Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#161

Post by Despegar » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #85

Despegar wrote: post #7

I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw this headline on Twitter. It's just kisses fingers . So now that everyone knows they are waffling on whether to stay in the business (and have a deadline), Microsoft and Amazon just need to increase the competitive intensity for the next few years to drive Google out and instead of cloud computing being an oligopoly it'll be a duopoly. If you're a startup you should serio…

If you're a startup you should seriously consider colocation for as many of your workloads as possible The vast majority of startups do not succeed or fail based upon their ability to control their datacenter spend. They succeed or fail based upon their ability to attract customers and grow revenue. Colocating and managing your own servers instead of taking advantage of the ease of using the cloud will only be a dist…

Perhaps that's true for a startup still trying to prove their concept, but it might not for one that has achieved product/market fit. "Hybrid cloud" is starting to get traction for large enterprises adopting the cloud [1]. They're going from on-premise in their own data centers to colocating at internet exchange data centers, which act as on-ramps to the cloud oligopoly.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-03/amazon-tu...

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#162

Post by karolist » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

Invictus0 wrote: post #45

karolist wrote: post #35

I have a hard time believing articles from sources with no track record making bold claims. Seriously, "theinformation.com" and hardly anyone is skeptical?

The Information is a very reputable source. Is this your first time hearing about them?

Admittedly yes, add to the fact it's behind a subscription-wall for me made me question the content. I will research theinformation.com more.

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#163

Post by roystonvassey » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

I worked with GCP on a small (Somewhere down the line, they came back to me to let me know that I had not given them clear instructions and what I had asked was impossible. In the meanwhile, an intern in my team had got the entire solution up-and-running on a small, self-hosted containerized service. I showed them and they mumble about something to be fixed and how they'll get back to me. All in all, a complete waste of time, resources and bandwidth. I am glad it was for just six weeks and in hindsight, I'm happy I didn't get the rest of my team involved in it.

We have worked with Azure since then and I am super impressed with their professionalism. There are hiccups but the understanding I now hold is this - Google (probably still) builds great consumer products but have zero clue on how to work with enterprises while it appears to be the opposite with Microsoft. Their razor-sharp and sole focus on enterprise appears to help them excel instead of having a diffused, unclear strategy that is Google's currently.

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#164

Post by lordnacho » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

jcrites wrote: post #119

lordnacho wrote: post #55

You have to wonder whether "must be number 1 or 2" came out of some pop-management text. What exactly is wrong with being on the list of potential cloud providers for almost every project? Have you ever been on a non-MS project where someone didn't at least mention GCP instead of AWS? Google being as profitable as it is can afford options. Why not sit around in number 3 spot?

The article claims, if I understood it correctly, that GCP will not be profitable unless it reaches the scale of being at least #2. The implication is that economies of scale are necessary for profitability. For example, in 2014, James Hamilton spoke about how every day that year, AWS was adding enough new server capacity to support all of Amazon's global infrastructure when it was a $7B annual revenue enterprise (20…

But there's a subtle difference between being big enough to make profits and ranking. If you need X amount of business to make profits, why does it matter whether one or two guys make X+ ?

If you take your SpaceX example, they need to launch some number of rockets. So what if someone else is launching more?

Why isn't the minimum expressed as a % of the market for example?

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#165

Post by Spooky23 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

cranky_coder wrote: post #132

UncleMeat wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a ridiculous interpretation. If Jeff Bezos sent an email to the company saying "We want retail revenue to increase by X% by 2023" would you assume that they'd shutter the whole thing if they didn't meet that goal? Of course not. Why is a goal and strategy for Google treated differently?

How is it ridiculous? The article said GCP would receive reduced invesment if that target isn't met. It's a bit hard to grow without investing, so it smells to me like a precursor to sustained engineering.

Google is dumping billions into GCP right now.

Google migrated from a weird, Apple like "come buy stuff from us, but first solve this riddle" sales process with reps with huge territories to a more traditional enterprise model. Based on Linkedin updates, the Oracle class of 2015 has basically moved in on the sales side. Those guys usually make premium bank, so they need to bang out deals or GTFO.

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#166

Post by AaronFriel » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

sitkack wrote: post #57

AaronFriel wrote: post #51

As a Google Cloud Platform customer, this is pretty concerning news and seems likely to drive me to start looking at alternatives and also likely to avoid placing any dependencies on Google-specific platform features. So, if any Google Cloud employees are reading this, please report back that this just killed any interest I had in Anthos, Google Cloud Run, the managed Google "Kubernetes Apps", etc. Pretty much anythi…

All platforms not under your control should be viewed as a risk. > Pretty much anything that isn't basic compute VMs, storage, or out of the box Kubernetes. I think this is perfectly healthy and a stance you should take everywhere.

It makes sense to take advantage of platform features if you expect stability and for those features to ease your development process in some way that justifies the cost of vendor dependence.

There are certainly features of Google Cloud that meet the latter criteria, but stability? This leaked report suggests we shouldn't expect that past 2023.

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#167

Post by sdnlafkjh34rw » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

clSTophEjUdRanu wrote: post #72

echelon wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From two sources. 1) The article. > The Google unit, which sells computing services to big companies, is under pressure from top management to pass Microsoft or Amazon—currently first and second, respectively, in cloud market share—or risk losing funding. 2) How Google treats all of its other "underperforming" products.

If it's profitable why do they care if it passes Amazon or Microsoft?

I'm fairly certain Google Cloud is not profitable. Even if it is profitable, Google will divest from business that don't hit a certain scale (billion $ businesses). Basically their goal is to never have employees staffed on projects which yield a low $ / employee ratio. They will invest for a while, but pull the plug after some arbitrary time if it doesn't hit the scale.

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#168

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:29 PM UTC

dannykwells wrote: post #76

karolist wrote: post #35

I have a hard time believing articles from sources with no track record making bold claims. Seriously, "theinformation.com" and hardly anyone is skeptical?

The Information is always light years ahead of other tech sources. Probably the #1 tech reporting outlet. So yes, no one is skeptical. Edit: noticed you work on Google. So that about explains it.

[deleted]

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#169

Post by harryh » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:29 PM UTC

the-pigeon wrote: post #124

mullingitover wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has a well established track record of killing things that aren't working out.

Worst than that. Google only seems interested in huge successes. Things like Google Reader had healthy user bases when Google came for them in the night. They could even sell most of the products they murder to someone else for millions.

They could even sell most of the products they murder to someone else for millions.

It would have cost Google more money to sell Reader than anyone would have bought it for.

Re: Google Brass Set 2023 as Deadline to Beat Amazon, Microsoft in Cloud

#170

Post by dangerboysteve » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 6:30 PM UTC

I'm just flabbergasted this would even leak out. It will be a self fulfilling proficiency as prospective clients will shy away from Google. They must be doing damage control right now with all their latest enterprise clients who switched over. May as well start the clock on the Stadia death march. I give it 13 months.