News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by maffydub on Thursday July 09, 2020 @04:31AM (#23778125)
I suspect Google felt they got burned with Kubernetes - doing a lot of the initial development, donating it to the CNCF and then not profiting much from it (e.g. still being distant 3rd in cloud).
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by fcantournet on Thursday July 09, 2020 @07:11AM (#23778900)
Google did profit massively from kubernetes, moreso than any other big company (Hello Red Hat lol)

It was (for better and for worse) the #1 reason to adopt GCP for our main cloud platform, and we're not alone.

It's has seen immense adoption that it wouldn't have had if it hadn't been in a neutral foundation. The work was definitely not done by Google alone (~30%).

IS GCP "still" #3 ? Yes. Is it because they didn't get a tighter grip on k8s and try to use it as a competitive advantage ? absolutely not. Nobody would have touched k8s with a 10 foot pole in that situation.

The strength of k8s is in its eco-system and that wouldn't have happened without the CNCF.

And I'm saying this as an early adopter of k8s, it's insane for the Google brass to see anything other than an immense success in the handling of k8s, at least from the perspective of how much money it made Google (indirectly)

It's not because of K8S strategy that GCP is #3. It's just because MS & AWS are better. PERIOD. Better at service, better at marketing, better at some product design sometimes, better at abusing their current dominant position (hehe it sucks doesn't Goog ? heh? Doesn't it ?)

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by koffiezet on Thursday July 09, 2020 @08:36AM (#23779500)
> (Hello Red Hat lol)

I think you underestimate the revenue OpenShift is generating... If I see the support contract bills of my clients, holy crap, you could host a ton of stuff on GCP for that.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by freedomben on Thursday July 09, 2020 @11:47AM (#23781510)
Disclaimer: I'm a Red Hat consultant but this is entirely my own opinion

Comparing consulting bills to IaaS bills is apples/oranges. Consultants are really just Humans as a Service (HaaS). A lot of the work we do is to bring in expertise in something that would otherwise be difficult and expensive to hire for and augment a team for a short period. We actually help customers with cloud-stuff (like AWS and Azure) all the time.

A lot of the work I've been doing lately is stuff that would have to be done if you were using K8s on cloud instead of OpenShift. I'm currently helping to migrate services from older platforms (like BlueMix) to OpenShift. You can look for that "feature" all day long in the cloud console, but you won't find it :-)

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by koffiezet on Friday July 10, 2020 @02:03PM (#23794388)
I'm not talking about consultancy fees. I'm only talking about Redhat licenses for OpenShift and its support contracts.

I'm also a freelance consultant mainly focused on OpenShift and k8s, my bill is separate.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by freedomben on Friday July 10, 2020 @02:19PM (#23794574)
Ah ok, I gotcha. No disagreement here. Apologies for misconstruing your comment.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by znpy on Thursday July 09, 2020 @10:56AM (#23780967)

    If I see the support contract bills of my clients, 
    holy crap, you could host a ton of stuff on GCP 
    for that. 
yeah with no support lol, and when something goes wrong... oh well ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

on a more serious note: in order to compare apples to apples you should compare red hat support bills with GCP support bills (i think they call that "professional services"). I guess they aren't cheap either.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by koffiezet on Friday July 10, 2020 @02:05PM (#23794426)
> eah with no support lol, and when something goes wrong... oh well ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Sadly, also my experience. Response SLA of 2 hours? Please attach sosreport is ALWAYS the first reply. Even if you attached it in the original ticket (which we always do). The technical quality of the support is sub-par, most of the time when we include technical information, they don't seem to understand it at all...

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by Andrex on Thursday July 09, 2020 @10:34AM (#23780698)
> better at abusing their current dominant position (hehe it sucks doesn't Goog ? heh? Doesn't it ?)

Just wanted to say this one weirdly petty/obnoxious concluding line tainted an otherwise solid comment. Seems unnecessary.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by solarkraft on Thursday July 09, 2020 @11:25AM (#23781257)
I don't see why. It's funny, based on facts and doesn't imply a clear bias (very different from something like "and btw Google are assholes").
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by ocdtrekkie on Thursday July 09, 2020 @10:53AM (#23780926)
It's incredibly accurate though. One human remark shouldn't ruin a comment full of substance for you. This isn't a Reddit comment, it's an HN response with a tail of humanity.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by manigandham on Sunday July 12, 2020 @07:24PM (#23815593)
That's exactly how it is in adtech where Google dictates everything to the rest of the industry.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by znpy on Thursday July 09, 2020 @10:54AM (#23780940)
> Google did profit massively from kubernetes

i should check if it's still the case, but I remember a time where every effing kubernetes tutorial would make you spin up a k8s cluster on google cloud.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by gary-kim on Thursday July 09, 2020 @02:28PM (#23783407)
I remember learning about Kubernetes for the first time. Thought it sounded cool so I started looking into how to make my own cluster. I think every other tutorial was like: "next, go to CLOUD_PROVIDER and sign up for an account to make a cluster".

I'm trying to look up how to make my own cluster, not use someone else's. Figured it out eventually but it took way more searching then for learning how to use k8s.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by znpy on Thursday July 09, 2020 @04:21PM (#23784702)
yes, I had the same experience and the same issues.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by Macha on Thursday July 09, 2020 @06:38AM (#23778741)
To profit from cloud services at the level AWS/MS do, you need big customers, the long tail is just marketing that happens to make you some pocket money. To get big customers, Google's reputation for losing interest and moving into the next big shiny plays very hard against them.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by a012 on Thursday July 09, 2020 @04:43AM (#23778185)
Do they? I see their GKE and then now with Anthos thingy got a lot of attention.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by pjmlp on Thursday July 09, 2020 @05:55AM (#23778537)
What matters is sales, not attention.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by akoncius on Thursday July 09, 2020 @06:56AM (#23778830)
without attention there will be no sales
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by pjmlp on Thursday July 09, 2020 @06:59AM (#23778843)
Well it doesn't seem to be working then.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by harpratap on Thursday July 09, 2020 @07:33AM (#23779035)
How can you be so certain? The project is barely 6 years old and so many APIs are JUST reaching v1. And companies are still using mostly barebones K8s, we are yet to see how RedHat, Azure differentiate on top of it and we get to see all the "distros"
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by pjmlp on Thursday July 09, 2020 @07:56AM (#23779195)
By the market position of Amazon and Microsoft versus what Google keeps trying to do, and there are enough candidates for that 3rd place.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by harpratap on Thursday July 09, 2020 @08:09AM (#23779293)
Cloud is still very much a blue ocean domain. Azure's rise has been driven by bringing in companies from the huge on-prem market into Cloud, not by attracting users away from AWS. We are nowhere near maturity level to even consider that current market leaders will stay in place for next 5 years.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by pjmlp on Thursday July 09, 2020 @08:25AM (#23779410)
Hope is good I guess, maybe by then Google has managed to finally provide enterprise level confidence on their offerings.
Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by tedk-42 on Thursday July 09, 2020 @10:28AM (#23780615)
Pretty much my feeling about the whole thing. It's someone's attempt within Google to not let the horse out so fast when there was a buck to be made on it.

Android brought people into Google's ecosystem.

Kubernetes could have positioned Google better in the cloud space but I think they were late to the party due to their failure to understand what customers want.

Re:Why IBM doesn’t agree with Google’s Open Usage Commons fo... by kevin_thibedeau on Thursday July 09, 2020 @01:21PM (#23782555)
They're third because of their poor track record with support and a penchant for killing things. They should concentrate on that first.