I'm not eligible, but this could still be positive for me... if it means Google Cloud starts supporting a greater range of programming languages. Right now the options are very limited compared to something like EC2.
Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
111–120 of 179 posts
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#112But if moving off your current platform and to Google's worth it? One year goes fast.
It's moving the other way that will get you. And that will likely wipe out any savings and then some.
Moving to GCP takes a bit of an idealogical shift, but moving off Google is pretty simple if you use AppScale. That might be the best option for these startups; take advantages of the free services from Google and move away after a year if you need to.
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#113Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#114But if moving off your current platform and to Google's worth it? One year goes fast.
It's moving the other way that will get you. And that will likely wipe out any savings and then some.
Yeah, there are some horror stories eg. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1927903
4 years old that, things may be better now.
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#115I'm not eligible, but this could still be positive for me... if it means Google Cloud starts supporting a greater range of programming languages. Right now the options are very limited compared to something like EC2.
You must be talking about AppEngine specifically, which is PaaS (Elastic Beanstalk is similar, and only supports a handful of languages as well).
Google Compute Engine doesn't have PaaS-like restrictions, much like EC2.
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't dispute anything you say. But the fact that they can make this an eligibility criterion speaks to the conformism in startup culture, and the gatekeeping role of a very small establishment.
The fact that they can make this an eligibility criterion speaks to the fact that they're giving you something you'd otherwise pay $100,000 for. If this deal is somehow keeping startups outside the gate then said startups must really have been screwed 3 hours ago when this deal didn't even exist.
Most startups need all the help they can get. Google has decided to provide help only to those who have sold their souls away. Seems rather evil to me.
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#117Between the lines: Google has calculated that ExpectedLockinValue(given(ventureFunded)) + SillyPRBoost.value > ExpectedUsage($100k/yr) Or, in other words, Google believes for the venture-funded cohort, giving you a $100k option now will set them up to take significantly more later. They also don't want to spend any effort administrating (vetting) this program. I don't think this is confusing or insulting. Google's ca…
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the most obvious (and innocuous) motivation: to expose young developers to google's cloud platform so that they'll be comfortable with it when they become big-time CTOs in a few years.
The network effects for cloud services are nowhere near as strong as they were for operating systems (end users don't care which underlying platform is used) but there is an advantage to having more developers familiar with your service.
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#118Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#119I'd say that if you want to fund a startup with $100,000 you go meet that startup and get to know it very well. Google is relying on somebody else to make that assessment so my guess is that the cost of those services to Google is much lower than those $100,000, maybe much much lower than that. They sure have unused capacity in their server farm, network, storage, etc. I'm not saying that they're doing an advertising stunt for free but $100,000 worth of anything doesn't necessarily means that $100,000 are leaving Google's pockets.
Re: Google Launches Cloud Platform for Startups
#120I have to agree with a lot of the comments here, the very people who need the help. The ones who are doing it the hard way, striking out on their own and grafting on only their own money/debt could really do with a helping hand here and there.
But time after time we're disqualified because we're not in an incubator. Our businesses are our incubators, our customers are our incubators.
Why not woo us? Why not offer us some help so we get hooked into your products?
I'd love to see the stats on survival rates between bootstrapped and funded :-)
Come on guys, stop adding the 'approved accelerator' nonsense - startup != accelerator !