Yes, a fad
This is why anecdotal evidence is broadly considered unreliable. Simply pointing out that someone mis-called a fad in the 50's does not have any bearing on the validity of my statement. Lots of tech fads have come and gone (PointCast, Clippy, DigiScent iSmell, Flexplay DVDs, etc.). How about a quote from someone saying "I told you so, those really were fads!".
The point is that the idea of letting a 3rd party store your sensitive corporate data and not even having a local backup copy of that data (the definition of "cloud" storage) is FAIL from the outset. But it's the current "hot thing" so some corporate execs are turning off their brains and running with it because their lackeys have told them what a great idea it is.
So what's going to happen? Someone is going to lose their data. Some corporation will lose hundreds of terabytes of intellectual property. This is inevitable. Chances are it will be due to a malicious cracker, possibly an agent of one of the nations actively working every day to crack into systems with the intent of disrupting operations or stealing data. One of these cloud storage companies will have a vulnerability they don't know about, and because they are storing so much data for so many corporations they will be a prime target worth throwing cracking resources at in abundance.
AFTER this event takes place, "cloud" storage will be a dead concept. It is simply too risky to entrust your critical data to a 3rd party, period.
As for "cloud" services, this is simply a rebranding of SOA; it's not anything new. Calling it "cloud" is a fad -- the name will be changed every few years to keep people thinking that something novel and groundbreaking has been created, when in fact it is nothing more than a small incremental improvement of what existed before. An exciting new name makes it easier to trick people into paying a premium for it.
