BT signs deal with AWS with aim of speeding up digital transformation BT, Britain's largest telecom biz, has signed a five-year agreement with Amazon Web Services (AWS) to help it cloudify internal applications and speed-up digital transformation under the broader modernization program. The network provider said AWS will be tasked with updating BT's own applications to be cloud-first, modular …
I guess it will be the death knell - experienced as an internal customer and a reseller to real customers - of the hateful beyond garbage that is BT Cloud Compute.
Truly a steaming turd of unreliability. Thankfully we moved off it and took some internal BT customers and real customers to AWS long ago.
It's amazing how the people in charge of BT - for decades - completely misunderstand the nature of the business they run. It's a regulated utility that would continue to make a decent return for its shareholders if they weren't constantly extracting money from it in pursuit of fatally-flawed "growth" schemes.
To say nothing of the fact that they decided they didn't need to be in the mobile market. The regulated bit always irked them. That's why they made disastrous investments in things they didn't understand because they thought there were fat profits in unregulated ventures.
Being fair it… it was analysts, deal grubbers and morons that twisted BT’s arm into disposing of Cellnet (now O2) many a moon just before the mobile market exploded in growth and … reversed that decision with the acquisition of EE.
BT were also denied sticking fibre everywhere by Thatch wanting to open the market to US cable … which turned out really well.with the ultimate bankruptcy of NTL-Telewest and creation of Virgin Media out of that mess.
BT Sport/TV - like Virgin’s push to compete with Sky on content with Virgin 1 etc - was always a half assed job. Ambition exceeded the pockets made available to fund sports rights deals and worry Sky Sports with a true competitor . BT Sport will ultimately be flogged - at the next cycle of growth/diversification followed by refocus on core activities - to Fox or ESPN Sports.
There were two parts to the mobile venture. There was the network part, CellNet, and the customer facing part, BT Mobile, originally the merger of the phone, paging and voicemail services.
It was already growing rapidly when they split it off - remember it was a share split, not a sale so BT got no cash for it. Any competent telecoms management should have seen mobile had to be part of their future and faced down the naysayers. To get back in required giving Deutsch Telekom 1/8th of the business, probably a bargain but something that should never have been necessary.
As to cable, you're quite right, of course. It's something most critics forget when complaining about fibre - BT was compelled to make a very late start.
BT is still full of people who think like it's the old monopoly days. The Tories years ago were right to privatise it, but they did not go anywhere near enough. It was still a near monopoly for years, not through great service or execution of tasks, but just being there.
Having worked for BT … it’s truly does not. BT Privatisation was almost 40 Years ago.
It does have a large regulated business rump however operating within the constraints Ofcom Regulations, The Telecommunications Act law and Universal Service Obligations (no other competitor has) exert on it.
I would like to agree but there's a couple of points. OpenStack is so effing complicated that anyone using it and relying on it would need to hire a bunch of people to run it. It's not just a load of UNIX/Linux boxes. We looked at it years ago, and that's what we saw. I could not recommend using it as I would afraid of losing those staff, and we would be stuck. Anyone deploying OpenStack is in exactly the same boat.
Somebody who is familiar with Solaris can look into problems with Linux (and vice versa). They may not be experts but they can at least get stuck in. The same cannot be said of OpenStack. Just look at the Wikipedia page - it has 38 components now, each with names which are mostly unrelated to their function. If you said to somebody who is not familiar with OpenStack "there seems to be a problem with Barbican", they would look at you with boggled eyes. Why couldn't somebody name Barbican to 'Locksmith' to at least hint at what it does?
Meanwhile AWS is complex, but at least you can get started without too much difficulty.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
