Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Is Planning To Move WhatsApp Off IBM's Public Cloud (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the assuming-control dept.

Jordan Novet, reporting for CNBC: Facebook's WhatsApp messaging service, which is used by 1.2 billion people across the globe, is planning to move off of IBM's cloud and into Facebook's own data centers, according to a person familiar with the matter. The WhatsApp move, which could begin later this year, would result in IBM losing one of its top five public cloud customers, the source said. IBM's public cloud business lags behind Amazon Web Services (AWS), which is on top with 33 percent of the market in April, as well as Microsoft's Azure cloud, according to Synergy Research.

59 comments

  1. Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by Lisandro · · Score: 2

    IBM's stock price has been in freefall since Jan 2017 and looks like it will reach 2015-2016 lows.

    1. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good. I hope IBM finally dies an agonizing, screaming death. With their bullshit culture of "come into the office now or you're fired" as a way to promote their ageist agenda against people who they decided could work from home - and now can and will be replaced with cheaper young people? Serves them right.

      Every time I learn about them losing something I get happier.

    2. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      That's only the latest round. About 10 years ago they offered a bunch of remote services people the option of moving to various Eastern European locales to be closer to some customers, along with a pay cut, or be laid off. Apparently, supporting English speaking people on a different continent remotely means you can't do it in the US.

    3. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by TWX · · Score: 2

      Frankly, as one that does not work for IBM, I am not in a position to know why they felt the need to recall their staff, but I would be very surprised if it's attributable to any single reason. Also, IBM historically has been one of the most conservative and least ageist technology services companies. Admittedly they might have changed since I last paid close attention, but I would be surprised if they'd changed solely as a means to shed older workers.

      I guess I look at it this way; if IBM performs poorly with the policy of work-from-home or otherwise telecommute, they're criticized for the policy. If they recall their staff in an attempt to determine why they're performing poorly, they're criticized for forcing their employees to change.

      Perhaps IBM should face a little bit of criticism for having a policy that essentially allowed the employee to live anywhere irrespective of an IBM facility, but perhaps it would have also been in employees' interest to be mindful of how far from the employer they live. It seems risky to live too far from one's employer simply because of the possibility of the job duties causing a change in workflow depending on circumstances and forcing a need to come in.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's quite sad to see what has happened to the company that was there at the beginning and contributed a lot to the hardware of computers, as well as important architecture and software ideas.

      In the 1960s. The best time in the West.

    5. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      "in freefall since Jan 2017"

      The 2015-2017 peak was in March 2017.

    6. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Well, time zones are still a thing.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      So is working off hours shifts

    8. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      And so is occupational health. (Well, maybe not in the United States, apparently.)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    9. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      I used to work at IBM. Anyone with a clue looked at 100% at-home work options with suspicion. They claimed they were saving on real-estate etc.

      If you can do it from home, you can do it from India or Brazil, and remember... IBM India and IBM Brazil are not outsourcing, it's "Global Resourcing". Why should a *global* company put their workforce in a country where the costs are high?

      That said, as long as your job doesn't leave the country, IBM is mostly an awesome place to work if you're in a marginalized category or need special accommodations (disabled, old, queer, new immigrant, single mother etc,). For other people, they just pay poorly and rot your brain.

    10. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      What does working night shift have to do with occupational health? And what does it have to do with other countries? What, do nurses, cops, firefighters, and others not work nights in other countries?

    11. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      What does working night shift have to do with occupational health?

      Let's just pretend you didn't ask this stupid question.

      What, do nurses, cops, firefighters, and others not work nights in other countries?

      These people have to. Support people across time zones don't.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      So, because of your value system, if I choose to work nights in an arrangement that's already setup, I should be laid off in favor of someone in that timezone because reasons?

    13. Re:Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      No, you should be laid of if the employer decides that you should be laid off. That's how it works for you over there, doesn't it?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  2. good riddance by nimbius · · Score: 2

    Softlayer, IBM's public cloud offering was acquired in 2013. in the 4 years its been headed up by Big Blue the service has gone from decent hosting provider to dumpster fire of penny stock spam and DDoS botnet herders.
    https://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/l...
    https://www.mailcleaner.net/bl...

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:good riddance by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

      Ditto. I might know another "IBM shop" or two migrating from IBM cloud offering (the cool kids seem to be skipping right over Amazon and going to GCP these days). Not sure who's going to be left up there.

    2. Re:good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't trust Google to fully support GCP going forward. They have a track record of abandoning the majority of their products.

