IBM blames 'external' network provider, incorrect routing, traffic flood for its two-hour cloud outage IBM has blamed a third party for yesterday's hours-long outage of its entire cloud. And while it says no data loss or attack was detected, it's still not a good look: major clouds are supposed to be more resilient than this. A brief notice on the IT titan's cloud status page offered the following explanation for the breakdown …
They tried that excuse with the Australian Census too.
Never mind its up to them to ensure redundancy, resiliency, scalability, and alternate paths/zones/providers etc etc etc.
IBM has never taken cloud seriously, they bought out (the market leader at the time) Softlayer, because their own offering was rubbish, and pissed the opportunity away, while Amazon and Microsoft built up their market share and capability.
Too late now, except for some large corporates who are "owned" by IBM, no one is interested in IBM's "version" of what they think cloud is and should be.
I concur. IBM has fumbled several times concerning their cloud strategy/offerings. Even worse, they've purchased a lot of great cloud technologies and subsequently let them wither away. Cleversafe is a perfect example; small company with promising product-line that allowed IT Shops to setup their own on-prem cloud. IBM purchases them, (2015) and morphs the product into IBM Cloud Object Storage.
"they bought out (the market leader at the time) Softlayer"
Ummm...what? What market did Softlayer lead? Small point of presence traditional co-los with some "cloudy" features that were still implemented by deploying physical equipment to racks with multi-day lead times as soon as you went outside the basic Internet accessible VMs model? I know...catchy title...
Softlayer looked good from a marketing perspective but in my experience (up until about a year post-acquisition) they were at best similar to Rackspace or Sungard and at worst too small a player to make a difference. The IBM acquisition just gave them access to more legacy data centres for points of presence and slowed down some of their automation work, but I'm not sure it made a significant difference in the long term as they weren't serious competition to the big cloud providers
And no, I don't consider IBM one of the big cloud providers - their large portfolio of legacy data centres might prop up revenue numbers in the short term but they are suffering the same fate as many other legacy data centre providers in that customers are moving to more dynamic cloud providers.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
