T-Mobile Appears To Be Quitting VMware Amid Support Rights Lawsuit With Broadcom (theregister.com)
- Reference: 0184261716
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/07/01/2255231/t-mobile-appears-to-be-quitting-vmware-amid-support-rights-lawsuit-with-broadcom
- Source link: https://www.theregister.com/virtualization/2026/07/01/t-mobile-appears-to-be-quitting-vmware-and-fighting-a-very-familiar-battle-for-support-rights-on-the-way-out/5264750
> The dispute relates to a deal T-Mobile struck with VMware in August 2023, which saw the telco acquire perpetual licenses and two years of support for some software, plus the option for a further year of support. When Broadcom acquired VMware in 2023, it stopped selling perpetual licenses and standalone support deals for customers with those licenses. Broadcom also reduced the virtualization giant's product range from over 150 products to two subscription-only bundles. Broadcom now mostly sells its Cloud Foundation (VCF) private cloud suite. Customers including AT&T and Tesco tried to exercise their right to extended support, but Broadcom declined to do so. AT&T settled on confidential terms. Tesco is [2]pursuing the matter in the courts .
>
> When customers exercise their option for extended support, Broadcom argues it can't deliver because the products covered by the contract don't exist anymore, its contracts allow it to deny support for dead products, and subscriptions are now the industry standard. T-Mobile started using VMware's products in 2008. In one hearing, the carrier's counsel described T-Mobile's VMware implementation as "the base of the entire internal network" and "the place where 1,000 applications reside." Another filing, from Broadcom, says the telco runs VMware software on over 303,000 CPU cores.
>
> Court documents allege that in 2024 Broadcom notified T-Mobile it would not renew support after the initial two-year deal expired in 2025. The two parties kept talking about possible new arrangements. T-Mobile also sought an injunction that would compel Broadcom to provide extended support. Broadcom opposed the injunction, arguing that T-Mobile deliberately waited too long to seek it. At one point T-Mobile suggested a $20 million deal for another two years of support. An affirmation filed last week by T-Mobile vice president of technology Kevin Luu says the carrier sought that arrangement "to be able to complete T-Mobile's transition away from VMware at a more deliberate pace."
>
> The court eventually granted the injunction forcing Broadcom to offer support beyond August 2025, but required T-Mobile to pay $5.28 million and post a $500,000 undertaking. Broadcom continued to provide support but also sought damages on grounds that the injunction meant it missed out on a new deal with T-Mobile. The telco has rubbished that argument in part because the two parties were still talking about a new deal. Broadcom later proposed to charge $24 million for extended support covering six products, a sum it said would cover over 20 staff needed to support T-Mobile. The carrier fired back by pointing out that it has made just two support calls in 2026, which hardly justifies such a massive staff and expense.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/virtualization/2026/07/01/t-mobile-appears-to-be-quitting-vmware-and-fighting-a-very-familiar-battle-for-support-rights-on-the-way-out/5264750
[2] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/06/17/2357242/tesco-moving-40000-server-workloads-off-vmware-amid-broadcoms-abusive-conduct
You don't solve problems by paying extortionist! (Score:2)
The bill just keeps getting larger and larger each time you push off dealing with the main core issues.
Re: You don't solve problems by paying extortionis (Score:3)
PepsiCo is experiencing the same thing now that no one wants their $7 potato chips.
Get off of VMWARE ASAP, but be warned (Score:3)
VMWare is more than virtualization.
OpenStack technical trainer here:
If you think of VMWare in 2026 as virtualization only solution, like we still are in 2006, then sure, KVM, or QUEMU, Xen, BSD's VMM, or Hyper-V are cromulent options.
But nowadays, VMWare, XenServer/Xencloud, on Premises Azure et al are used to make Private Clouds, or the fleets running on them use a few advanced functions beyond virtualization, with all that implies. Very few workloads are "virtualization only", not touching any of the advanced or the cloud-dy functions .
The linux equivalent would be OpenStack, with all the load that implies.
And yes, many of the FOSS solutions run KVM under the hood, with a few exceptions like Xen based ones, or BSD's vmm and vmmd, but again, what really counts in 2026 is not the Hypervisor, but all the other advanced stuff built atop of it.
There is another aspect in this too, and it is Application support. Many ISVs certify their platforms/apps on specific OSs/Distros running on Specific Hypervisors.
So, for instance, your ISV may say: Only Windows Server 2022 or 2025 only, RHEL 10, or Suse 16, on top of VMWare, Openstack or Azure.
And there you are, for those workloads, you can forget about all the other solutions (obscure or not) that homelabbers love to peddle. Big corpos can pressure smaller ISVs to support their preferred solution, but the big ISVs will most likely put a few options on offer, and that's it.
In those cases, large intitutions (like T-Mobile, the focus of the article) have 100s or even 1000s of ISVs some more crititcal than others, and they need to reach commonality of solutions, or personel requirements ballon (the legacy VMWare group, the Openstack group, the XenCloud group, the ProxMox group, the Azure group, the Nutanix group, the....) along with all the other support functions (negotiations and keeping track of support contracts for each technology). A veritable nightmare. So, unlike homelabbers, Big corpos will probably go to a one or two vendor solution for their internal clouds.
Since VMWare was the leader, and for many lustres a model citizen, pretty muche every single ISV offered them as a supported option, therfore, it was the easier default.
So, get out of VMWare ASAP, but be warned it will be hard, as you need to provide alternatives to the advanced functions, and align certification requirements for support.
Also, use this as a clean-up opportunity . Retire redundant APPs, retire inhouse stuff with big technical debt, move it to either functions inside SW you already own (even if they are not completely taylor made) or to SaaS. That way your VM stable will be smaller, migration will be faster and easier, and the bill from whatever replaces VMWare will be "even moar" cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
if you are in the position of "get out of VMWare ASAP" you did not get caught. You made a series of bad choices over and extended time frame!
