Alphabet earnings show Google Cloud on $10B run rate

Post by thehappypm » Thu, Feb 06, 2020, 11:13 PM UTC

pingyong wrote: post #62

davedx wrote: post #43

Does anyone know if there are numbers somewhere for how much energy the different cloud providers use? Would be interesting to see which is more efficient from that perspective for those of us who care about such things. Energy per $ revenue or even better per compute would be helpful.

A cloud provider that specializes in compute will have vastly higher energy costs than a cloud provider that specializes in storage. Even without explicit specialization, it's not unreasonable to assume that the distribution of compute-heavy and storage-heavy customers is quite different between providers. So you'd have to sort of calculate that out. But if you do that, I'm not sure what would even differentiate them…

Post by xyst » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 1:50 AM UTC

vikramkr wrote: post #162

xyst wrote: post #135

I hate how we are just giving away control over the internet to Amazon/Google. How does a small cloud provider stay in business when up against these multi billion dollar companies? At any point in time, these companies can just lower the cost of their products, and suffer through a few bad quarters while the small businesses slowly bleed out and die.

So predatory pricing is very illegal, and considering that there are three major players in this space (azure/gcp/aws), all three of them would have to coordinate to kill other competition (since otherwise one of them could break from the deal and make their own money by betraying the other two), which is also very illegal. And why would they even need to do something like that? AWS is wildly profitable anyway with e…

Post by vikramkr » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 4:14 AM UTC

sixothree wrote: post #200

vikramkr wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So predatory pricing is very illegal, and considering that there are three major players in this space (azure/gcp/aws), all three of them would have to coordinate to kill other competition (since otherwise one of them could break from the deal and make their own money by betraying the other two), which is also very illegal. And why would they even need to do something like that? AWS is wildly profitable anyway with e…

You seem to imply coordination requires some sort of deal/communication between the entities.

Post by koheripbal » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 4:53 AM UTC

ethbro wrote: post #186

koheripbal wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the "reputation" is simply the fact that you cannot call someone at Google for support unless you're an enterprise customer (GSUITE). That's the new trend though for almost all companies. Customer telephone support is costly, difficult to manage, difficult to staff, and problematic customers consume an overwhelming amount of resources - orders of magnitude more than their value as a customer. ...on the ente…

The problem is companies that treat support as a cost center. A healthy company mines the hell out of it for feature discovery and product improvement. These people are literally continually talking to your customers about what their actual pain points are!

Post by int_19h » Fri, Feb 07, 2020, 3:07 PM UTC

moksly wrote: post #54

Pandabob wrote: post #2

Meh. I'd wish Microsoft and Google would start separating their actual cloud platform (Azure, GCP) revenues from their "cloud" SaaS revenue (Office 365, G Suite). It'd make comparisons to AWS a lot more meaningful. Edit: Apparently Microsoft is already doing this.

It’s a little unrelated but Azure and Office 365 are becoming the same thing in large enterprise, utilising the same Azure AD, letting you run the same powershell/python managed services on your office 365 platform from your Azure platform. Utilising things like OIOSAML for multi-organisational setups for IDM with a mix of local, azure AD and office 365 account management. I personally prefer things like digital ocea…