 Live from the San Jose Convention Center, extracting the signal from the noise, it's theCUBE covering Hadoop Summit 2015, brought to you by headline sponsor Hortonworks, and by EMC, Pivotal, IBM, Pentaho, Teradata, Syncsort, and by Atunity. Now your hosts, John Furrier and George Kilburn. Hey, welcome back everybody, I'm Jeff Frick. You're watching theCUBE, we're a day three of Hadoop Summit 2015 in San Jose, California. We've been going three days of wall-to-wall coverage. We're getting towards the end of the show, but we've still got a few great interviews lined up for you. Joining in this segment by co-host George Gilbert, our new analyst from Wikibon, we're excited to have on. And for this segment, Joe Goldberg, Solutions Marketing from BMC. Welcome, Joe. Thank you very much. Glad to be here. I think first time on theCUBE, right? Absolutely, excited to be here. So what is BMC doing here at Hadoop Summit? So BMC is coming at the Hadoop or big data market rather from the enterprise perspective. We're kind of a traditional IT management company. The solutions that we're talking about here, we've had them out in the field with thousands of customers for over 30 years. And we've added support for Hadoop. And really what we feel we bring to this market is the ability to accelerate the delivery of big data applications and to be able to deliver them in a more robust, operationally ready state than they are today. So that's what we do. And what's kind of the secret sauce to do that? Why does that experience of 30 years be an advantage as opposed to a disadvantage or some of these kind of new technologies? So I would say the typical technology adoption curve is that you kind of begin with a set of functionality that you kind of start with and you mature it over time. By coming at it from the other perspective by adding that technology or support for that technology to very robust and mature set of capabilities that we already have, we feel we're providing just a tremendous value. Really what we're doing today and for context, when we talk to people, we tell them we're an Uzi replacement. That's kind of a technical discussion, but it kind of sets the context that tells them that we're talking about managing workflows. Now, just like in the traditional technology space, when it comes to big data in the Hadoop market, a good chunk of that work that's being done has to be done in batch and has to be managed that way. And the tools that are available in the existing environment with the ecosystem, I would say are relatively limited. And people have to do a lot of heavy lifting to get that integrated with the rest of their technology stack. And so that's what we do. We make it easier for them to do that. And when they've finished building their applications, which are now being delivered 10, 20, 30% faster than they would otherwise, when they get into an operational state, they run more reliably, they provide more governance, they provide enterprise capabilities that come for free while they're being able to actually build those applications more quickly. So it's kind of a real win-win for the developers as well as for the organization. You're touching on a theme that we keep hearing, which is, actually from our last guest on IBM, where Apache is incubating so much innovation that we're pushing two dozen projects that soon may be in a Hadoop distribution. And as you're telling us, so we can take an application that might require a couple of these different projects or a pipeline that might require a couple of different projects and you turn that into a batch workflow that fits your control. Yes. So tell us, obviously you've been in business in decades, so how has the control capability hardened and matured relative to Uzi, if that's a good example? And then how do those applications inherit that sort of enterprise hardening that they wouldn't have? So from our perspective, and really control-M architecture, by the way, I'm not sure I mentioned our solution before that, but it is called control-M, BMC control-M. It's matured exactly along very similar lines in a traditional space. We started way back on the mainframe. When distributed systems came along, we added that support. When ERPs came along, we added that support. So I would say that the analog between the sort of traditional evolution of technology and what's happening in Hadoop is very similar, but what's happening in the Hadoop or big data market is just in an incredibly compressed timeframe. So as we have learned from that experience of having to add a very broad cross-section of technology, supporting a lot of complexity, being able to deliver that capability not only to technology users within IT ops, but also enabling business users who've had an interest and have had some kind of interaction with or a need for that interaction with their traditional workloads, we're seeing exactly the same kind of patterns, but now instead of playing out over 10, 20, 30 years, it's happening out, playing out over 10, 20, 30 months. And so we're seeing that with the fact that you do, as you say, have pig and hive and scoop, and now we're adding Spark, by the way, we're adding support to our solution for Spark within the next month. We've added actually a development toolkit that allows us to literally, with minimal effort, and actually it's customer facing, to allow customers to add that same measure of support for any technology that they have as long as it has an application interface. So if a customer now decides that in addition to what they have within the core Hadoop distribution, they want to add flume, or Kafka, or Avro, or any of the hundreds of names and acronyms that you can throw out, we have that core platform with very rich functionality that already provides that support. So now, instead of having to do all the integration on their own, they literally pull from a pallet and drag and drop a workflow in seconds instead of having to build all of that on their own. And just a quick follow on, for me, you had said in addition to being able to orchestrate and control these batch workflows, you also said it gives them this enterprise sort of hardening, what specifically do you mean by that? Well, there are a number of features that have become more important for organizations over time. So auditing, for example, and all of the, what could, in some