Apple's iCloud Runs On Microsoft Azure 230
Front page first-timer ge7 writes "Apple's recently announced cloud storage and cloud service platform, iCloud, runs on their main competitor Microsoft's Azure platform and Amazon services. According to The Reg's sources, 'Microsoft insiders see the iCloud deal as a validation of Azure. iCloud puts Azure into a different league, given the brand love for Apple and the Apple management's fanatical attitude to perfection. It is a "huge consumer brand, a great opportunity to get Azure under a very visible workload." ... Apple has had a recent unpleasant experience in providing online services: in a famous memo, Steve Jobs admitted his company had "more to learn about internet services" following the outages and failures of his precursor to iCloud for email, contacts, calendar, photos and other files on MobileMe.'"
I don't know. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The odds of this being true are exceptionally low. The Register isn't exactly known for journalistic integrity.
So, we are to believe that Apple, who has been building out an awfully large and awfully expensive data center in North Carolina, are going to outsource one of their key products to Microsoft and Amazon? Apple will often use third parties for products and services, but this seems way too much like handing the keys to their castle to someone else.
In the end, all that really matters is how well iClou
Re:I don't know. (Score:5, Informative)
This story is apparently based off of observations made in june [datacenterknowledge.com], when iCloud was first announced, and seems to concern just iMessage [infiniteapple.net] not the entirety of iCloud services. iCloud isn't even out yet, it's still in beta (real beta, not "Google beta".) As always without any kind of official confirmation or strong observable evidence this is just a rumor, but that won't stop everyone from reporting it as fact.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I don't know. (Score:4, Informative)
Pretty much every statement in your post is completely made up whole cloth. The purpose of the data center has never been stated, whether it's ready has never been stated, MobileMe having "miserable failed" is far from true, and that they "completely stripped down their server OS" is both incorrect and wholly unrelated (Apple uses Sun and Oracle, among others, for their Internet servers).
And finally, that they are using MS and Amazon is completely, 100%, pure rumor based on a supposedly anonymous tip to a disreputable "news" organization.
It's not that this is impossible, far from it. But it's that it's simply a rumor from a single source, and a claim that would certainly need a bit more substantiation to believe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Azure is PaaS. There's no reason to use it beyond development stages, if they're even doing that. That Apple would use Windows 2008 R2, which is what Azure is built on, to host, is very unlikely. These are ideologically different practices, and Azure's been mostly in beta or "technology preview" for eons. Methinks El Reg has succumbed to rumourmongering. Quelle surprise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Quite simply, it cost too much for what it provided. If it were free then it wouldn't have become the "failure" that everyone is claiming.
Re: (Score:3)
iPod Mini was a huge success when Apple ditched it in order to replace it with iPod Nano.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it's not impossible. Apple uses akamai for CDN.. so why not use AWS and Azure. Just because the compete in the consumer space doesn't mean they can't have partnerships for the infrastructure. More datacenters = better redundancy, and geo diversity also saves a lot of traffic on the backbones.. (seems inefficient, for example, for a California resident to download their music servers on the east coast.. even more so for customers overseas).
They're suing Sammy on one side, but buy a shit ton of parts on the o
Re: (Score:2)
The odds of this being true are exceptionally low
Sigh. This was reported a few days after the iCloud apps started appearing in beta. It was reported by various Apple rags. It was later confirmed by several sources. This isn't hard to check. Connect the device to your network, check to see what sites it accesses when storing stuff in the cloud. Given the age of this story, if it wasn't true, any idiot with a router and an iCloud account could have shot it down long ago. It hasn't been, quite the opposite, it has been verified again and again. Something any
Re: (Score:2)
Who thinks Apple will confirm or deny which cloud service, if any, will host iCloud?
If anything, Apple wouldn't.
Now, I can believe some Microsoft PR guy thought about it and came up with the idea of spreading a rumour that it would use Azure, precisely because Apple wouldn't say...
The bigger question is 'who cares?'. Apple has nothing that competes with Azure so why would this be an issue? WP7 is hardly competing with iOS on the iPhone, MS are barely a blip in the tablet space and Apple's revenues primarily come from iOS rather than the only product really in competition with MS which is OSX. It doesn't seem much like Microsoft and Apple are in much competition with eachother at all these days.
