" The pace of innovation in these two clouds is mind-blowing,"
Yes, it is. And highly annoying, too. Some of us just want the stuff to work consistently.
I mean, I like Office365 for email for students and employees - saves me having to maintain a fleet of local email servers. But after a while, it gets numbing to keep up with which features are changing this quarter, what new features (that we don't know how to admin yet, but the lusers will want to use the day after they come out) are coming out, what useful features are being taken away, etc?
It's like building a huge mansion on sand - sure the mansion as a whole is still up and mostly functional if you don't look too closely, but walls sometimes collapse, floors crack, and doors get stuck. So you repair them and just wait for the next round of problems. So the question becomes - are all these problems (and other things like data ownership/security, availability, etc) worth the benefit of not running our own servers? For email, I'd say YES. For general purpose stuff like SQL or file servers or AD, I'd say NO. That's not the kind of stuff I want to be a moving target dictated by Microsoft's marketing department.
And that's probably why Barracuda is in a hurt now - they built their business taking care of peripheral stuff - email filtering, backup, firewalling- most of which is fairly easy to move to the cloud, and even easier to justify to Upper Management of why it was moved to the cloud (especially when MS is giving it to education customers for FREE). I feel sorry for them - I always liked their products back when we used them.