industries, is onerous governance that comes into play. Things like version management and control, being able to collect all the logs, not only for analysis purposes, but also for auditing so that somebody can literally come to an operational environment and say, I need to see how this thing ran on this particular day and be able to access all that information and show exactly what is the progression, being able to look back in history, being able to do the opposite, to be able to assess change impact. We're going to have either additional resources or we're going to have some kind of an outage over time that's going to reduce our resources. How's that going to impact our operational capabilities? All of those kinds of things are operational requirements that have arisen over time and have kind of become an expectation in the traditional environment. And we're seeing exactly the same thing. So if you looked at Hadoop a year ago, today there's more high availability. There is more auditing and governance capabilities within sort of the core. And that same set of requirements is also coming up for managing workflows, which are really key to operationalizing pretty much any application. So Joey, you talked about BMC's been around for a long time, 20, 30 years. I wonder if you can give a little perspective as to how kind of the growth and open source within the enterprise has really impacted your guy's solution, both in terms of, are you incorporating it into your own stuff, but really more the scope of the type of applications and the speed of the applications that you guys now have to support is very, very different than it was when, there wasn't kind of the speed of deployment and development as you said. A laundry list of acronyms and funny name projects. How has that impacted your business and what do you guys see as kind of an opportunity there? So, you know, being within this market, which is predominantly open source, that's a question that comes up all the time. We have taken, we kind of are maintaining a commercial approach to this. And, you know, one of the things that we feel that we have an advantage over the, sort of the open source community is that we have kind of this broad overarching interest in workflow management as opposed to being specific to a particular environment or application. So, it certainly is a challenge in terms of, you know, we get asked pricing questions and, you know, things of that sort, but we have realized that we had to respond from a corporate structure perspective to be able to maintain a speed of delivery. And so, what we have done is we've reorganized our R&D a little bit and actually focus on this particular market. So, what it allows us to do, you know, we kind of stack up and compare ourselves against Uzi against primarily, we have now revved our solution about three times as frequently as Uzi has. Because, you know, we know that we have to deliver new functionality. You know, we've added, I just was walking through the floor and encountered a company that's talking about Tajo, which is a, you know, a sequel on Hadoop solution that almost nobody has heard of, but that we've added support for a specific customer. So, we feel that we have positioned ourselves to be able to respond very quickly. Additionally, this component that I mentioned earlier that this toolkit, which we call application integrator, actually has a community associated with it. So, it's available to anyone who wishes to participate. And what that allows them to do is both to take from that community, as well as to contribute new integrations of what we call job types to that community. So, you know, those are our technical responses. From a business perspective, you know, open source, the code may be free, but that doesn't mean that using it and operationalizing it and incorporating it into your business is free. And so, there are so many different pricing and cost structures, and, you know, ours is just another flavor of it. So, we've found that the community is quite receptive to our position. I think everybody understands the practicality of having to stay in business and make money somehow. And ours is just another alternative. You know, a quick observation on something you just touched on. What we've heard is that people might acquire software, open source software, at a sort of low to zero cost. But when they want to put it into production, they're willing to pay. Yes. You know, it's like two different people. They get the developer win, or, you know, the initial dev-ups win, maybe. But when they, you know, they have to run the thing, they want a relationship, and they'll pay for that relationship. Is that a model that you see? We certainly have encountered that. You know, from, in a traditional enterprise sort of space, that relationship begins right from inception. And, you know, frequently our buyers in the past traditionally have been from IT operations or from the IT infrastructure folks. And so that's the way they begin the relationship. But you're quite right that today we see a, you know, the sort of the entry point, if you will, to be a little bit different. And so what we've been doing is, you know, we've been tweaking with our delivery model. So we've been making test drives available. We're working on making some additional sort of flavors of access to our software available via cloud providers and, you know, other public sort of sources. So, yeah, we absolutely understand that people are looking to consume initially in the development or the early stages to consume products in a slightly different way. And, you know, that's part of our organizational response that we are certainly, you know, finding ways to get our software into their hands. But, you know, ultimately keeping the end goal in mind, which is that they're going to operationalize it. And at that point, there's going to have to be a financial and economic relationship. Right, right. Well, Joe, thanks for stopping by. We're getting hooked from the guys over here. Joe Goldberg from BMC. Again, thanks for a first visit to theCUBE. Glad you could- Thank you very much. It's been a pleasure. Thanks for having me. Jeff Frick with George Gilbert. We're at a Duke Summit 2015. You're watching theCUBE day three of wall-to-wall coverage. We'll be back with our next guest after this short break. Thanks for watching.