US Archives - Page 2 of 2 - Latest News from Backup Technology

Does the UK lag behind in usage and adoption of cloud computing? Are UK businesses more sceptical of cloud computing than other nations?

A recent survey released by�Redwood Software�would suggest just that. The�survey�into the use of cloud computing by large US and UK firms (1,000 employees and above), conducted by Vanson Bourne, looked at usage levels of cloud computing and general opinion of cloud computing, e.g. data storage and automation of business processes. In general, the study found that significantly more US businesses are using cloud computing, for example, 58% of US businesses who took part in the survey use the cloud for private data storage compared to 35% in the UK. As well as data storage, 47% of US businesses use cloud computing for capacity management of IT resources compared to just 24% of UK businesses.

Not only is there a significant difference in current usage of cloud computing between the two countries, there is also a disparity in opinion of �its benefits. Of the 200 US companies who made up the survey �71% believed cloud computing would “improve agility in supporting business needs”, compared to just 47% of the 100 UK businesses. When asked if they thought that the cloud gave them a “faster return on investment” 57% of US businesses said yes compared to just 36% of UK businesses, while 45% of US businesses believed that cloud computing “reduced labour costs”, compared to 29% of UK businesses.

A difference in current usage is one thing, but the divide in opinion is more indicative of where cloud computing is heading in 2013. There is no doubt that the cloud is becoming more and more popular with a broader range of consumers, but it would appear that the cloud is set to grow by a larger extent in the US than it will over here in the UK.

The question of course is: Why is cloud computing still seen as a bit of a fad by so many UK businesses? There is some evidence to suggest that it’s implementation in Europe as a whole (and not just the UK) is not as effective as it could be, �something that the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) has targeted as a reason for relatively poor uptake of cloud computing. More specifically, the EESC believe that there should be more emphasis on how to move IT to the cloud rather than just promote its use. This is a valid point, as for many businesses, the thought of trusting other companies with their data or services is more than enough reason not to adopt cloud computing.

The EESC also feels that more emphasis should be put on the benefits of the cloud to SMBs, for example how it can allow them to use or offer services that previously were unavailable to them. In the same article, the EESC also expressed concern that the current cloud computing market will allow an “oligopoly” of non-European suppliers to form. The world’s biggest providers of cloud computing, e.g. Amazon Web Services (AWS), Rackspace and Citrix, are already based in the US, and their market share is ever increasing.

As things stand, there is no provider based in the EU that can hope to challenge the big US providers but the only way that will change is if more European businesses decide to adopt cloud computing.

A recent Backup Technology blog briefly touched upon the legal concerns that many businesses have when considering a move to the cloud. This post looks to explore those concerns further. Many of the concerns relate to the lack of regulation in cloud computing, which often makes some larger corporations fearful in case something goes wrong with the service.

Although cloud computing is picking up momentum, it is yet to be taken up on a large scale by big corporations, who still prefer to use hardware. Two of the reasons that many big corporations give for not moving more of their IT to the cloud is the concerns over responsibility for the service provided and data security. Understandably, lawyers of big corporations are concerned that when things do go belly up, they will not be able to hold the cloud provider responsible, and even more worryingly they may in fact be liable themselves. This is a major stumbling block for many large corporations who would otherwise be quite keen to make a push to the cloud.

There are many calling for tighter regulation of the cloud computing industry, as well as a change to legislation that is better suited to the cloud. As things stand, US law does not empower prosecutors to hold cloud providers accountable for criminal activity facilitated by the cloud. This is not to say that the cloud provider itself did anything illegal, but simply allowed crime to occur by hosting a service for the criminal organisation.

A prime example is that of CloudFlare and LulzSec. LulzSec, a hacking group with ties to other high profile groups such as Anonymous, used CloudFlare to host their operations during June 2011, in which they targeted websites such as that of the CIA, gaming website The Escapist and sandbox game, Minecraft. CloudFlare, a website optimisation and security company, managed to escape liability for the attacks even though they had been hosting LulzSec’s website for several weeks. In theory, CloudFlare could have helped with any attempt to prevent the attacks from happening but chief executive Matthew Prince chose not to take the website offline. In fact, his company did quite the opposite, and continued to provide their service designed to protect LulzSec’s website from attack.

A recent article in Cloud Times�has suggested that legislation needs to change to allow it to police the cloud computing industry properly. This is emphasised by the CloudFlare story, where a company was knowingly defending and hiding the website of a criminal organisation, but was not held accountable by any authority, because current legislation does not allow it. For cloud computing to be adopted by big business on a large scale, this is something that needs to change.