Exploring 8x8’s Cloud Native Journey with Chief Product Officer Dejan Deklich

Exploring 8x8’s Cloud Native Journey with Chief Product Officer Dejan Deklich

Emily and Dejan cover the following points:

  • 8x8’s journey to a leading cloud technology provider.
  • Why 8x8 decided to migrate to Kubernetes, a move that gave them the flexibility to run workloads wherever they want.
  • Dejan’s thoughts on the Kubernetes migration, and how it’s helped the company improve its operations. For example, Kubernetes has helped 8x8 migrate away from several legacy systems.
  • The biggest challenges and surprises that the 8x8 team experienced during their migration journey, such as getting engineering teams to embrace a culture built around monitoring, observability, and documentation.
  • How 8x8 has avoided “feature bloat” and maintained a product that performs at a high level, while staying true to the features that are important for its core customer base.
  • The strategy of obtaining buy-in from stakeholders and fellow executives by focusing on business problems, instead of technical issues. This included cost, velocity of innovation, global scale, and so on.
  • How 8x8’s cloud-native architecture has made it faster and easier to scale.

Transcript



Announcer: Welcome to The Business of Cloud Native podcast where we explore how end users talk and think about the transition to Kubernetes and cloud-native architectures.



Emily: Welcome to The Business of Cloud Native. I'm Emily Omier, and I am talking with Dejan Deklich, from 8x8.



Dejan: So, I'm the Chief Product Officer at 8x8. To give you an idea, 8x8 is now 16 or 1700 employees worldwide, 450 million in revenue, give or take, offices all over the world, customers all over the world. I'm responsible for all product management, engineering, QA, project management operations for all the products worldwide for 8x8.



Emily: Can you give me a little bit of an idea of 8x8’s history in the Cloud?



Dejan: So, 8x8 has been around, probably, a lot longer than most companies you're talking about. We've been public 30 years, give or take. We have been in the business of communication and collaboration since early 2000s. As you can imagine, we have gone through so many different tech stacks, architectures, and so on, that it is pretty amazing.



We have, in the last several years, done a massive cleanup and rebuild of our software stack. We rebuilt pretty much all of the mobile apps, desktop apps, web apps. We rebuilt the platform starting with billing and provisioning all the way down to how the voice traverses the world. So, it's been a incredible couple of years, incredible journey where I would argue we have gone from the early versions of hosted service to early versions of Cloud, maybe 10 years ago, and we are now what I would like to call a proper cloud technology company. And it's been a very interesting, difficult journey. We learned a lot. We messed up a lot of things, then we learned some more than they did it correctly.



Emily: When you first moved to Kubernetes, and the modern public cloud, what was the rationale? What were their business reasons?



Dejan: Those multiple steps there. We moved to public cloud I don't know, five, six, seven years ago. We ran a lot of things in Amazon. And to be fair, we still also have data centers around the world. So, let me explain quickly what we actually running because I think it's important. So, we have, I think 16 data centers around the world, and then we run in pretty much every region of Amazon, we use Google Cloud extensively, and we have now shifted a lot of workloads to Oracle Cloud. At the same time, business is threatening me with Alibaba Cloud and Tencent Cloud as something that might be coming our way in the next couple of quarters. So, data centers are there because on the networking layer, the Cloud does not yet give us what we need for the realtime voice and video transmission.



We actually are the best voice provider in the industry. We have proven that, and that's where your milliseconds really matter, therefore networking still sits in data centers. As soon as the backbone can be moved into Amazon, and we are told that could happen in the next three to four years, we will move likely everything to the Cloud. So, what we have generally in the Cloud are different applications, and the reason for that is simply the velocity of deploying and scaling them.



So, what matters to us is, on one hand, the global reach: we have customers in 150 countries around the world. We have to have data centers close to the customers. And the applications need to be as close to the customer as possible, therefore all the different regions of Amazon, and Google, and whatnot. So, as you can imagine, managing all of that, monitoring all of that is a non-trivial exercise.