When ASAP comes up you have failed!
Re: (Score:2)
The company I work for has decided to stay on VMware because they stated that "the applications we are running aren't supported under another VM".
The point of virtualization is for the applications to not know that they are on a virtual machine.
This was presented at a major corporate "hallelujah" meeting recently where they at the same time had created positions for upper mid level managers that they now are looking for people to fill.
I did experience a similar thing right before the Dot Com bubble burst an
Re: (Score:3)
I don't work for T-Mobile but I do work in the Core Network design team of another mobile carrier in another country. Amongst those applications were undoubtedly a bunch of systems that are literally the mobile network itself, Virtual Network Functions (VNF) - things like HSS, MME, PGW etc. You can't just pick those up and flick them somewhere else on a whim. With the complexity of a modern mobile network 4 years would be on the short side for a program of work to move them. Especially since the move would
Re: (Score:2)
> Amongst those applications were undoubtedly a bunch of systems that are literally the mobile network itself...
Yes, yes, yes. Thing is, there was a clear lack of urgency here. The timelines you cite are for your case, and whatever requirements, budgets and deadlines you suffer. T-Mobile made a bad bet in 2008, and the writing has been on the wall for years now, and viable alternatives have been available at least as long. Were T-Mobile competently managed, they certainly had the means to meet the necessary deadlines. Instead, they made yet another bad bet trying to litigate against pirates.
The correct bet tod
Broadcom told us all it was going to scam us... (Score:3)
They didn't even try to hide it. They were very public about this acquisition being about milking their customer base who would not be able to migrate away in time to avoid paying them.
My company ditched VMware within 3 months of the announcement. We moved with all deliberate speed to Proxmox and to be honest, we're happier there. Wish they had forced us sooner.
Re: (Score:2)
I did the same. I wouldn't say I'm happier - as a tech running the show, there are certain niceties I miss. From an overall business decision we are paying far less money and I believe the redundancy / resiliency is much the same and the end users don't see any difference so from that perspective, the business prefers the new solution. At the end of the day it's all about maximising profits, and Proxmox does that vs VMware for sure.
Customers lost in the shuffle (Score:1)
We went to Spectrum 2 days ago to replace my sons oldish phone with a new phone and plan from Spectrum. His old plan was on T-Mobile. We are still waiting for the eSim and phone number to transfer to his new phone. Spectrum says it might take 72 hours. But it appears the problem is likely on T-Mobiles end. I wonder how many others are being held hostage to this situation?
Re: (Score:3)
Transfers have always been messy, no one has fixed that problem, period.
I don't see how T-Mobile running their cell towers on VMware or not is going to have a direct impact on your transfer. Onboarding is just another app, slightly more critical than most, and it does touch a lot of systems. But it's hardly a big problem even if things go offline for 72 hours.
They care bout money, so billing is probably top of mind. Then cell towers.
Always Part of the Plan (Score:3)
It was obvious that Broadcom's plan was to shed their smallest customers and squeeze their biggest customers and I'm sure that they had models projecting how many customers would migrate away from VMware in the process. What I'd love to know is how accurate those projections have been but that information is harder to obtain.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering this has been Broadcom's recent mid-term business model I bet their projections were pretty accurate, as they were informed with data from less public/controversial acquisitions where they've done the same thing. Just to companies you've never heard of that make parts for companies that you have.
Hello? Anybody? (Score:4, Funny)
So even T-Mobile can't get through to customer support?
Oh the irony! Hurt Corpos hurt Corpos (Score:3)
Broadcom: We are altering the deal. Pray we do not alter it further
T-Mobile: Fuck you we're leaving
Also T-Mobile: We're cancelling all legacy phone contracts despite promising we wouldn't.
Re: (Score:2)
This! Fuck those assholes :)
'Pharma Bro' Martin Shkreli modus operandi (Score:3)
Broadcom are the tech equivalent of 'Pharma Bro' Martin Shkreli, who became infamous and earned the nickname after he hiked the price of a potentially lifesaving antiparasitic medication in 2015.
Pharma bro logic : The people who pay the massive price hikes will be more than enough to offset the people who die because they cannot afford the medication, and this short-term revenue boost will cover the purchase price, and from that point on it's all free money.
Broadcom bro logic : The companies who pay the massive price hikes will be more than enough to offset the companies who leave because they cannot afford the subscription, and this short-term revenue boost will cover the purchase price, and from that point on it's all free money.
It's the exact same playbook.
What's the problem? (Score:2)
"The matter is somewhat urgent," The Register reports, because a court-ordered support arrangement expires August 3, "so T-Mobile may soon be unable to get support for its very substantial VMware estate." ... The carrier fired back by pointing out that it has made just two support calls in 2026, which hardly justifies such a massive staff and expense.
They have a perpetual license, so can keep running VMWare without support. If they only had 2 support calls in the last year, it seems they should be abl
Contracts denying support for dead product (Score:2)
Exercising a cynical loophole for Broadcom. They can pretty much ditch any contract they want just by playing musical chairs with the product.
Everyone Saw This Coming (Score:3)
Broardcom's entire business model with these acquisitions (they did the same thing with others before VMWare) is to acquire something everyone depends on AND can't easily switch off ... and then jack up the prices by an insane amount.
It doesn't matter if most customers eventually leave: they will stick with what they have, no matter the cost, long enough for Broadcom to cover the entire cost of acquisition. At the end of the day they have more money than they started with, a small fraction of customers still paying, and some significant IP.
They win all around, and everyone else (including the acquired company and its now-fired employees) loses.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. The only surprise is that some large customers (like T Mobile) apparently did not see that coming.