Despite doubts, federal cyber experts approved Microsoft cloud service

I dunno, but for me ensuring security means reducing the number of problematic parts, and making sure the ones that have control over the ones that exist.

The most secure thing I could think of is a cluster of servers running in my basement under lock and key, running a conservative set of well-tested software.

I can only speak from the perspective of someone who used/admined in all those 3 environments. I'm surprised you ranked google's support above microsoft. I've also seen bugs that would be unusual in other clouds, but other clouds have other pros/cons as well. GCP for example is capable, but it is tedious to use, and even harder to log/audit.

Of all 3 CSPs azure has the best identity management system. they're the worst in terms of charging for critical security measures that should be free, but when you pay for it, none of the other providers even come close to that capability.

The main reason people use Azure is easy integration. You're probably right when it comes to availability, no argument there, except maybe how AWS region outages seem to be a bi-annual holiday.

In practical terms, different CSPs might annoy people differently, but availability aside, I think they all suck in their own special way from a user experience perspective. AWS had to recently tell their devs/engs to have a senior dev review their vibe code because of all the outages it was causing.

Firefox's? Yep. Edge's? Bloody hell no.

> and there's no way of knowing which are which

Especially not after the last round of cuts, some of the people they let go made my jaw drop.

It sucks so bad to be a software dev today. We simultaneously have to worry about:

- Market monopolies reducing options/leverage

- Outsourcing

- AI automation

- Complexity explosion

These days, every company which has money is using some horrible clunky platform/infra and we spend 99% of our time just working around limitations of those platforms; Problems which were created artificially and don't need to exist... And at the same time we're expected to meet deadlines while almost all of the challenges we face involve certain critical aspects that are totally outside of our control and require us to wait for someone else to fix stuff while we work around it with some crappy solution and we can't just switch platforms or write it from scatch (which would be easier for a lot of us) because the organization forces us to use a particular platform because of the pretext that they are SOC2 compliant. It's total BS!

Not only we have to worry about threats to our jobs, when you look at who is being rewarded in this industry; it's essentially people who create bloat/unnecessary complexity and build these horrible products.

The industry is full of horrible products that everyone uses. There is no incentive for software engineers to be competent because look at what the market rewards!

This in turn affects organization politics; everyone who has some leverage over the platforms is (at least subconsciously) looking for ways to sabotage the tech to maximize billable hours to fix it later... Fixing the platform is their bread and butter so of course they never want to fix it completely. Anyone who tries to do the right thing runs into issues with managers for missing deadlines which they have ZERO control over due to underlying constraints of the platforms they are forced to use. The people 'maintaining' the platforms don't have deadlines do they? They can keep making money from the shit they produce by ensuring they stay shitty and ensuring that the people who actually have deadlines and actually try to get stuff done can't meet them!