consensus or not. If it isn’t public then it must be private. Even if the cloud exists on public servers, if they are managed in a private manner then I suppose that makes them private. Calling them “service oriented” makes about as much sense as saying that dinner rolls aren’t bread.