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

I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

fourlightyears.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 684 posts

Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

#551

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

pabs3 wrote: post #512
pessimizer wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OSS licensing. Free Software was designed to avoid this, and has become stricter as the technology changed. Open Source was deliberately designed to thwart this. The entire intention of it was to allow businesses to resell work that was done for free. When you fork Free Software, your fork is also Free Software.

Free Software licenses don't restrict profit making, even the AGPL wouldn't stop Amazon from using the same strategy to beat those OSS companies in the market.

Yes, but at the very least, Amazon would need to contribute their code back, so it's not a complete loss.

Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

#556

Post by somenameforme »

jlokier wrote: post #269
andrepd wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lesson there then, isn't there? Use GPL

The GPL has no effect on this issue. For service providers like AWS, who provide the service not the software, the GPL doesn't require them to do anything differently than with more permissive licenses.

++

I think the GPL has become somewhat obsolete because of this causing it create to completely nonsensical scenarios. For instance I can't comply with the GPL and add vanilla Stockfish (the currently strongest chess engine, licensed under GPL) to a chess app released on the Apple store, yet somebody can slightly modify the engine, keep all those modifications proprietary, and sell access to the engine on the same App store, without source access, so long as the computer is done through a middle-man server instead of being done locally.

The GPL no longer suffices to maintain the spirit of intent of the GPL. Like a peer comment mentioned it seems (??) that AGPL is their update to resolve this.

Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

#557

Post by Hendrikto »

akvadrako wrote: post #434
Galanwe wrote: post #324

These arguments against AWS are boring. 99% of the negative comments are along the line of "so i have a dead simple product, I dont know anything about AWS, I logged in and it was super complicated and it seemed pricey". Well guess what, if you have a CRUD website and 100 users you're just not the target. Move on. Some days ago I wanted to sketch a 3D model of my TV remote. I opened blender and what a mess of complic…

It's true the comments get it wrong. But their main point stands; they shouldn't use AWS. It's also true that most companies which AWS does target shouldn't use it either, unless you have a good reason why ( like you need data centers in every continent or to quickly scale to 10+ thousands of cpus ).

> like you need data centers in every continent or to quickly scale to 10+ thousands of cpus

Which for some reason many people think they need, while in reality 1% actually need it.

Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

#558

Post by petepete »

mpyne wrote: post #469
petepete wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PostgreSQL doesn't have a pro/officially supported version though.

Sure they do. AWS RDS, Azure Database for PostgreSQL, etc. are all "pro" / "officially supported" deployments of PostgreSQL. On top of that the PostgreSQL official website even lists a whole table full of vendors from whom you can get commercial support at https://www.postgresql.org/support/professional_support/nort... Bringing faux open source into the world isn't a justification for adopting an infeasible business…

Obviously I mean PostgreSQL themselves don't have one, like Redis, MongoDB etc.

Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

#559

Post by IsTom »

sudosteph wrote: post #123

I'm surprised by the author's hate towards DynamoDB. It's probably one of my favorite AWS Services. Great availability and no operational overhead. Cost was pretty minimal too each time I've used it, but you do need to spend some time architecting your data model up front, and that requires reading service docs and understanding it.

I might be holding it wrong, but last time I tried to use DynamoDB it made absolutely no sense performance-wise to me. Postgres on my laptop was many orders of magnitude faster for fraction of price. It seemed like it maybe might make sense when you hit multiple TBs of database data and can no longer run on a single server? But then the costs would be sky-high and you probably could engineer your way around this with this kind of money.

Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left

#560

Post by cantalopes »

sorry to hijack this but since we're talking the AWS egress exorbitant prices, could someone recommend a reliable production-tested s3 service that will not ruin me financially? i have been with hetzner and while their vps server are great, they are absolutely terrible at s3. random downtimes, incomplete uploads/downloads, capacity issues, terrible api key management, etc - but the failure rate is really high
Post reply on HN