So, we moved to Kubernetes, in large reason, simply because it is one underlying framework that allows us to run workloads wherever we want. So, to give you an idea, we launched a video meetings product to compete with Zoom. We had, on launch, a couple of hundred thousand users, nothing really. And then, this COVID-19 happened, and within a period of weeks, we now hit 15 million users. The only way you can scale a system like that is if you have a properly built underlying architecture, everything horizontally scalable.



I was blown away, everything really worked. People were super busy, but by having proper cloud architecture, we were able to actually scale, and fulfill the demand that we have seen worldwide. Now, the nice thing is, as you put more and more workloads on top of Kubernetes, you can shift them between clouds as you want, or data centers as you want. And I think that's number one reason why we went with Kubernetes.



I love Amazon, I love Google, and nothing makes me happier than writing them a million-dollar checks, but I also want to be able to move the workloads wherever I can run them cheaply. And, to me, that's very important. I don't have unlimited budget; I have to be able to play the game and get the most compute and the most bandwidth for the lowest cost that I can, and Kubernetes lets me do that.



Emily: And would you say that Kubernetes was a technical decision or a business decision or both?



Dejan: That's a good question. I think normally, the way we operate at 8x8, you start with the business problem. The business problem was we don't want to be locked into one cloud. We want to be able to run wherever we want to run, and on top of that, we have customers in Europe who are not very friendly towards Amazon, and want us to run on other clouds. And then, we took a peek: what can we do? What's the fastest and easiest way to do it? Turned out it was Kubernetes, so that's the way we went.



Emily: What did the move to Kubernetes, what was it like? What were some of the surprises?



Dejan: It was very interesting. It is still very interesting. So, on one hand, the good thing was we have already broken the monoliths in the past God knows how many years, into services. But to get things running properly in Kubernetes, you have to go a bit deeper, you actually have to really clean up your code, and so on, and so on. So, one thing that I thought was incredibly useful was this allowed us to, for the first time in 8x8 history, create a proper template for a service where all yo...

Jaksot(267)

ATO special episode with Peter Farkas

ATO special episode with Peter Farkas

In this special episode recorded at All Things Open, I talk with Peter Farkas, CEO and co-founder of FerretDB. We talked about about MongoDB and the license change fiasco and why Peter wanted to build an open source company and never considered building a non-open source company. The biggest 🤯 in this episode was about enforcing what it means to be open source; in particular, FerretDB positions itself as a truly open source alternative to MongoDB, and has received threatening letters from MongoDB as a result. How do you enforce it when a company claims to be open source but does not use an OSI-approved license? How well do the average users actually understand the license implications, and if a big company says they have an open source license even though it’s source-available, not open source, how much will people understand the difference? If you want another perspective on the enforcement of advertising around open source licenses, listen to the episode I recorded with Stefano Maffulli, also at All Things Open.

12 Marras 202416min

Selling Peace of Mind with Bhaskar from YottaDB

Selling Peace of Mind with Bhaskar from YottaDB

This week’s full-length episode is with Bhaskar, founder of YottaDB. This episode was recorded on-site at All Things Open last week, and we covered a wide range of topics. Including:How the open source ecosystem, and the open source business ecosystem, has changed over the past 30+ years.Who can responsibly self-support an open source database, and who really needs to have someone to call if things go wrong. The spectrum of professionalism among open source developers How YottaDB started out as a project developed inside a larger company that was in financial services; and Bhaskar decided to spin it out as it’s own company.The challenge articulating the value of support contracts, especially for software that is reliable. Bhaskar says he is selling peace of mind more than anything else; and he works with customers to avoid incidents — because ultimately avoiding an incident is a better outcome for everyone than a quick recovery from an incident. How to convince people that they are actually not as good at managing open source databases as they think they are. We also talked about conference strategies: according to Bhaskar, the way he’s decided which conferences to exhibit at is a series of trial and error — and by the way, this is something I’ve heard from many people. Yes, you have to think about where your customers are, not where your friends are, but sometimes you don’t know ahead of time which conferences are going to have the best ROI. I’m working with YottaDB right now on how to differentiate themselves in the crowded database market — and we talk about that process a bit right now. If you’re having trouble standing out in a crowded market, you might want to work with me.

