31–40 of 61 posts
I really, really hope aws joins the game. re:invent is around the corner.
This is a good thing; Microsoft will increase competition in this space by applying its expertise in dev tools to Kubernetes. I just hope that MS doesn't add in too many platform-specific pieces that would encourage vendor lock-in. For example k8s ingress right now is based on controllers and GCE controllers support/don't support a wide variety of things compared to nginx ingress... these areas of Kubernetes make me…
Microsoft should write an ingress controller for Azure? Not sure how you can get into a vendor lock-in situation with k8s. Maybe Microsoft extends the API with its own blackbox controllers and force that instead of kube primitives?
Step one: “We love Kubernetes! Run it on Azure! It’s great”
Step two: “Kubernetes experience on Azure is best enjoyed using Microsoft Enterprise Ingress, Microsoft Custom Resources for Business, and developing in Visual Studio. Use those!”
Step three: “Oh, the CTO wants to migrate workloads to AWS instead? Too bad you used so many of of our custom and proprietary add ons, that’s going to make migrating incredibly expensive. Just stay on Azure and everything will be just fine...”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is to be read "the price of the Master is incorporated into the amortised price per unit time of the agent nodes". Microsoft is not giving you something for nothing here.
To be fair to MS here, the agent price is the same as the stand-alone VM pricing, so there really does not appear to be a premium/hidden cost here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, on a tangent, what does your directorship in CNCF entail and how does one end up in a position like this?
It mainly involves replying to HN threads on the weekend. More seriously, this slide deck gives an overview of all the areas in which CNCF is involved, from the Certified Kuberenetes program to providing marketing and other services to our projects to offering training and certification. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BoxFeENJcINgHbKfygXp... We're also running KubeCon + CloudNativeCon in a week, with over 4,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You write "Microsoft's offering does not seem to charge you for the masters ever". The article says "You will only pay for the virtual machines (VM) that you use for managing your Kubernetes cluster". Do you have a source that disagrees with the article? Edit: to those replying correcting the article, if you were to create a top-level comment on this thread correcting the article, we could upvote your comments and be…
Yes, I have played with AKS. You do not pay for the Kubernetes masters, just the nodes. In the prior version of the product (ACS) you would specify a cluster size as a number of masters and a number of workers/nodes. In AKS, you only manage the latter and Azure abstracts away the Kubernetes API. https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/container-...
On GKE, if i run a Kubernetes cluster of size 1, I'm still charged for a single VM. You're saying that if I do the equivalent on Azure, I won't get charged at all?
I really, really hope aws joins the game. re:invent is around the corner.
I'm almost sure they will. They don't have much of a NIH problem (look at how many DBs they support, anyone remember SimpleDB?), ECS hasn't exactly taken off, and they're generally very good at giving whatever their customers want.
It's just very very very hard to find a link to it from AWS :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft should write an ingress controller for Azure? Not sure how you can get into a vendor lock-in situation with k8s. Maybe Microsoft extends the API with its own blackbox controllers and force that instead of kube primitives?
I seriously doubt it’s a deliberate strategy on their part in this case, but Microsoft has been known to pull this type of maneuver in the past: Step one: “We love Kubernetes! Run it on Azure! It’s great” Step two: “Kubernetes experience on Azure is best enjoyed using Microsoft Enterprise Ingress, Microsoft Custom Resources for Business, and developing in Visual Studio. Use those!” Step three: “Oh, the CTO wants to m…
K8S does help a bit in this regard, but all three of the cloud big cloud players have reasons, products, policies, and strategies to lock you in.
This is stupid to say the management node is free, you're just paying for it in another way. Now if they said they were able to run the node so cost effectively that it's just included in the hourly node cost, then that's a plus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform." This seems like a thing that platform owners are doing more and more (iOS has a similar clause, and ChromeOS, well, uses Chrome). Is this just purely a move to stifle competition from web apps that could threaten control of the platform? Or perhaps I am missing some nuance behind these kinds of decision…
A JavaScript JIT requires memory that is writable and executable. W^X is a security feature and required for the security model of walled gardens. Otherwise you could pull down unapproved code and make the walled garden useless. They don’t want shitty JavaScript interpreters making their platform look bad, so they force you to use their system JavaScript engine.
Walled gardens are one of the problems. They should be rendered useless.
It's a company that caused many people to suffer through Internet Explorer for 20 years. I don't think that security[1] or making the platform look bad[1] is the primary motivation with blocking competing browsers. MS saw that other companies got away with it using different tactics, so they just changed their approach.
