PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteSome links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
The Open Cloud Coalition (OCC) is a real industry group launched in October 2024 to advocate for more competition, interoperability and easier switching in cloud services. But its claim to speak for an open cloud market drew scrutiny because Google Cloud was a founding member while Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Microsoft were not listed. Microsoft went further, alleging that Google organized the coalition as an “astroturf” campaign. That remains Microsoft’s allegation—not an established finding.
The distinction matters: OCC’s membership raises a fair question about representation, while its stated policy goals address problems regulators have also examined. Neither point settles whether the coalition is independent of Google’s commercial interests.
What is the Open Cloud Coalition?
OCC launched in the UK and EU on October 29, 2024. It says it wants a cloud market built around open standards, interoperability, security, resilience, customer choice and competition. Its agenda includes reducing switching barriers and lock-in, and challenging restrictive licensing and commercial practices. The group is an advocacy coalition, not a neutral standards body.
Its launch announcement named 10 members: Centerprise International, Civo, Gigas, Google Cloud, ControlPlane, DTP Group, Prolinx, Pulsant, Clairo and Room 101. In December 2024, OCC said five more members had joined—Adarga, BlackBox Hosting, Dark Matter, DataVita and National Cloud—bringing the total it reported then to 15. That historical figure should not be mistaken for a current membership count. OCC’s current people and membership page lists an executive committee including representatives from Civo, DTP Group, Gigas, Google Cloud, Prolinx, Pulsant, Room 101, Clairo AI and DataVita.
#1 Best Overall
OCC describes its intended constituency as cloud providers, cloud users and policymakers. Its stated concerns—portability, interoperability and the cost of switching—are relevant to organizations choosing infrastructure, negotiating cloud contracts or planning a migration.
Sources: OCC’s launch announcement; its December 2024 membership update.
Why did an analyst call it “not so open”?
In a report about the launch, Info-Tech Research Group analyst Phil Brunkard questioned how representative a coalition promoting an open cloud market could be without AWS and Microsoft, two of the largest cloud providers. That is a criticism of representation. It does not establish that OCC formally bars those companies from joining, or that its internal voting is unequal. The launch materials did not list either as a member.
“Open” can mean several different things here:
- Open membership: Who is eligible to join, and who has chosen to do so?
- Open governance: Who sets policy positions, controls budgets and makes decisions?
- Technical openness: Can customers move data and workloads, use interoperable systems and avoid unnecessary dependence on one provider?
- Transparency: Are funding, conflicts of interest and research methods disclosed?
A group can advocate technical openness without representing every large provider. Conversely, a coalition’s chosen policy label does not demonstrate that its membership or governance is open. Brunkard’s objection is therefore a useful challenge to OCC’s breadth, not a verdict on every meaning of “open.” Network World’s coverage reports his criticism.
What did Microsoft allege, and how did OCC respond?
In a post dated October 28, 2024—one day before OCC’s launch—Microsoft called the group an “astroturf” organization. Microsoft alleged that Google organized it while obscuring its involvement, funding and control, and that the coalition was intended to influence policymakers and competition authorities against Microsoft. The post also pointed to Nicky Stewart, OCC’s senior adviser, and her earlier complaints concerning Microsoft and AWS during the UK cloud investigation.
Those are claims by Microsoft, a company with a direct commercial interest in the cloud competition dispute. Its post is evidence of Microsoft’s position, not an independent investigation proving the allegation. Google Cloud’s membership and prominent representation in OCC are documented; the available evidence cited here does not by itself establish secret funding, control of policy positions or a right of veto.
OCC rejected Microsoft’s characterization. In its October 2024 response, it said the coalition had 10 members, represented smaller providers and cloud users, and operated on a “one member, one vote” basis. It argued that its members had firsthand experience with market barriers and that concentration and lock-in harmed customers. These are OCC’s claims; the public response is not, on its own, independent verification of how governance works in practice.
To judge independence, readers would need evidence beyond a member list and a stated voting principle: formal governance rules, budget and funding disclosures, who appoints the executive committee, how research and policy positions are approved, and whether member disagreements are visible. The available materials establish Google’s involvement, but do not answer all those questions.
Rank #3
- Your Personal Streaming Server - Build your own Netflix-style media library and stream 4K movies, shows and photos to any device without monthly fees
- Create Your Own Cloud - Store your entire photo, video and music collection; access from anywhere with fast 282 MB/s transfer speeds
- Creator-Grade Backup Solution - Protect your irreplaceable content with automated backups to cloud services, external drives and remote NAS
- Multi-Layered Data Protection - Combine RAID redundancy, automated backups and snapshot technology to prevent data loss from any cause
- Smart Home Surveillance - Support up to 30 IP cameras with AI detection, instant alerts and secure remote monitoring
Does Google’s role invalidate the coalition?