6 Marras 202429min

ATO Special Episode with Tatiana Krupenya of DBeaver

ATO Special Episode with Tatiana Krupenya of DBeaver

This special episode of The Business of Open Source with Tatiana Krupenya, CEO of DBeaver, was recorded on site at All Things Open 2024. It’s a short conversation, so we addressed one main question: What is the difference between running an open source company versus as proprietary software company? Tatiana says the difference is big — and it’s complicated. The bottom line: Your OSS can be your main competitor, and your customers have to really see the value in your commercial offering if you want to make sales. ## If you aren't sure how to talk to your potential customers are about why they should use your commercial offering, you might want to work with me.

5 Marras 202413min

Behind the Scenes of the Open Source AI Definition with Stefano Maffulli

Behind the Scenes of the Open Source AI Definition with Stefano Maffulli

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Stefano Maffulli, Executive Director of the Open Source Initiative, about the definition of open source and… the definition of open source AI. We recorded this episode on-site at All Things Open, so there’s a little bit of background noise. We talked about why OSI felt like it needed to develop a definition of open source AI, how “open source” is enforced, and the thought process behind the definition that the OSI ultimately published. We talked about open data quite a bit — different kinds of data, what kind of information and data is important to researchers and professionals in the AI space, and if there’s a way to include AI models that are trained on proprietary data in the definition of open source AI. If you are interested in open source AI, definitely check out this behind-the-scenes discussion of how, and why, this definition was published — and what the future likely holds for defining open source AI.

30 Loka 202432min

Price Anchors of Zero Dollars with Anais Concepcion and Paul Fitzpatrick

Price Anchors of Zero Dollars with Anais Concepcion and Paul Fitzpatrick

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Anais Concepcion and Paul Fitzpatrick , the co-CEO of Grist Labs and CTO of Grist Labs. We talked about managing growth of users versus growth of revenue, moving to an open source approach for technical, not technical, reasons, and open-source related product management questions for open source companies. Some really interesting themes we talked about:Moving from a SaaS first approach to also focusing on enterprise sales. Why they did that, what other sales channels that opened and what questions it also forced the company to addressUser personas versus buyer personasThe situations in which Grist is the best option — which incidentally I could not understand from the website or the project documentationThe relationship between the open source project and both enterprise sales and SaaS sign-ups. How open source has been critical for a strategic relationship Grist has with the French government, which has been important for increasing product development velocityGiving up ‘darlings’ or features that they really want to develop but that they don’t think would drive revenueThe difference Anais sees between running Grist and running non-open-source companies — one of the most interesting differences is that users often have a sense of ownership over the project that you just wouldn’t see in a fully proprietary How open source true believers often work in large companies and control budgets, and should not be underestimated. Why trying to sell based on features — including telling yourself that if you just had one more feature, you’d unlock all the sales — was a big mistake. Are you struggling with price anchors fixed around zero dollars, or can’t figure out how to manage the push and pull of developing open source and building a business? You might want to work with me.

23 Loka 202442min

Getting people to use the features you already have with Eric Holscher

Getting people to use the features you already have with Eric Holscher

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Eric Holscher, co-founder of Read the Docs. We had a really far-ranging conversation that included talking about why documentation is often so bad, why documentation should be a priority, but also Eric’s experience building Read the Docs and Write the Docs. This episode was interesting because it’s both about building an open source company and also about the importance documentation for software projects in general and open source projects. Some things we covered included: What is documentation? Is it a marketing effort, is it a part of the project itself? Eric talks about how good documentation for an open source project is a clear signal of a level of seriousness for the project. How Read the Docs was really started to support open source projects, and that is part of why there’s no enterprise installs — either you use the open source code on your own, or you use the hosted product.How Eric sees building in the open as a way to help other people become better software engineers, but that ‘helping companies use Read the Docs for free’ is not the reason he wanted to build an open source company, and he’s still not sure how to feel about the fact that this happens. You don’t get bonus points for being open source or bonus points for being bootstrapped — it won’t prevent a potential customer from using a competitive product because it has a feature that Read the Docs doesn’t have. How open source in general — and even documentation in general — can help build brand value, but it is super hard to quantify and put in a slide in a board meeting to justify an investment in open source. The decision to build Read the Docs as a business stemmed from the pressure that Eric got from having a successful open source project. How they tried very hard to avoid accepting advertisements, but they should have started doing so much sooner because it turned out advertisements is well-aligned with the things they want to be working on. The difference in risk between being open source for a database company versus an app-level open source project like Read the Docs; for Read the Docs one of the risks is the brand damage associated with people running the OSS on-prem and doing a bad job. Are you the founder of an open source company and struggling with figuring out how to manage the relationship between the project and product? You might want to work with me. Enjoy the show? Help it reach more people by leaving a review and sharing with your friends.