    3. Re:good riddance by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      I don't trust any vendor will fully support anything other than core products going forward. In terms of GCP, I do believe that their container/VM infrastructure is real. Here's why:

      1) Google likes money. They've watched Amazon's highly profitable virtualization service take off (despite EMC's previously dominating VMware offering) and have decided there's enough profit there to step into the market.

      2) Google is marketing (successfully) directly at enterprises, in fact telling them they can replace all their IaaS stack with GCP (and also that there are enough PaaS and SaaS items in there to go cloud-native if that's what you wanted to do).

      3) The stuff works today and hundreds of tech companies are "roadmapping" to build out the same level of integration with GCP-specific things (e.g., cloud/hardware encryption modules) that they already have with Amazon.

      So...while I expect a couple of GCP's edge/little-used services to come and go, I also expect Google to gouge Amazon's IT market share in the coming years.

    4. Re:good riddance by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone go to GCP? The prices are identical to AWS, and third party tools currently "planned for" integration with GCP are currently integrated for AWS. Also, Amazon does not have a reputation of abruptly terminating services.

      I say this not just to be dismissive, but as someone about to roll out a new project, and planned to do so on AWS. Right now would be a damn good time for me to jump to GCP.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    5. Re:good riddance by lgw · · Score: 1

      I did the same analysis, with the same result. Google also has a long history of ruthlessly monetizing any data you let them have.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  3. Context? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What is WhatApp?

    1. Re:Context? by Lisandro · · Score: 2

      Only the most popular IM application in history, with over 1 billion users.

    2. Re:Context? by Wootery · · Score: 1, Troll

      Don't feed the trolls. Especially not the lazy ones.

    3. Re:Context? by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      But he's so fluffy!

    4. Re:Context? by future+assassin · · Score: 2

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    5. Re:Context? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Another way to surrender your privacy in the name of convenience.

    6. Re:Context? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's encrypted!

    7. Re:Context? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used it up until it started requiring access to my contacts to even sign in - then I deleted it.

    8. Re:Context? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Whatever. I don't use it. I've heard people used it because it claimed to be anonymous with encryption. Good luck with that if it goes through Facebook's servers.

    9. Re:Context? by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      I've had it with whatever is the latest IM fad. I've switched IM clients more often that I would care to remember.

    10. Re:Context? by Lisandro · · Score: 2

      FWIW, WA is insanely popular outside the US. I've lived both in South American and Western Europe and it seemed like everyone with a phone was using it.

    11. Re:Context? by Wootery · · Score: 1

      I don't care if you don't like it. It's not an obscure product. That was the point, remember?

    12. Re:Context? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      It wasn't always. The founders cared a lot about privacy and had a reasonable business model (free for the first year, $1 for each year after that. The servers were FreeBSD boxes running an Erlang stack and so the server cost per user was well under $1/year). Then Facebook bought them and it all went downhill.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    13. Re: Context? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Oh fuck off you tedious snob

    14. Re:Context? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      As I remember it was useful if you went on holiday to mainland Europe (from the UK) as you got free calls, when using a mobile phone abroad was potentially quite expensive.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  4. The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clouds are up there with apps and cryptocurrencies as things people waste their money on these days. It's all just servers in some data center. You don't control it, you are the product. It's time everyone goes back to using their own servers and send cloud providers packing.

    1. Re:The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah lets all build up our own data centers again. So we can employ server, storage, Router, and power and cooling people. Yay. That will be an efficient use of money. I am sure the uptime will be great.

    2. Re: The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah lets all build up our own data centers again. So we can employ server, storage, Router, and power and cooling people. Yay. That will be an efficient use of money. I am sure the uptime will be great.

      If you're in the cloud then you are paying for all those people. And more for their profit

      And get the same terrible uptime.

    3. Re: The cloud bubble needs to burst. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Economies of scale ... it was a fascinating week you missed because you weren't interested in taking Economics in high school.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re: The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They make a profit and they have great uptime. The future in IT isn't in a companies server room. Ask your CTO. If your cloud provider isn't providing good uptime than switch to the other two big ones.

    5. Re:The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You pay for the servers and the HVAC systems, either if they are at your place or sitting at Amazon's warehouse.

    6. Re: The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AWS has had a 100% uptime so far. With stuff like Lambda, you can fire all your ops guys except an IAM person and not have to worry about server hardware ever again. The days of worrying about RAID, backups, and such with AWS are like fretting about what buggy whip to use with your Tesla.

