Facebook Is Planning To Move WhatsApp Off IBM's Public Cloud

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.

Man, IBM doesn't seem able to catch a break.

[Lisandro]

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

Re:

[bhcompy]

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.

Re:

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Well, time zones are still a thing.

Re:

[bhcompy]

So is working off hours shifts

Re:

[K. S. Kyosuke]

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

Re:

[bhcompy]

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?

Re:

[K. S. Kyosuke]

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.

Re:

[bhcompy]

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?

Re:

[K. S. Kyosuke]

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?

Re:

[TWX]

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

Re:

[Dr. Evil]

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 marginali

Re:

[radarskiy]

"in freefall since Jan 2017"

The 2015-2017 peak was in March 2017.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

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.

Re:

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

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 t

Re:

[Actually, I do RTFA]

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.

Re:

[lgw]

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

Context?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is WhatApp?

Re:

[Lisandro]

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

Re:

[Wootery]

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

Re:

[Lisandro]

But he's so fluffy!

Re:

[cheesybagel]

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.

Re:

[cheesybagel]

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

Re:

[Lisandro]

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.

Re:

[Wootery]

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

Re:

[future assassin]

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

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:

[TheRaven64]

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.

Re:

[tehcyder]

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.

Re: Context?

[cyber-vandal]

Oh fuck off you tedious snob

Re:

[bill_mcgonigle]

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

Re:

[Lisandro]

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

Re:

[TheRaven64]

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 t

TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp

[bill_mcgonigle]

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.

Re: TIL: IBM's Cloud Hosted WhatsApp

[Lisandro]

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

Wondering about the valuation of such services

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

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?

Re:

[TheRaven64]

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, whi

Re:

[Actually, I do RTFA]

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