Re: (Score:2)
We care because it indicates, as the summary says, that a large software company believes in the Azure cloud offering. I've never heard anyone even consider it. That is the news.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now, I can believe some Microsoft PR guy thought about it and came up with the idea of spreading a rumour that it would use Azure
Yeah, because it is sooooo hard to check what sites a device connects to when storing stuff. Were you born this dumb or did someone make you this dumb by hitting you repeatedly over the head with a hammer?
Re: (Score:2)
But AWS is an open platform. You can use their servers, or host on another OS like Ubuntu if you want.
That would make sense to be using somebody's cloud format... Until the get it rewritten for OSX
Surprised (Score:4)
I'm surprised that Microsoft and Amazon apparently agreed not to publicize this. While I don't really care what Apple is using behind the scenes in iCloud - it's not like Apple's a serious player in server space, after all - I wouldn't think they'd have the leverage to dictate these sorts of terms with either company. Seriously, what are they going to do, walk away from the negotiating table? Who else could do it?
Re: (Score:3)
hmm - well, seeing as the iCloud is still in beta and the service appears to only run iMessage on Azure, it could be that Apple is still deciding which host platform to run on - in which cash, if MS started shouting 'look Apple uses MS tech' then Apple could so easily shift everything to Amazon and make MS look really stupid.
Re:Surprised (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This is microsoft doing the deal, not some sales droid cold calling companies and apple came up on their list.
"Hello, Mr... Jubs. I'm calling to tell you about a GREAT new deal with Microsoft's Azure cloud service..."
Re: (Score:2)
And the news gets out anyway, via rumors.
It always does.
Huh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
When you are an adult other things than principles become important, like earning more money than you will ever need by whatever means possible. It's hard to explain, but using you opponent's products can then suddenly make sense.
Highly Suspicious (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably because the iPhone 5 comes out in a month or two and they need something that works now. I'm sure once they have something stable they will switch to an in-house solution.
Re: (Score:3)
They've been working on iCloud betas since before the public announcement over the summer, I'm sure it will be done in time. That Billion-dollar-datacenter was started years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say they are having a learning experience while covering immediate needs with a proven setup.
Re: Is Azure a proven setup? (Score:2)
Wikipedia says Azure was available commercially in February of 2010. So it's been on the market for a little over a year and a half.
Because they don't have any good server technology (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously. On the hardware front, they killed the X-serve and have nothing else that remotely is a workable solution for real high end, high density servers. Mac Minis are fine for small offices or homes that are messing with tiny servers, they aren't what you need for a cloud infrastructure.
On the software front their OS leaves something to be desired in the server arena but more importantly they have no real virtualization solution. You can only virtualize OS-X on OS-X so any of the bare metal solutions like vSphere are out, and the software for MacOS is decidedly consumer oriented like Fusion and Parallels.
So Apple's own technology, at present, is not at all suited for a cloud type system. For that you need a bunch of high power, high density servers that you can run VMs on so you can provision things as needed at a high speed.
Remember the big thing that separates a "cloud" from just a bunch of servers is the flexibility and provisioning. You go to a normal server host like, say, Pair networks and they can get you a server in fairly short order, a day or less probably. However if you want a bunch that'll take time as they'd have to order the hardware. You also pay per month regardless of usage because the hardware is there powers on using resources. With Amazon EC2 you can get not just a server in minutes, but thousands. You also can pay more based on usage, because idle servers don't have to take up resources. This is possible only because it is all virtual, and an extremely competent virtual setup.
Now maybe they fix that, or maybe they build a data centre with someone else's technology (their was a time they liked AIX, maybe they do that again). However that takes time and if they need shit now, well Amazon and Microsoft are two of the big ones that can deliver it.
At any rate right now, Apple isn't really in a good position to run their own cloud service.
Re:Because they don't have any good server technol (Score:4, Interesting)
*YOU* can't virtualize OS X on vSphere, but they can. Because they own they software, they can do whatever they want with it.
I don't think anyone is surprised that they aren't running it on Mac OS X Server; they are surprised that they are (allegedly) running it on a MS product. It is well known that Apple hosts it's own services on Sun, Oracle, and (maybe) HP products. There long-existing web products (eg. the iTunes store) don't run on racks and racks of Xserves, if that's what you think.
