121–130 of 228 posts
There is nothing defensible about this business model. It's entering a crowded category with entrenched players who have far deep pockets and can negate all of this startup's so-called advantages. It's really about the worst kind of business to enter besides the restaurant industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not at all a selling point. You can do the same on AWS, get an EC2 and install everything there, that's it. The thing is that when you will need to leverage the other services of AWS, they will be there, while you will need to migrate if you're on one of those server providers.
I never understood the complaints of complexity about AWS. You can easily just use EC2 and maybe S3 and ignore the other 100 icons. I think, in practice, what folks are complaining about is that AWS has the worst UI known to man. In which case, you can use GCP for their nice UI and still get the benefits of a hyperscaler. I don’t mean to say that the simpler services have no place in the market but it’s pretty narrow…
"AWS has the worst UI known to man, except for Azure and GCP".
It still amazes me that when you add members to AAD groups the interface pops up and tells you 'change may not be displayed yet'. It's like, YOU HAVE ONE JOB.
Corporate fluff aside, AWS is on track to run on 100% renewables by 2025[1] so the selling is mostly "European cloud" since the green part will be mostly expected by the time they actually ramp up. Competition is always good though. > Studies by 451 Research have shown that AWS’ infrastructure is 3.6 times more energy efficient than the median of U.S. enterprise data centers surveyed and up to five times more energy…
Well we already have Hetzner and OVH which are European so just being European does not give them a selling point over others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclosure: I used to work on GCE. "Renewable" is a broad set of terms. Importantly from your first link on GCP it says: > Google is carbon neutral for our operations today, but aiming higher: our goal is to run on carbon-free energy, 24/7, at all of our data centers by 2030. Carbon-free, 24x7, is a stronger commitment than carbon-neutral which would include using renewable power offsets. Amazon's methodology is at h…
My understanding is that Google is also shifting workloads based on carbon intensity using ElectricityMap's data feed. https://www.electricitymaps.com/blog/announcing-our-partners... https://blog.google/inside-google/infrastructure/data-center... https://app.electricitymaps.com/map
Corporate fluff aside, AWS is on track to run on 100% renewables by 2025[1] so the selling is mostly "European cloud" since the green part will be mostly expected by the time they actually ramp up. Competition is always good though. > Studies by 451 Research have shown that AWS’ infrastructure is 3.6 times more energy efficient than the median of U.S. enterprise data centers surveyed and up to five times more energy…
Disclosure: I used to work on GCE. "Renewable" is a broad set of terms. Importantly from your first link on GCP it says: > Google is carbon neutral for our operations today, but aiming higher: our goal is to run on carbon-free energy, 24/7, at all of our data centers by 2030. Carbon-free, 24x7, is a stronger commitment than carbon-neutral which would include using renewable power offsets. Amazon's methodology is at h…
There's a big difference between "we bought solar elsewhere but still burn fossil fuels for our datacenters" and "we never use fossil fuels to power our data centers".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never understood the complaints of complexity about AWS. You can easily just use EC2 and maybe S3 and ignore the other 100 icons. I think, in practice, what folks are complaining about is that AWS has the worst UI known to man. In which case, you can use GCP for their nice UI and still get the benefits of a hyperscaler. I don’t mean to say that the simpler services have no place in the market but it’s pretty narrow…
To paraphrase Winston Churchill "AWS has the worst UI known to man, except for Azure and GCP". It still amazes me that when you add members to AAD groups the interface pops up and tells you 'change may not be displayed yet'. It's like, YOU HAVE ONE JOB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never understood the complaints of complexity about AWS. You can easily just use EC2 and maybe S3 and ignore the other 100 icons. I think, in practice, what folks are complaining about is that AWS has the worst UI known to man. In which case, you can use GCP for their nice UI and still get the benefits of a hyperscaler. I don’t mean to say that the simpler services have no place in the market but it’s pretty narrow…
I honestly would not trust a developer who finds AWS too confusing. At least 80% of the "complexity" on AWS is to keep you from introducing catastrophic security vulnerabilities. When a developer starts whining they can't figure out how to use an IAM role, it usually means they want to run their entire application as a root user whose SSH key they have sitting in Dropbox. Stay away from my software please.
AWS UI is filled with manual and tedious bullshit to do every day things. It really doesn't have to be this way, making things annoying to configure correctly leads to mistakes or lazy overly broad permissions.
If they weren't the first they wouldn't have made it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclosure: I used to work on GCE. "Renewable" is a broad set of terms. Importantly from your first link on GCP it says: > Google is carbon neutral for our operations today, but aiming higher: our goal is to run on carbon-free energy, 24/7, at all of our data centers by 2030. Carbon-free, 24x7, is a stronger commitment than carbon-neutral which would include using renewable power offsets. Amazon's methodology is at h…
My understanding is that Google is also shifting workloads based on carbon intensity using ElectricityMap's data feed. https://www.electricitymaps.com/blog/announcing-our-partners... https://blog.google/inside-google/infrastructure/data-center... https://app.electricitymaps.com/map
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big problem is IT in Europe just doesn’t pay very well. It beats a blue collar job, but anyone truly good has the option to emigrate for 2-3x more money.
And 10x for healthcare elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never understood the complaints of complexity about AWS. You can easily just use EC2 and maybe S3 and ignore the other 100 icons. I think, in practice, what folks are complaining about is that AWS has the worst UI known to man. In which case, you can use GCP for their nice UI and still get the benefits of a hyperscaler. I don’t mean to say that the simpler services have no place in the market but it’s pretty narrow…
I honestly would not trust a developer who finds AWS too confusing. At least 80% of the "complexity" on AWS is to keep you from introducing catastrophic security vulnerabilities. When a developer starts whining they can't figure out how to use an IAM role, it usually means they want to run their entire application as a root user whose SSH key they have sitting in Dropbox. Stay away from my software please.
So you would not trust most developers?
Even a lot of Sysadmins i.e. Devops find it confusing.
A lot of people just pretend it is fine by being ignorant and not learn any of it. They would follow 1-2 processes that works and never do anything else. You ask them why or how it works and you can't even get a real answer out of it.