Why Emulating the Cloud Isn’t the Same as Being One
It’s easy to mistake progress for innovation. VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0 (VCF) introduces long-awaited features like VPC-style networking, developer-centric automation, and bundled services. But let’s be honest: this is not the future of cloud. This is infrastructure catching up to where the public cloud world already was ten years ago.
Example: Moving some concepts and features from VMware Cloud Director (vCD) to Aria Automation and then calling it VCF Automation is also not innovative. It was the right thing to do, as vCD and Aria Automation (formerly known as vRealize Automation) shared many overlapping features and concepts. In other words, we can expect VCF Automation to be the future and vCD will be retired in a few years.
Anyway, there’s a pattern here. Platform vendors continue to position themselves as “private cloud providers”, yet the experience they offer remains rooted in managing hardware, scaling clusters, and applying patches. Whether it’s VCF or Nutanix, the story is always the same: it’s better infrastructure. But that’s the problem. It’s still infrastructure.
In contrast, the real shift toward cloud doesn’t start with software-defined storage or NSX overlay networks. It starts with the service model. That’s what makes cloud work. That’s what makes it scalable, elastic, and developer-first. That’s what customers actually need.
Let’s unpack where VCF 9.0 lands and why it still misses the mark.
What’s New in VCF 9.0. And What’s Not.
Broadcom deserves credit for moving VCF closer to what customers have been asking for since at least 2020. The platform now includes a proper developer consumption layer, integrated VPC-style networking, a simplified control plane, and aligned software versions for different products. Yes, it feels more like a cloud. It automates more, hides more complexity, and makes day 2 operations less painful. All good steps!
The new virtual private cloud constructs let teams carve out self-contained network domains – complete with subnets, NAT, firewall rules, and load balancers – all provisioned from a central interface. That’s a meaningful upgrade from the old NSX workflows. Now, transit gateways can be deployed automatically, reducing the friction of multi-domain connectivity. The whole setup is better, simpler, and more cloud-like. Well done.
On the consumption side, there’s a proper push toward unified APIs. Terraform support, policy-as-code blueprints in YAML, and native Kubernetes provisioning give developers a way to consume infrastructure more like they would in a hyperscaler environment. VCF customers can onboard teams faster, and the lifecycle engine behind the scenes handles upgrades, certificates, and best-practice configurations with far less manual effort.
So yes, VCF 9.0 is a big step forward for Broadcom and for existing VMware customers. But let’s put that progress into perspective.
Cloud Features Delivered Years Too Late
The features we’re seeing now – developer APIs, VPCs, self-service provisioning, built-in security, elastic-like networking – these aren’t breakthroughs. They are basic expectations. Public cloud providers like AWS and Azure introduced the VPC concept more than 10 years ago. Public clouds have offered full-stack policy automation, service mesh observability, and integrated load balancing for most of the last decade.
What VCF 9.0 delivers in 2025 is essentially what existing on-premises customers were asking for back in 2020.
The bigger concern is that VMware has always been the benchmark for enterprise-grade virtualization and private infrastructure. When customers bought into VCF years ago, they expected these capabilities then, not now. Broadcom has simply shipped the version of VCF that many customers assumed was already on the roadmap, five years ago.
And even now, many of the services (add-ons) in VCF 9.0 like Avi load balancing, vDefend IDS/IPS, integrated databases, and AI services, are optional components, mostly manually deployed, and not fully elastic or usage-based. These are integrations, not native services. You still need to operate them.
The Core Problem: It’s Still Infrastructure-Led
That’s the real difference. VCF and Nutanix remain infrastructure-led platforms. They require hardware planning, capacity management, lifecycle orchestration, and dependency tracking. Yes, they have APIs. Yes, they support Kubernetes. But at their core, they are platforms you need to own, operate, and scale yourself.
Cloud, on the other hand, is not about owning anything. It’s about consuming outcomes. VCF 9.0 and others are just not there yet.
The Illusion of a Private Cloud
This is why it’s time to call out the difference. Just because something looks like cloud – has some APIs, supports Kubernetes, uses words like “consumption” and “developer self-service” – doesn’t mean it actually behaves like cloud.
The illusion of a “private cloud” is seductive. You get to keep control. You get to use familiar tools. But control also means responsibility. Familiar tools mean legacy thinking. And a so-called private cloud, in most cases, just means more complex infrastructure with higher expectations.
That’s not transformation. That’s rebranding.
What VCF 9.0 delivers is an important evolution of VMware’s private infrastructure platform. But let’s not confuse that with cloud. Broadcom has moved in the right direction. They have shipped what customers needed years ago. But they are still delivering (virtual) infrastructure. Just better packaged.
Final Thought
You don’t transform your IT strategy by modernizing clusters. You transform it by changing how you consume and operate technology.
So the question isn’t whether your stack looks like “the cloud”. The question is whether you can stop operating infrastructure and start consuming services.
That’s the real line between emulating the cloud and actually being one. And as of today, VCF (and Nutanix) are still on the other side of that line. It’s not good. It’s not bad. It is what it is.
We must be very careful with our interpretation of the results. Just because someone is “planning” a reverse cloud migration, does it mean they are executing? And if they execute such an exercise, is this going to be correctly reflected in a future survey?
My interpretation? Just because one slide or illustration talks about repatriation does not mean, that the entire world is just doing reverse migrations now. Cloud migrations and reverse cloud migrations can happen at the same time. You could bring one application or some databases back on-premises but decide to move all your virtual desktops to the public cloud in parallel. We could still bring workloads back to our data center and increase public cloud spend. 