Why wouldn't they be in a good position to run their own cloud service? Again, you need to throw out your assumption that their cloud service might be run on OS X and Mac hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Testing? Who knows? And why does it matter anyway what Apple runs iCloud on? Apple will use whatever service makes iCloud good enough to encourage more hardware sales, as that is what Apple cares about.
Re: (Score:2)
Files are served by servers underneath blob.core.windows.net - that's Microsoft's Windows Azure, not an appliance.
I bet they're using only bare bones (Score:2)
I bet they're using only bare bones, like blob storage and possibly CDN, and then only temporarily until they roll their own. Apple is all about _control_ first and foremost.
And if I were Microsoft, I'd keep this one secret until _after_ they succeed, because it's not only a great opportunity to succeed. They could also fail quite spectacularly, too.
It was probably a time issue (Score:2)
So Apple turns user data over to the government? (Score:2)
Under Wikipedia for Azure: Microsoft has stated that, per the Patriot Act, the USA government can have access to the data even if the hosted company is not American and the data resides outside the USA.[20]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am surprised this pure FUD got modded up. The Patriot Act affects every US based company and Apple would have to turn the data over even if they hosted it themselves.
"Any data which is housed, stored or processed by a company, which is a U.S. based company or is wholly owned by a U.S. parent company, is vulnerable to interception and inspection by U.S. authorities."
God forbid catching Bill Gates... (Score:2)
...with an iPad, there sure would be hell to pay! _ o _
Not all customers use OS/X (Score:2)
Is it possible this is just for people using other platforms? Pushing customers using Windows off to Windows land while the rest use the iTunes cloud makes sense to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do some people call it "OS/X"? Where are you getting the slash from? This isn't OS/2 Warp.
Re: (Score:2)
Classic Make vs. Buy Decision 101 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, not surprising really. Apple will do what they have to do. If it requires using Micro$oft services they'll bite the bullet and do it. You can bet somewhere they've got a team working on an alternative that gives them total control. Apple is all about control. This is just a compromise they were forced to so they can provide the kind of service they need until their own solution is ready.
Re: (Score:2)
Still surprising, given that they are about control, that they went with Azure rather than, say, Linux on Amazon EC2, or something like that.
Re: (Score:2)
TFA is short on sources, but mentions:
One way to avoid managing different code bases and ensuring the best levels of performance could be for iCloud to also run on Windows on AWS.
So we don't really know whether they're using Windows on both, which would again be a surprising choice. There are, after all, multiple services right now which will give you a Linux-based cloud.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What does it matter? Why shouldn't Apple use Azure for iCloud, assuming this old rumor is even true? Apple isn't offering a cloud computing platform for third parties (just a data service for consumers), so it's not like this is in competition with one of their own products. Apple just wants to sell hardware.
Re: (Score:3)
Remember Steve's quote about MS being trucks? So why not use them as a big truck. Back end. Where they belong. It's a giant public slap in the face to Microsot that know one else gets! Be our server slaves, stay in the closet, and let us (Apple) take care of the rest.
But isn't that the whole idea behind Azure? Microsoft wants to be the big truck people rely on behind the scenes.
I'm not a Microsoft fan - I've tried to remove their products from my life as much as possible - but I see this as a big win for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Not sure why Apple would be embarrassed to use one of the leading back end products in their back end.
Not like they have a competing product they would be admitting is not up to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow! That is huge fanboyism to suggest that by Apple choosing to use a Microsoft product that this would somehow be a slap in the face for Microsoft. Ha ha Microsoft, you lose because we chose to use your services.
Was their ever a chance that Apple would have considered using anything other than a back-end product from Microsoft? Did you expect that Apple would ever consider choosing Windows on the next Mac or Windows Phone to run their next iPhone or something?
Oh, or maybe a slap in the face is like a pok
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
This is what it looks like to be in the end stages of being an Apple fanboy. You actually believe it's a "slap in the face" to Microsoft for Apple to run a portion of their business on an MS product. No awareness at all that Apple has to pay Microsoft for the privilege. No awareness that by Apple choosing a Microsoft product, they are saying tacitly
Re:Black or White (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
So far, I don't actually see any Apple "fanboys" complaining. As the premiere Microsoft-bashing website, you're the ones who actually care about this.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Only Linux is more reliable, but it's nowhere near as easy to manage, as I've learned repeatedly in 15 years in the industry.