16 Loka 202445min

Open source companies' reputation problem with Chris Holmes

Open source companies' reputation problem with Chris Holmes

Today on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Chris Holmes, co-founder and CEO of Greymatter. Greymatter is deeply involved in the open source ecosystem and maintains the Go Envoy Control Plane, but Chris is adamant that it is not an open source company. We had a great discussion about why that is, what it means for the company and the conversations he ends up having around open source with his customers and partner companies. Some particularly interesting points that came up:Customers worry that buying Greymatter could force them to buy enterprise versions of open source software — and Chris thinks that this could be a symptom of the fact that many users expect that they’ll end up being forced to pay for something they don’t want to pay forHow open source companies, and open source projects in general, can be viewed as risky if they are only backed by one companyWho is gonna pay for open source? How if you are going to get away from open source projects being aggressively monetized, big companies have to put their money where their mouth is and pay for open source development directlyWhy and how to get started selling to governments. Yes, the sales cycles are longer but the deals tend to be very sticky once you get in — and why Chris actually finds it easier to sell to the military than to large enterprises. What benefits Greymatter gets from being a maintainer of the Go Envoy Control Plane. Struggling with how to get your product strategy right, and find the right balance between your open source project and your commercial offering? Not sure how your user audience and customer market relate to each other? You might want to work with me.

9 Loka 202444min

Building your product with your customers with David Höck

Building your product with your customers with David Höck

This week on the Business of Open Source, I spoke with David Höck, co-founder of Vendure. We talked about switching licenses from MIT to GPL, the ways that Vendure is different from it’s competitors and how architectural decisions can be a powerful differentiator for an open source company. Favorite quote: “You need to build your product together with your clients.” Some specifics we talked about that you should pay attention to: Why they switched to GPL in order to encourage more people to reach out to them and get more visibility into who was using their open source projectOn the other hand, they wanted to make sure that big companies building commercial platforms on top of Vendure’s platform are forced to pay for a commercial license. They also wanted to choose a less-permissive license, but something that was still well-known and wouldn’t cause a lot of confusion among users or potential customersThe difference between being happy with people using your software for free, and being happy with competitors using your software to build a competitive product, without offering any support to the underlying software. Do your customers care about whether you are VC-backed or bootstrapped? We had an interesting conversation about this, because Vendure is bootstrapped. I think we settled on a real important nugget — if your technology is really critical to the company, they will care about your long-term sustainability. Being bootstrapped can help convince potential customers that you are independent and will be sustainable for the long term. The top advantage of open source, David says, is the ability to get fast product feedback from a community. —> I just was talking with someone yesterday about this advantage of an open source strategy, I think it is under-discussed but extremely important. If you’re the founder of an open source company struggling with your product strategy — uncertain how to differentiate between project or product or how to differentiate the entire company in the ecosystem; don’t know what your project is supposed to do for your business; aren’t clear on the target market for your project or product — you might want to work with me. Find out more here.

2 Loka 202440min

Suosittua kategoriassa Liike-elämä ja talous

sijotuskasti
mimmit-sijoittaa
psykopodiaa-podcast
puheenaihe
rss-rahapodi
ostan-asuntoja-podcast
rss-lahtijat
pomojen-suusta
rss-rahamania
rss-startup-ministerio
rss-turvacast
taloudellinen-mielenrauha
rss-neuvottelija-sami-miettinen
rahapuhetta
rss-h-asselmoilanen
oppimisen-psykologia
kasvun-kipuja
sijoituspodi
hyva-paha-johtaminen
rss-40-ajatusta-aanesta