Spotify moves its back end to Google Cloud

Post by snissn » Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 10:02 PM UTC

ariwilson wrote: post #139

snissn wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's core business is ads. Parse makes a lot of sense strategically for facebook, a big moat that they have built is around being your identity on the internet. Parse's platform encourages app developers to use facebook login as a core component of their apps. So even despite being ancillary to their business, they shut it down. Building a technology company around an ecosystem is potentially a lot riskier than p…

Google's core business is providing web services and putting ads on them. That core business means Google focuses a lot on running those web services effectively, which is why they are now focusing hard on the business angle of running other people's web services. Google spends $2+B per quarter on capital expenditures; where do you think that money is going if not datacenters? Using Facebook as a default login was ne…

Post by boulos » Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 10:04 PM UTC

tn13 wrote: post #145

nrh wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotifier here. One of the big risks that we identified with the Google partnership was exactly this: Google isn't exactly known for awesome customer service. We've been very pleasantly surprised. The cloud team has been pretty awesome to work with, including lots of engineer engineer contact, walk-throughs of systems and code for critical dependencies, and solid support and collaboration. Exceeded our expectations.

I am not surprised. Spotify is a big company. The question is will it work exactly same for Joe's Inc.

Post by kuschku » Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 10:05 PM UTC

boulos wrote: post #88

kuschku wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you ask your paying customers to pay extra – not to get support, but to increase the chance of getting support in time? That’s... an interesting business model.

Paying more for more support cases or more urgent responses is standard practice for support plans. For example, here's the AWS Support comparison page: https://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/compare-plans/ which has similar tiers of support.

Post by boulos » Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 10:08 PM UTC

tn13 wrote: post #148

latchkey wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a paid support service that is actually pretty good. It sounds like you're avoiding the generic Google in the same way you'd not buy something from Amazon vs. using AWS.

As I said Google's reputation is what made me not even bother to try. We all know that AWS and AZURE both are state of art and very competitively priced. If Google wants to beat them they have to win the perception war too. (OR reduce prices substantially).

Post by iampims » Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 10:10 PM UTC

vgt wrote: post #120

Hermel wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you happy with the performance of AppEngine? I have tried it last summer and was quite disappointed. CPU-bound programs that completed in a few seconds on my own computer took about ten times as long on AppEngine despite similar nominal specs (GHz and RAM).

In addition to all the excellent comments here. Let's not forget that the massive massive Snapchat runs almost entirely on Google AppEngine. So if AppEngine can handle their scale, it can handle most others :)