15 years and still incompetent. Nice.
Re:No surprise, really. (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess you've never heard of a little side-project of Apple's called the "iTunes Store"?
It's daily transaction volumes are in the same neighborhood as Amazon's, and it is has been highly available and reliable.
How much storage does ITunes Store give you? (Score:2)
ITunes store is an entirely different type of service. There is no customer storage to speak of.
It's pretty much an e-commerce store with a native client.
Re: (Score:2)
The iTunes Store is very different from a data syncing service. You download your files once, and you're done. You may as well also cite Software Update.
Re:No surprise, really. (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking of, if you search their job listings for the word "iCloud", almost every hit explicitly mentions Linux or UNIX, and most of the rest mention Perl, Ruby, Python, and other UNIXy applications. I didn't look at every single one of them, but the only one I saw that mentioned Windows at all was for testing the sync to iCloud functionally on Windows. I don't think I'm buying this story.
Re:No surprise, really. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
With the amount of money rolling through Enterprise, I doubt they'll sink.
Don't underestimate the sinking power of CEOs ;).
Re: (Score:2)
If you stay away from the exotic storage mechanisms on either platform, and just use SQL Server, it's pretty easy to build a complex website which runs fine on both Azure and a standard IIS setup.
It's also likely that they aren't "striping" the website itself, but hosting the front end on Azure and returning objects from AWS - quite a few large services do something similar to this.
Re: (Score:2)
The Register can claim anything they want, they provide no proof for any of it.
And as for the "why", that depends on the reasons - are Apple hedging their bets? Are they in a trial period? Are they just balancing load across multiple independent providers?
When you distribute storage, you do it for any number of reasons, and those reasons influence how you do the distribution. When the data itself doesn't actually affect the application, and s merely data being managed, it doesn't have to be anywhere near
Re: (Score:2)
What you have described is a system that not only uses two providers but uses each of them for distinct function, each of them critical. So if either has performance problems, the whole system has performance problems, and if either of them fails, the whole system fails.
Apple does a lot of stupid things, but they are not THAT stupid. "Striping" would be a better option than that.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Lest you forget, MS kept Apple alive with a huge cash infusion when they were about to go under."
No, Apple was not about to go under. The $150 million was a token gesture of solidarity and it purchased non-voting shares. Apple had BILLIONS of dollars in the bank at the time. Apple was rudderless, which is what led to Jobs returning and reforging the sword that was broken, but Apple didn't need Microsoft's cash--they needed Office to be supported.
Re: (Score:3)
'which is what led to Jobs returning and reforging the sword that was broken'
Well okay then.
Re: (Score:2)
The point back then was to reestablish customer/developer confidence in the platform. The money itself wasn't the point, the point was to tell them that Apple won't go under next week, so it's still ok to buy things from them and develop for their platform. It worked very well, most likely much better than Microsoft had hoped.
Re: (Score:3)
Okay, that's it, I'm holding this thread open till someone seriously explains how the Bildberg group conspired to make sure it just LOOKED like Apple took any help from Microsoft because otherwise you'd just DIE of shame omigaw.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would completely agree that Amazon wants to be a much bigger competitor to Apple in Apple's domain than they are at the moment. I guess Apple's willing to take that risk right now?
Amazon mp3 isn't really hurting iTunes, for instance.
Re: (Score:2)
(Forgive me for replying to myself, no edit)
Similarly, MS thinks they're a competitor to Apple for phones and tablets. But they're not.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple and MS enemies? Of course not! They are extremely good allies, both scared to death of Google's Android! The mobile market is going to surpass the PC market by a fair margin, and Apple and MS do NOT want Google dominating it. Hence, both are trying to bury Android under patent lawsuits - patents that they have sometimes acquired together.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, Apple customers are big MS Office customers, Microsoft even admits that their Mac version has an adoption rate comparable to the Windows version.
