Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Huh? I did not have to look very long to find evidence [1] of rather sobering issues with IBM "Cloud". In fact, that article reported IBM as dead last in the 2018 Gartner's Magic Quadrant ranking of IaaS cloud offerings.

What are you trying to say exactly? And why should customers turn their attention to IBM?

[1] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/04/ibm_cloud_outage/

Ok. Wasn't trying to make you upset. There are some interesting things we are competitive at such as baremetal on demand/GPU VSI. I am also very excited about our Redhat aquisition with CoreOS, Redshift, CentOS, and RHEL. All the IBM Cloud core engineering teams are based in the US which I strongly agree with. Have a nice day!

> All the IBM Cloud core engineering teams are based in the US which I strongly agree with. Have a nice day!

All US based really is not a selling point.

As a European, I wouldn't bet my company (if I had one ;)) on a provider who's engineers are all in a TZ 5-8 hours different from me.

You didn't [make me upset]. I'm also looking forward to see what Red Hat is capable of with IBM's resources. Thanks for clarifying.

Competition is good and I didn't know IBM had a bare metal offering.

(you might want to put some sort of contact method in your profile in case people want to reach out to you)

Your comments come off as unvarnished self-promotion, which is generally frowned upon here.

I like where I work and I feel like we don't have as strong of representation on hackernews compared to some of the other cloud providers.

That is fine, but entering the conversation with a comment that is self-promoting but otherwise unrelated to the conversation at hand is obnoxious, just as much so as someone doing the same for their own person at a party.

If you want to promote your product, more apropos and therefore constructive would be a comment detailing why it did not suffer the same outage, or justified speculation why its competitors did. Engage in the conversation rather than just naming a list of features.

I think it's good to hear someone talking about it. I've never used it - perhaps I have the impression that it's not even something I could just go sign up for with a credit card and start using as a non-business entity.

But, I see things like https://github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm exist, so it must be at least reasonably usable.

What's a reason why someone would consider this over the big three, besides sweetheart deals for big customers?

One of the cooler things to me is you can order an actual physical server and its entirely only yours. It gets the same infrastructure and care we give everything else but you own and control it entirely. You can select the specific components you want or select a common build that we keep prebuilt for "fast provision". These prebuilt ones are sitting ready for booting via IPMI/BOOTP so with a few clicks you can get a baremetal server thats only yours in a few minutes. You can totally lock us out of it in every way if you want to. Also, the portions of the network where this happens is not an "overlay network" so that translates to extremely predictable latency and jitter characteristics that are actually better than the others can provide. Game companies especially like this but the downside is decreased flexibility because of course its a physical server somewhere so your responsible for managing any container or VM you choose on it. We of course have container and VM and many other things as services as well.

Which is great and all, if done properly. Was this fixed properly? What’s the IBM equivalent to AWS’ Nitro or GCP’s Titan?


So you provide as evidence an article from July of last year?

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact