Container-based computing is one of those computing solutions whose benefits are almost entirely technological. It offers a great way to squeeze a great deal of processing power into a greatly reduced footprint. Radically controlling the space requires vendors and customers to embrace sometimes radical (if you consider water to be radical) cooling technologies with significant short- and long-term benefits.
In addition, at a time when data center owners are under pressure from facilities construction and maintenance expenses, rising power costs, and the desire (among some, if not all) to embrace more ecologically sustainable IT, containerized computing is green in just about every sense of the word. Since expanding such a facility requires little more than an empty space and appropriate utilities connections, once a company embraces these solutions, it is easy to expand them to suit evolving business requirements.
If containerized data centers are so great, why arent more companies adopting them? As with most things related to business, habits are hard to break. Organizations used to building, managing, and maintaining monolithic data center facilities tend to stick with what they know, and stubborn executives tend to like best what confuses them least. That said, container-based IT solutions have been finding their way into corners of the market where the combination of quick deployment, easy installation, and robust performance trumps conventional thinking.
So how does HPs POD stack up against the competition? Pretty well, though details are thin on the ground. The PODs density looks pretty impressive at first glance, but one should note that the HP container is also twice the length (40 feet versus 20 feet) of Suns Project Blackbox. We are also somewhat puzzled by HPs claim that the POD is the first offering of its kind designed to support a wide range of industry-standard technologies. The last time we looked, IBM and Rackable qualified as well regarded, industry-standard vendors, and Suns solution is available with x86-based servers.