Live data from Hacker News

It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

vanityfair.com

11–20 of 93 posts

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#11
Seems a bit too tailored though - "To even make a bid, a provider must maintain a distance of at least 150 miles between its data centers, a prerequisite that only Amazon can currently meet. JEDI also asks for “32 GB of RAM”—the precise specification of Amazon’s services. (Microsoft, by contrast, offers only 28 GB, and Google provides 30 GB.) In places, JEDI echoes Amazon’s own language: It calls for a “ruggedized” storage system, the same word Amazon uses to tout its Snowball Edge product."

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#13

Seems a bit too tailored though - "To even make a bid, a provider must maintain a distance of at least 150 miles between its data centers, a prerequisite that only Amazon can currently meet. JEDI also asks for “32 GB of RAM”—the precise specification of Amazon’s services. (Microsoft, by contrast, offers only 28 GB, and Google provides 30 GB.) In places, JEDI echoes Amazon’s own language: It calls for a “ruggedized” s…

Guys, please, try to be reasonable here.

150 miles is not an insert for Amazon. I'm not a general, but even I can see that 150 miles is military sense.

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#14

Seems a bit too tailored though - "To even make a bid, a provider must maintain a distance of at least 150 miles between its data centers, a prerequisite that only Amazon can currently meet. JEDI also asks for “32 GB of RAM”—the precise specification of Amazon’s services. (Microsoft, by contrast, offers only 28 GB, and Google provides 30 GB.) In places, JEDI echoes Amazon’s own language: It calls for a “ruggedized” s…

It sounds like the military wants what Amazon can provide, but is allowing other competitors to step up and give it a better deal. There are obvious reasons why a military customer would want distance between data centers and ruggedized storage, that's surely one of the reasons why Amazon has implemented them.

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#15

Seems a bit too tailored though - "To even make a bid, a provider must maintain a distance of at least 150 miles between its data centers, a prerequisite that only Amazon can currently meet. JEDI also asks for “32 GB of RAM”—the precise specification of Amazon’s services. (Microsoft, by contrast, offers only 28 GB, and Google provides 30 GB.) In places, JEDI echoes Amazon’s own language: It calls for a “ruggedized” s…

Way out of date, too. I suspect the reporting should have been fact checked, or updated.

https://cloud.google.com/compute/pricing

I guarantee that Google has more than 150 miles between data centers ;)

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#16

Seems a bit too tailored though - "To even make a bid, a provider must maintain a distance of at least 150 miles between its data centers, a prerequisite that only Amazon can currently meet. JEDI also asks for “32 GB of RAM”—the precise specification of Amazon’s services. (Microsoft, by contrast, offers only 28 GB, and Google provides 30 GB.) In places, JEDI echoes Amazon’s own language: It calls for a “ruggedized” s…

Google provides up to 3844 GB of Ram, https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2018/05/Introducing-ult...

While google also provides custom VM sizes, Does this mean Jedi includes hard instance type requirements that were basically copies of AWS EC2 types?

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#17

Seems a bit too tailored though - "To even make a bid, a provider must maintain a distance of at least 150 miles between its data centers, a prerequisite that only Amazon can currently meet. JEDI also asks for “32 GB of RAM”—the precise specification of Amazon’s services. (Microsoft, by contrast, offers only 28 GB, and Google provides 30 GB.) In places, JEDI echoes Amazon’s own language: It calls for a “ruggedized” s…

Those seem like standard specs to me. 32 GB is a standard number for RAM. Also, I'd be shocked if other major cloud providers have all their data centers within 150 miles of each other - that would eliminate geographic redundancies.

Re: It’s Amazon’s Swamp Now

#20
FWIW, it's a long-time, standard complaint by the losers that the specs were written in a way that favored the winner. On one hand, it's an obvious tactic for insiders to favor certain outsiders.

On the other, of course the winner has capabilities that better suit the specs - that's the goal of competitive bidding and we should hope that it's true of all winning bidders. So the fact that the winner's capabilities match the specs well doesn't tell us anything; if they didn't match well, it would be signal of corruption in the selection process.

Post reply on HN