Re: (Score:3)
After all these years, most people still don't know what the reasons were for the buying of non-voting stock. First of all, Apple wasn't "about to go under." Everyone makes the same mistake in repeating this myth that Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy. Second, the reason Microsoft bought the stock and continued Office was part of an agreement over the theft of Quic [roughlydrafted.com]
Troll? Troll? You goddamn stupid Apple Fanboys. (Score:2)
Troll? Troll? You goddamn stupid Apple fanboys. Everyone who doesn't agree with you is not a troll. I meant every single thing I said there.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather call it closed vs open. Or at least those that push open source and openness vs those who don't.
It will be interesting who'll win.
Personally, I hope no one does, competition is best for consumers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's like saying I hope that police will never eradicate mafia, because competition is the best...
Hardly.
Satisfying the implied morals of your comment would require the abolishment of free trade.
Re: (Score:2)
Which endeavours? 50% of their endeavours have utterly failed and been cancelled, another 25% are doomed, 20% are losing money.
Leaving a 5% success rate (count those endeavours on one hand).
I'm not saying the "let many flowers bloom" approach is wrong, but please don't tell me they're all or even majoritorially successful.
Re: (Score:2)
Which endeavours? 50% of their endeavours have utterly failed and been cancelled, another 25% are doomed, 20% are losing money.
Leaving a 5% success rate (count those endeavours on one hand).
I'm not saying the "let many flowers bloom" approach is wrong, but please don't tell me they're all or even majoritorially successful.
labs are not endeavours ...they are experiments.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I was going to say, what idiot believes Microsoft is Apple's main competitor now? Microsoft and Apple have been buddy buddy for some years now, both teaming up against Google, which is a shame, because both of them are individually bigger than Google, so could just compete on their merits if they were so inclined.
Apple and Microsoft have long been working together on things like IP strategy and keeping down competitors, it's not suprising to see cooperation in other areas too really.
Re: (Score:2)
In Slashdot's worldview, everyone who competes with Google is in an evil conspiracy together. All those years Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board of directors didn't happen, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft and Apple have been buddy buddy for some years now, both teaming up against Google, which is a shame
It was Google who decided to end the alliance with Apple (which was forged against MS) and directly compete against Apple after gathering lots of insight Eric Schmidt gathered when he was on Apple's board of directors.
Everybody knows that Steve Jobs is a very emotional leader. So when Google backstabbed Apple he didn't just shrug it off as mere business tactic. Although, by Jobs' standards he reacted very calm. Bing was added to Safari etc. in addition to Google, unlike the time when one GPU maker (can't re
Re: (Score:2)
Totally. When I go to the store, Apple's will magically forces me to buy their hardware, and Microsoft's will forces me to buy their software. I definitely don't have a choice in the matter. Excuse me while I browse the open source repository for the Google search engine and use Flash-free Chrome, because they're such an open company and all.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft was required to buy non-voting stock in Apple as part of a settlement over the theft of Quicktime code. It's amazing that, after all these years, people still think Microsoft swooped in to "save" Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing that, after all these years, people still think Microsoft swooped in to "save" Apple.
Including Steve Jobs [venturebeat.com]. And actually, Microsoft first saved Apple in 1989 when they launched Office for Mac (before Office for Windows even).
Correct (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? Is that supposed to be funny?
Re: (Score:3)
The only one where that's true on your list is Keynote:
Re: (Score:2)
"Microsoft Word is a professional text processor (like LaTeX)."
LMFAO
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, maybe I should have used "tries to be" instead of "is" ;)
Re: (Score:2)
All this was discussed last time (yep, this is an old rumor). Assuming it's an even true, Apple is free to use Azure and EC2 to get iCloud up and running and then move it to their own data centers later on. Or, maybe they'll just keep using what they're using now. It doesn't matter except to sites like this that treat companies as warring tribes to aid in battle. Apple doesn't give a shit what they're using as long as it helps them sell more Apple hardware. That's the point of iCloud in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, MobileMe would have been better if they hadn't tried to run it from a huge Hypercard stack.
But when you're dedicated to using only your own technology, your choices are somewhat limited.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice cherry-picking. The very next paragraph talks about how they then refuted that statement with evidence it is indeed using Azure and S3.
Re: (Score:2)
They also don't have a phone they direct-sell either. Don't know why you felt like taking the opportunity to blast WP7 but not Windows Tablet Edition, despite them both being essentially the same thing...