Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

blogs.dxc.technology

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 61 posts

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#11

Post by th3iedkid »

mephitix wrote: post #6

This is a good thing; Microsoft will increase competition in this space by applying its expertise in dev tools to Kubernetes. I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. For example k8s ingress right now is based on controllers and GCE controllers support/don't support a wide variety of things compared to nginx ingress... these areas of Kubernetes make me…

In fact MS acquired Deis sometime in March this year.

Draft.sh , helm etc are under MS now, while they do remain OSS.

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#12

Post by sailingparrot »

gkop wrote: post #7
clhodapp wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GKE does charge for the masters for clusters of 6 or more nodes. See https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/pricing . Microsoft's offering does not seem to charge you for the masters ever, so that does seem like a differentiator.

You write "Microsoft's offering does not seem to charge you for the masters ever". The article says "You will only pay for the virtual machines (VM) that you use for managing your Kubernetes cluster". Do you have a source that disagrees with the article? Edit: to those replying correcting the article, if you were to create a top-level comment on this thread correcting the article, we could upvote your comments and be…

https://docs.microsoft.com/gl-es/azure/aks/intro-kubernetes

> "you pay only for the agent nodes within your clusters, not for the masters."

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#13

Post by xkarga00 »

mephitix wrote: post #6

This is a good thing; Microsoft will increase competition in this space by applying its expertise in dev tools to Kubernetes. I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. For example k8s ingress right now is based on controllers and GCE controllers support/don't support a wide variety of things compared to nginx ingress... these areas of Kubernetes make me…

Microsoft should write an ingress controller for Azure? Not sure how you can get into a vendor lock-in situation with k8s. Maybe Microsoft extends the API with its own blackbox controllers and force that instead of kube primitives?

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#14

Post by AaronFriel »

gkop wrote: post #7
clhodapp wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GKE does charge for the masters for clusters of 6 or more nodes. See https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/pricing . Microsoft's offering does not seem to charge you for the masters ever, so that does seem like a differentiator.

You write "Microsoft's offering does not seem to charge you for the masters ever". The article says "You will only pay for the virtual machines (VM) that you use for managing your Kubernetes cluster". Do you have a source that disagrees with the article? Edit: to those replying correcting the article, if you were to create a top-level comment on this thread correcting the article, we could upvote your comments and be…

Yes, I have played with AKS. You do not pay for the Kubernetes masters, just the nodes. In the prior version of the product (ACS) you would specify a cluster size as a number of masters and a number of workers/nodes. In AKS, you only manage the latter and Azure abstracts away the Kubernetes API.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/container-...

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#15

Post by AaronFriel »

gkop wrote: post #2

Edit: Thanks to replies explaining that in fact AKS doesn't charge for the master! I'm leaving the rest of this comment standing because it's an honest reply to the article posted - Microsoft isn't disingenuous, this article is just wrong. > Be that as it may, Microsoft is offering AKS for free. You will only pay for the virtual machines (VM) that you use for managing your Kubernetes cluster. Microsoft says, “Unlike…

> Also, if we have to think about the master instance sizes on AKS because we're paying for them, then that's one thing we have to manage on AKS that we don't have to manage on GKE

This is entirely premised on your speculation which turned out to be false. Curious that you're willing to call this blog post disingenuous when you're the one spreading falsehoods?

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#16

Post by Kipters »

JoshMnem wrote: post #9
mephitix wrote: post #6

This is a good thing; Microsoft will increase competition in this space by applying its expertise in dev tools to Kubernetes. I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. For example k8s ingress right now is based on controllers and GCE controllers support/don't support a wide variety of things compared to nginx ingress... these areas of Kubernetes make me…

> I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. That's Microsoft's main strategy though. Example: Users can't even install Firefox or Chrome on Windows 10 S. Microsoft announced: "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform." I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised to see similar things hap…

That's a different product, with different goals. You're right about 10 S, but it's kinda unrelated to Azure.

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#17

Post by gkop »

AaronFriel wrote: post #15
gkop wrote: post #2

Edit: Thanks to replies explaining that in fact AKS doesn't charge for the master! I'm leaving the rest of this comment standing because it's an honest reply to the article posted - Microsoft isn't disingenuous, this article is just wrong. > Be that as it may, Microsoft is offering AKS for free. You will only pay for the virtual machines (VM) that you use for managing your Kubernetes cluster. Microsoft says, “Unlike…

> Also, if we have to think about the master instance sizes on AKS because we're paying for them, then that's one thing we have to manage on AKS that we don't have to manage on GKE This is entirely premised on your speculation which turned out to be false. Curious that you're willing to call this blog post disingenuous when you're the one spreading falsehoods?

"You will only pay for the virtual machines (VM) that you use for managing your Kubernetes cluster."

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#18

Post by rad_gruchalski »

fredsted wrote: post #8
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #3

I really, really hope aws joins the game. re:invent is around the corner.

Well, you can use something like kops, although it's a little more difficult to get started, I guess. This new tool from Azure is basically the same thing. It's a little interesting since they already have ECS, which isn't that bad either, but it seems like everyone just wants Kubernetes. Will they do both, or provide a migration path?

ECS is okay, used it quite a bit recently. It definitely has some quirks to it, like having to use CloudWatch events to figure out the port given to the container when using bridge network. Maybe if the service discovery story was a little bit more defined, ECS would be easier to use. There's lots of little manual things one has to do around it to make it work as swift as other solutions available.

With regards to k8s on AWS, I do not have a problem running it myself but some backing from AWS definitely help defining k8s as "the solution" for running containerized workflows. Here's one hoping.

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#19

Post by lewisl9029 »

JoshMnem wrote: post #9
mephitix wrote: post #6

This is a good thing; Microsoft will increase competition in this space by applying its expertise in dev tools to Kubernetes. I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. For example k8s ingress right now is based on controllers and GCE controllers support/don't support a wide variety of things compared to nginx ingress... these areas of Kubernetes make me…

> I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. That's Microsoft's main strategy though. Example: Users can't even install Firefox or Chrome on Windows 10 S. Microsoft announced: "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform." I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised to see similar things hap…

> "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform."

This seems like a thing that platform owners are doing more and more (iOS has a similar clause, and ChromeOS, well, uses Chrome).

Is this just purely a move to stifle competition from web apps that could threaten control of the platform? Or perhaps I am missing some nuance behind these kinds of decisions? I'm honestly struggling to find any room to give them benefit of the doubt here.

Re: Microsoft doubles down on Kubernetes for Azure

#20

Post by plasma »

mephitix wrote: post #6

This is a good thing; Microsoft will increase competition in this space by applying its expertise in dev tools to Kubernetes. I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. For example k8s ingress right now is based on controllers and GCE controllers support/don't support a wide variety of things compared to nginx ingress... these areas of Kubernetes make me…

> I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in.

I watched one of their videos demonstrating the product, and they understood people wanted 100% compatibility with the open-source k8s system and no special Azure/MS features, and so this was one of their selling points, which is good.

Post reply on HN