AWS just went multi-cloud • Hacker News Board

Re: AWS just went multi-cloud

#141

Post by tatersolid » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 5:35 AM UTC

im3w1l wrote: post #140

cheesgrateron wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you must have a limited mindset of how long it can take wheels to turn in large companies. Without cloud, it's not uncommon for the F500s I've worked at to take literal months (90+ days) just to provision and stand up a new server for an application team to even begin developing on. Even if you spend time "debugging black boxes" (which is highly debatable), most of the time you're still moving a lot faster wi…

Why don't they give the application team a few extra servers to do whatever on without asking for permission?

Because without good organizational controls, the developers will put those servers into production with no HA, backups, and insecure configuration.

I’ve seen it multiple times in my careeer.

Re: AWS just went multi-cloud

#142

Post by djeiasbsbo » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 10:52 AM UTC

throwaway908357 wrote: post #46

djeiasbsbo wrote: post #25

Unrelated but is ACG a good learning platform? I'm never sure with these types of platforms because I am not interested in any certifications and such, so it is hard to tell whether they just teach the stuff needed for these certifications and nothing more...

Their content is absolutely average. ACG as a company nearly killed Jupiter Broadcasting. JB were able to escape but are facing many years financial hardship due to an overly burdensome litigious culture from ACG after the acquisition of Linux Academy from separating the two businesses. This split came on the heels of a questionable HR policy implementation around the firing of Joe Ressington. Reverse sexism is appar…

Thank you but would you mind providing even more context/data here? Listening to different Jupiter Broadcast shows, their advertisements seem to have seamlessly transitioned from Linux Academy to ACG. So I can't say I have encountered that drama...

Re: AWS just went multi-cloud

#143

Post by cpufry » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

shitlord wrote: post #23

rory_isAdonk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is working at AWS hellish? Or once you get in it's just a normal job? I get its heavily dependent on the team, just wondering from your perspective.

AWS is huge, so YMMV across teams. Some teams have operational and funding issues, so your experience there may be hellish. You could think of it another way and realize that you have your work cut out for you. I previously worked on an AWS team like this and left because I got tired of the grind. On the other hand, a lot of teams are great places to work. Before I left AWS, I worked on a really good team with intell…

> It was like night and day - the team was over-funded and had very few operational issues.

oh god which service/team/

Re: AWS just went multi-cloud

#144

Post by im3w1l » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 6:30 AM UTC

tatersolid wrote: post #141

im3w1l wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't they give the application team a few extra servers to do whatever on without asking for permission?

Because without good organizational controls, the developers will put those servers into production with no HA, backups, and insecure configuration. I’ve seen it multiple times in my careeer.

That makes a lot of sense. I can see how using cloud solves for HA and backups. But how does insecure configuration come in?

Re: AWS just went multi-cloud

#145

Post by gnramires » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 11:13 PM UTC

martamorena9182 wrote: post #18

julianozen wrote: post #7

I wonder if Amazon’s theory here is that by offering multi-cloud support they can put decision makers at ease when choosing cloud vendors by making them feel like they’re not getting locked into AWS - but Amazon also expects most customers to mostly only use AWS out of convenience Disclaimer - I used to work for AWS

See Jeff Bezos' famous comment: "It is better to cannibalize yourself; than let others cannibalize you" This should answer your question and hint what's to come.

The classic case I often heard is Kodak:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak#Shift_to_digital

It was a pioneer in digital transition but moved too slowly in fear of cannibalizing their film business. Ironically, today it seems printing and their legacy film are their strengths (and the consumer digital camera market is dead, shifted to smartphones) -- which seems to complicate drawing lessons. However, it could easily have invested in e.g. sensor manufacturing if it recognized early the potential of the transition and still be well today[1].

I think a good strategy is to fearlessly cannibalize [1] yourself yes, but don't abandon your strengths and expertise, instead use them to propel your new ventures.

[1]: I think a good definition of self-cannibalization is due. In this case, it refers to abandoning unstable businesses. For example, trying to hold a market by forcing out "better", newer devices (digital vs film) is unstable -- you're betting on blocking the adoption of a better alternative.

[2]: Sony appears to have done well, today the leading camera sensor manufacturer https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201007005124/en/Str...