No—not by itself. Google is a major cloud provider, and its membership can bring technical expertise, resources and direct experience to a debate about cloud services. It also competes with Microsoft and AWS and has its own commercial interests in how regulators define competition and address licensing, switching and interoperability.
Both facts belong in the assessment. Google’s participation does not automatically make OCC’s arguments false; neither does a “one member, one vote” claim automatically prove that Google has no influence. The relevant questions are whether financial and organizational ties are transparent, whether other members can shape or contest positions, and whether OCC applies its principles consistently to Google as well as its rivals.
Nor does the absence of Microsoft and AWS prove that OCC is closed. A coalition focused on challengers and users might intentionally avoid being dominated by the largest providers. But that focus means it should not be mistaken for a representative forum containing the whole cloud industry or for a neutral standards organization.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →What did UK regulators find after the launch?
The argument unfolded during official scrutiny of the UK cloud market. Ofcom referred the matter to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in October 2023. The CMA closed its cloud services market investigation on July 31, 2025. It concluded that AWS and Microsoft had significant market power and identified concerns involving data-egress fees, interoperability barriers and Microsoft software licensing. It recommended prioritizing possible strategic-market-status investigations into Microsoft and AWS.
These findings overlap with issues OCC has highlighted, but they do not endorse OCC or prove that it caused the findings. Regulators reached their own conclusions through an investigation. The overlap supports the point that switching costs, licensing and interoperability are substantive policy questions—not that every coalition claim or proposed remedy is correct.
In May 2026, the CMA also opened an investigation into Microsoft’s business-software ecosystem under the UK’s digital markets framework. In the EU, the European Commission continued examining cloud-computing interoperability, financial conditions and contractual issues under the Digital Markets Act; it said a final report was expected by May 2027. Those are separate regulatory processes, and neither should be presented as a final EU finding.
Sources: CMA cloud services market investigation; UK concurrency report for 2026; CMA Microsoft business-software investigation; European Commission cloud roundtables.
Recommended Free Tools
What the dispute means for cloud customers
For customers, the practical issue is not which corporate side wins a lobbying argument. It is whether a cloud choice remains workable and affordable over the life of a service—and what it would cost to leave. Before committing to a provider or architecture, examine:
Best Value
- COMPATIBILITY: Specially designed to mount Ubiquiti UniFi Cloud Gateway models UCG-Ultra and UCG-Max securely in place
- RACK SPECIFICATIONS: Standard 1U height rack mount bracket engineered for 10-inch rack installations, offering efficient space utilization
- MOUNTING SOLUTION: Provides stable and secure placement for your UniFi Cloud Gateway UCG Max or UCG Ultra device in server room or network cabinet setups
- PACKAGE CONTENTS: Includes one (1x) 1U 10-inch rack mount bracket specifically designed for UniFi UCG Ultra & UCG Max Gateway installations
- INSTALLATION: Purpose-built bracket ensures proper device positioning and reliable mounting in standard 10-inch rack environments
- Data transfer: Estimate the cost and time required to move large volumes of data out, not just the cost of storing or processing it.
- Licensing: Check whether software terms, discounts or bundled commitments change when workloads run on a different provider.
- Committed spend: Understand minimum-spend agreements, cancellation conditions and how unused commitments affect a migration.
- Proprietary dependencies: Identify managed databases, AI services, identity systems, networking and monitoring tools that would need replacement or redesign.
- Portability in practice: Kubernetes and infrastructure-as-code tools such as Terraform or OpenTofu can help standardize some layers, but they do not make an application automatically portable. APIs, data formats, operational skills and egress economics still matter.
- Exit and recovery plans: Document how to export data, restore critical services and operate during a provider outage or transition. Test the plan rather than assuming it will work.
Compare the total cost of a workload across plausible alternatives, including migration and exit costs. “Multi-cloud” is not automatically cheaper or safer: duplicating infrastructure can add operational complexity, and a design that depends heavily on one provider’s services may remain difficult to move even if it runs on portable infrastructure.
How to evaluate OCC’s claims
OCC’s advocacy can be useful input, but treat it as interested-party evidence, as you would research from any industry group whose members have commercial stakes. Check whether a claim is backed by disclosed data, a clear method and evidence that regulators or customers can verify. Ask whether the coalition addresses comparable conduct by Google, Microsoft and AWS, and whether its proposed measures would apply fairly across providers.
The same discipline applies to Microsoft’s accusation: distinguish documented membership from allegations about hidden control, and seek independent evidence before repeating the latter as fact. The strongest reading is neither that OCC is a neutral champion nor that Microsoft has proved it to be a front. OCC is a real coalition with a pro-competition agenda; Google’s role is significant and warrants scrutiny, while the central questions about funding and practical control require evidence beyond the public statements summarized here.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
OCC continues to publish policy material on cloud procurement, public-sector cloud, competition, AI-related lock-in and regulatory developments. Its latest-news page is one place to track its own positions; those positions should be read alongside regulator documents and evidence from other market participants.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