    7. Re:The cloud bubble needs to burst. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Do you remember why AWS exists? Amazon had to have enough servers to handle peak buying times, but most of the time a load of them were sitting idle. They realised that they could make money by selling the idle cycles. The cost of this spare time to Amazon is a lot less than the cost of buying, powering, cooling, and connecting a machine would be to you. Google works the same way: their attitude to power management is that the machines should be running at 100% load all of the time, and if they aren't then you bought too many of them.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re: The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AWS has had a 100% uptime so far. With stuff like Lambda, you can fire all your ops guys except an IAM person and not have to worry about server hardware ever again. The days of worrying about RAID, backups, and such with AWS are like fretting about what buggy whip to use with your Tesla.

      Except for that monumental fuck up on February 28th, when they couldn't even update their status page explaining why AWS was down?

    9. Re: The cloud bubble needs to burst. by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      Well, anything sounds bad when you say it with that attitude.

  5. TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    I'm sure Facebook's highly efficient data centers make more sense for them to host their own apps, but I've never heard of people complaining that WhatsApp is down. If you had asked me yesterday, I would have guessed that they were on FB's infrastructure already.

    This is a pretty good ad for IBM's offering - are they cheap? I can't imagine WhatsApp picking an expensive provider, but almost everything IBM is four times as expensive as it ought to be.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re: TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      WhatsApp had two severe outages (the second one was pretty much worldwide) just over the past month.

    2. Re: TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not surprising at all. Softlayer is hot garbage. They frequently send emails out like.. "We will be doing a rolling reboot of all our servers in REGION X to mitigate security vulnerability xyz". Or better yet, "The network will be out for up to 4 hours on next Sunday while we upgrade switches".

      You get the feeling that the folks who run/work at softlayer have never even tried using their competitors products. They are so far behind and awful it is comical.

    3. Re: TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OpenStack isn't production quality either. Keystone loses its MySQL DB connection briefly, kiss your entire cloud goodbye. OpenStack is coming along, but I would wait until at least the "Z" release before trusting it. There is no such thing as a backup faculty, or vMotion/Live Migrations. The OpenStack mentality is that all VMs can be trashed at any time, which sounds great in theory, but the real world still has "pet" servers, rather than the nice idea of having the IT infrastructure with all "cattle" servers.

    4. Re: TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have pets in AWS, NAKIVO Backup & Replication performs AWS EC2 instance backup . Backups and replication to other regions. Set and forget.

  6. Wondering about the valuation of such services by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    1.2 billion people use whats app because it is free or nearly free. If they tried to make any profit, most of the user base will vanish. Then how do they justify the lofty stratospheric valuation of these companies? Would people actually pay money to forward tasteless memes, debunked snopes stories and selfies of themselves eating breakfast?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Wondering about the valuation of such services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Metadata and advertising.

    2. Re:Wondering about the valuation of such services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1.2 billion people use whats app because it is free or nearly free. If they tried to make any profit, most of the user base will vanish. Then how do they justify the lofty stratospheric valuation of these companies? Would people actually pay money to forward tasteless memes, debunked snopes stories and selfies of themselves eating breakfast?

      Er which chat/social service you use that it's not free or nearly free? the same can be said about any other chat/social service that tried to make profit off the user base.

    3. Re:Wondering about the valuation of such services by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      When Facebook bought WhatsApp, it was free for the first year (long enough for network effects to lock users in) and then $1/year after that. $1/year is small enough that you can pay it without thinking, but the cost of hosting is tiny. I don't know exactly how many they users were hosting per machine (FreeBSD + Erlang is a pretty efficient combination), but I do remember them having over a million open sockets on a single node. If each one of those is to a separate user, then that's $1m/year/server, which pays for quite a lot of VM time.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Wondering about the valuation of such services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have what VCs want in every single company. Suck data from the end user, and push ads. That is pretty much the gist of what any successful Internet startup has to offer as a product or else the VCs will go elsewhere.

    5. Re:Wondering about the valuation of such services by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      What's App is going to stay free. It makes a profit with ads and user data. See also: Google, Facebook.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  7. Twilio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought that WhatsApp was using Twilio

    http://www.businessinsider.com/whatsapp-accounts-for-17-of-twilio-revenue-2016-5

    Has that changed? If not, is that changing?

  8. Hugen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    story would be relevant if lenovo had not bought out ibm like it did. so who cares. and buy a new buick. then ask where is the saturn dealership closest to me. oh hugen@!

  9. Facebook Hosts on some elses cloud ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Facebook had data centers of their own. Oh, well.