how Beats compability is preserved?
OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
421–430 of 438 posts
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
Err, SSPL which Elasticsearch is licensed under isn't AGPL - it's a viral, proprietary license - not quite the copyleft we'd want if we wanted a fair playing field between all actors working on it.
It's a viral open source license, it literally requires open sourcing code, there's nothing proprietary about it except that we allow a council of elitist snots to decide what is and isn't Open Source(TM), and they have decided Google and Amazon support is more important than viable businesses which are building open source businesses.
Could Elastic's business model work if lucene were licensed SSPL?
I think it probably could not. And if lucene were licensed GPL, it would not be possible for ElasticSearch to use this new SSPL license, it would be have to be GPL too.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#423Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was nodding along until this: > and THEN we think about how do we make money from it Do you really need to think? Looking at the on-demand pricing in US East, a m5.4xlarge.elasticsearch instance costs $1.133 an hour, while a m5.4xlarge instance costs $0.768 an hour. That's 47.53% of extra money. And like you said, it only requires a small team to build and maintain the service. It is no coincidence that all cloud p…
What people often forget is that cross-AZ traffic is included in those .elasticsearch instance prices. In a 3-AZ deployment and given the frequent rebalancing/replication traffic that is a significant line item if you run it yourself. I'm not arguing it's not expensive, but when you look at the TCO it's less obscene than if you just look at EC2 pricing alone.
That's a very good point, I wasn't aware of that.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you think this is about Elastic caring about openness and freedom, ask yourself why they don't drop the CLA for a DCO and let themselves be beholden to the same terms
Counterpoint: FSF and Mozilla require CLA too
Except that FSF and Mozilla are not usual for-profit companies with primary mission of making as much money as possible. Elastic on other side is and it's funded by VC money that want return on their investment.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#425Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#426Is there any good that done by Amazon to support OSS? Like ever. They started with cloning MongoDB and now Elastic with actually zero contribution to the community regardless of their insane profits. This is a clear single. Amazon can always clone and redistribute any open source software then lock it in for AWS. If we've started to witness declining in OSS, well at least we know now who started the wave.
I like to think, or at least I hope, that OSS isn't going to decline, it's just going to evolve. The existing OSI licenses weren't meant for a world of clouds and SAAS. I believe we'll have to find the next-generation of licenses that can succeed where AGPL tried and failed.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#427Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon will of course have a PR statement about how it cares about open source. It's not like Apple is known for it's commitment to open source but it has a similar page: https://developer.apple.com/opensource/
Firstly, Apple is a hardware company, AWS is a services company, these two things are quite different. I'm not sure why you think mentioning them in this discussion brings anything helpful to the conversation. Secondly, Webkit is hugely influential as an Opensource project.
Well, Apple actually makes quite a lot of software, doesn't it? Such as its own series of operating systems and applications to run on their hardware? I'm not really sure how you think they aren't relevant to a conversation about OSS.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#428Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value in the market is the subject of the parent thread. Anyways, like I said, Elastic could've made money with a proprietary product but they chose OSS instead (and used Apache Lucene to build on). AWS is just offering customers what they want and there are many other companies doing the same thing (IBM's Compose, Aiven, Instaclustr, etc). How is this against OSS? This is the OSS industry operating as intended.
Your comment is interpreting as ES was naive by choosing open-source which allows AWS to fork the code. I read this argument all the time about OSS. Where does this conversation lead? I'll tell you: to end any meaningful attempt to create open-source code with a business model aka the end of OSS.
No, I never said any that and it makes no sense.
OSS doesn't have anything to do with business models. Anyone can create open-source software and many do. The whole point is that it's free to create, see and modify. Some companies choose business models which include open-source software, and that comes with advantages (increased popularity and growth) and disadvantages (free usage, forks of codebase).
The reality though is that tech has changed and customers don't want to buy software, they want services now. ES has been slow to offer this, and they still offer it poorly, which is why AWS and other companies have filled in the gap. This is how business competition works.
Please answer these questions: Do you have a problem with the other companies (which are smaller than Elastic) that offer managed elasticsearch? Do you have a problem with multiple companies offering hosted Wordpress? Do you have a problem with any company that sells software or services that use open-source components?
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is Amazon too big and a bully? Is Starbucks too big and a bully? Sure, they force Mom and Pop shops to close by out-competing them, and that sucks. But bullying? I believe that's just Capitalism. Or say you're 6'6 and weigh 230LBS and you join a football team full of people who are 5'9 and 175lbs. Are you a bully just because you're bigger? ES basically handed them a platter with a goose laying golden eggs and a si…
> Is Starbucks too big and a bully? Sure, they force Mom and Pop shops to close by out-competing them, and that sucks. But bullying? I believe that's just Capitalism. I'd say it's more like a mom-and-pop coffee shop giving free coffee to patrons hoping to make money on cookies, and Starbucks coming in, taking the free coffee, opening a nice stand right next to the shop and selling the coffee they got for free. I'm ha…
You could always look at teh Oracle version (wait.. please... )
They started selling consultancy.. the solution was an Oracel DB...
To expand across the world they franchisedit.Th eagreeement was, you take te hfranchise, if yoou hit x target in 4 years, we will pay you y amount (large) ...and take it over.
That worked well. DOnt see any reason why Starbucks, or anyone else could nottake that on board, then everyone is a winner.
Re: OpenSearch: AWS fork of Elasticsearch and Kibana
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you know can I migrate my sophisticated security setup easily over? Including users, groups, roles, policies and instance policies.
Everything on AWS is accessible via API, which means you can easily automate the migration process. So do that? Obviously the more complex a system is the harder it will be to migrate, but that has nothing to do with Amazon trying to "lock you in" and everything to do with it just being a complex system that there is no industry standard solution for.
It appears you are using one definition of lock in while others are using another. What your version of lock in seems to entail is deliberate actions by the hosting provider to force you to stay with their offering. When I (and others it seems) use it, it just means the natural friction that keeps you in the provider. It doesnt have to be a deliberate strategy to be lock in. That doesnt make it any less difficult/painful to migrate.