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

Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 256 posts

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#131

Post by matwood »

keerthiko wrote: post #70

I don't understand why Google doesn't woo silicon valley startups more aggressively. Gcloud is actually a pretty solid service, far more usable at varying levels of technical expertise. A lot of nice integrated tools for high end users (EC2/kub8/cloud console/etc) that gives AWS a good run for their money, and (gcloud web browser, web console, gcutils) for devs not that familiar with cloud tools that are significantl…

They purposely turned away many of those startups with changes in pricing like they did for the Maps/Geolocation API [1].

I'm sure there is an example, but I don't know of one when AWS has ever raised prices on a service.

[1] http://geoawesomeness.com/developers-up-in-arms-over-google-...

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#132

Post by [deleted] »

jussij wrote: post #114
avip wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me guess: "the tier that we were in" was the free tier?

And it may well be that "the tier that we were in" was the free tier. But my question would be why did Google enter a paying field with a free option, knowing full well it would kill off all those paying players, to only then kill their free option knowing all competition is now gone? Google should not be offering up any service, free or otherwise that has a use by date that is only known to Google.

[deleted]

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#133

Post by coredog64 »

Analemma_ wrote: post #12

Cloud is where Google's reputation for killing products is really going to haunt it. Every time HN commenters complain about Google axing a service, there are lots of "you're making too big a deal about this, no one is leaving Google because they ditched Reader" responses, and for its consumer products that may be true. But decisions about which cloud provider to use are made by C-suite executives, and they absolutel…

I would also add that Google is competing with customers in a similar fashion to Amazon/AWS. One example is travel: Google is actually an OTA and actively works to take a cut of each trip. If you’re doing anything that could potentially be given away free (well, free with ad revenue), you should be thinking long and hard about paying Google to outcompete you.

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#134

Post by fsloth »

killjoywashere wrote: post #106
spricket wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I used to do consulting so I've seen this firsthand. Many of our non-technical clients demanded Azure even when it wasn't ideal (this was years ago, before they cloned most of AWS). Why? Microsoft is known for long term support, at reasonable prices. Any business that's survived more than a decade loves them for it. We had clients running Windows 95 in VM's if that gives you an idea of how far some companies…

> Windows 95 in a VM Puh-lease! I log into a VMS server every day to access an application that saw it's last update in 1995. Which wasn't even deployed until 2001. It will be replaced this year with a Win95 era application, complete with acres of giant grey buttons, served over a Citrix link from VMs running Server 2008. Bleeding edge, boys, bleeding edge.

Statistically a new software project - especially if done by a team with no common history of past successes - is risky.

So, if business values stability over risk, I understand very well if they select very very very very long term support option rather than to create the product from scratch.

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#135

Post by vishnugupta »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #129
scarface74 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, AWS has never abandoned a service. They deprecate services and occasionally make services unavailable for new accounts.

Technically Amazon and not AWS but they deprecated then removed two separate payment APIs one after the other (SimplePay and another). It’s the reason we haven’t adopted the latest replacement. Why bother? Edit: thanks, it was indeed FPS.

> another

I was in a team that worked on "another" :-). Some of the best memories of my professional life were formed during that period! At launch that was indeed as part of AWS. However it then came under Amazon Payments entity due to legal reasons. Felt sad to see it retired though[1]

[1] https://forums.aws.amazon.com/ann.jspa?annID=3045

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#136

Post by S_A_P »

spricket wrote: post #94
politelemon wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely anecdotally speaking - at a few enterprises, convincing customers to make use of GCP has been an uphill battle. I notice deep misgivings regarding the support timescales, and even for supported products, poor support in general (ymmv+++). GCP do have a clause in their SLA/T&C where they promise a 1 year notice in the case of any services they plan to deprecate, but that hasn't helped assuage fears - they w…

Thanks, I used to do consulting so I've seen this firsthand. Many of our non-technical clients demanded Azure even when it wasn't ideal (this was years ago, before they cloned most of AWS). Why? Microsoft is known for long term support, at reasonable prices. Any business that's survived more than a decade loves them for it. We had clients running Windows 95 in VM's if that gives you an idea of how far some companies…

Fellow consultant here that has seen a lot of similar issues. I am currently tasked with rewriting a Delphi application that supports business in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. It was written by a guy in his garage in Alabama. He sold the source code to the former parent company of my client. We now have a vm of the image of the guys laptop and the heavily customized Delphi environment required to build this application should a change be required. Apparently he built a bunch of delphi ide plugins to configure the environment, and should you try to build it with the latest Delphi IDE, you are SOL.

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#137

Post by mathattack »

They both suffer from opposite ends of Customer perception. Google’s Customer perception problem is that it’s too hard to use. (Fear of the unknown) IBM’s is that people resent their history of broken promises and hype. (Fear of the known)

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#138

Post by ascii_only »

lugg wrote: post #127
dsl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Azure is bought in the boardroom, not by the engineers and ops staff that will use it on a day to day basis. When you have a $xx million Azure minimum commit that your C-level has already written a check for, you yell at your account team until they add Linux support and try to make due with what you have. I've heard internal numbers that Linux VMs outnumber Windows 2-to-1, but that they see long term value in doing…

Makes me wonder if instead we might see an MS branded Linux distro (think redhat) or C# native on Linux.

They already have both. Azure sphere and .Net core.

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#139

Post by snarfy »

politelemon wrote: post #92
spricket wrote: post #87

The reason for IBM's failure is pretty obvious. Their old school bare-metal servers at Softlayer are a good value, but the need for bare metal is decreasing with IO improvements like SR-IOV and real hardware level virtualization (ex HVM on AWS). I've also heard IBM is running that division into the ground. Their cloud offering sucks. Last time I was curious, I couldn't even figure out how much my server would cost. T…

Completely anecdotally speaking - at a few enterprises, convincing customers to make use of GCP has been an uphill battle. I notice deep misgivings regarding the support timescales, and even for supported products, poor support in general (ymmv+++). GCP do have a clause in their SLA/T&C where they promise a 1 year notice in the case of any services they plan to deprecate, but that hasn't helped assuage fears - they w…

Support is the main reason I wouldn't use GCP. Production is down and the only response I get is an automated email? No thanks.

Re: Google and IBM still trying desperately to move cloud market share needle

#140

Post by ramshanker »

spricket wrote: post #94
politelemon wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely anecdotally speaking - at a few enterprises, convincing customers to make use of GCP has been an uphill battle. I notice deep misgivings regarding the support timescales, and even for supported products, poor support in general (ymmv+++). GCP do have a clause in their SLA/T&C where they promise a 1 year notice in the case of any services they plan to deprecate, but that hasn't helped assuage fears - they w…

Thanks, I used to do consulting so I've seen this firsthand. Many of our non-technical clients demanded Azure even when it wasn't ideal (this was years ago, before they cloned most of AWS). Why? Microsoft is known for long term support, at reasonable prices. Any business that's survived more than a decade loves them for it. We had clients running Windows 95 in VM's if that gives you an idea of how far some companies…

Yes yes, there is a WinXP PC in our department with screen covered with a white paper with large font size text "This PC is under remote operation by Structure department, Do Not Shut it down."

Obviously there is a highly domain specific application for our Civil & Structural works last updated 10+ years ago. No one familiar/willing to upgrade it's internal licensing systems to work on newer Windows. So here we go. Whoever needs to work on it, take Remote Desktop. Simple.

Post reply on HN