These numbers are very misleading considering they wrap up things like Office into “cloud revenue.” When talking about compute cloud they are still way behind Amazon although you don’t get that from the misleading headline.
Does Google include G Suite in their cloud umbrella? Microsoft does a really good job of using products like O365 or other IT kinda services as a lead-in to Azure infrastructure. Which is ironic because O365 kinda sucks.
Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
71–80 of 120 posts
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#72Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Dropbox uses their own infrastructure.
He means Amazon lists Dropbox storage as a competitor to AWS storage services.
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#74Very anectodal, but some things are better on Azure, because they were late to the party, for example azure blob storage. It costs the same as s3, but it supports journaling, so you can do journal archives. You can run your main thing on aws and keep backups on azure. If you wanted backups with journaling on AWS, you'd have to use EFS at minimum, which is orders of magnitude more expensive.
Azure is just now rolling out availability zones. There are strange constraints everywhere, like you can only use premium storage accounts with specific VM types. You cannot use the same premium storage account for blobs. In general, not all configurations of skus for storage accounts, vms and disks are supported. You need to match availability set skus between scalesets and load balancers. If you connect an internal 'standard' load balancer to an instance, then it cannot reach the internet anymore. You can only attach one internal and one external load balancer to a scale set. You can't use the internal load balancer to loopback (same as internal AWS NLBs, but AWS has other options).
And so on. It all seems poorly integrated. Budget 5x as much time for a similar deployment on Azure as compared to AWS or GCP. Add more buffer if you need flexible automation, as you'll bump into those edge cases often as people change parameters.
They have a ridiculously huge amount of features compared to the other two major cloud providers, but integration between them is iffy. It is improving.
AKS seems pretty good, although it's still new and people are reporting issues. But it is promising, you can actually tweak quite a few things, and I have high hopes for the compatibility story (even more so than GKE). AWS's EKS is a marginal implementation at best.
On Azure AD, the tables are turned: it's AWS that provides an inconsistent story. There are many options, none are as well polished compared to Azure.
They did learn from some AWS mistakes. But technically speaking they have a bunch of polishing to do.
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#75(disclaimer: I was at AWS from 2008 to 2014, and VMware from 2014 to 2016) Microsoft have been playing this game for years now. It's a joke. Anybody with just a little sense of how the industry works knows that AWS still leads the market with 80% to 90% penetration. Microsoft should be punished for misleading the public this way. And some analysts should be fired for not knowing better.
Even if you exclude Office 365, etc there your statement that AWS has 80-90% penetration is absolutely false. AWS has about ~45% of the market, Azure, GCS, IBM and Rackspace round out the top 5. Amazon & Google also both include their Office Suites in their Cloud numbers...so, it's not "a joke." Everyone does it. No one denies that for compute AWS is #1, right now.
The current state of affairs is that AWS still dominates. Your claim of 45% shows that you are simply repeating what some myopic analyst has written. Talk to industry experts, and you'll see why I'm right.
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#76(disclaimer: I was at AWS from 2008 to 2014, and VMware from 2014 to 2016) Microsoft have been playing this game for years now. It's a joke. Anybody with just a little sense of how the industry works knows that AWS still leads the market with 80% to 90% penetration. Microsoft should be punished for misleading the public this way. And some analysts should be fired for not knowing better.
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#77These numbers are very misleading considering they wrap up things like Office into “cloud revenue.” When talking about compute cloud they are still way behind Amazon although you don’t get that from the misleading headline.
This is nearly a "no true Scotsman" definition of cloud revenue, where if Amazon doesn't have a product in a market segment it shouldn't count. Google and Microsoft both have offerings in the cloud SaaS office suite market segment, and it's a real liability for Amazon that they do not.
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#78Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#79Ben Thompson of Stratechery precisely wrote about this last week: >Given this week’s theme, though, I wanted to focus on AWS: revenue was up 46%, and while that may be lower than Azure in percentage terms, it is almost certainly higher in absolute terms. AWS had $6.7 billion in revenue last quarter, while Microsoft’s entire Server Products and Cloud Services — the majority of which remains on-premises — was $5.7 bill…
wonder how much of those were attributed to Serverless revenues....probably negligible. 2018 is almost over and I still don't know if I should go fully serverless, more importantly, which cloud vendor has fixed the "cold startup time" for serverless functions. Google seems quite promising but still no recent study has been done on this. Would somebody like to see a test on this done? I've been wanting a straight up a…
I'm interested in this problem area, so I would be interested in your definition of fixed.
Re: Microsoft Beats Amazon in 12-Month Cloud Revenue
#80Very anectodal, but some things are better on Azure, because they were late to the party, for example azure blob storage. It costs the same as s3, but it supports journaling, so you can do journal archives. You can run your main thing on aws and keep backups on azure. If you wanted backups with journaling on AWS, you'd have to use EFS at minimum, which is orders of magnitude more expensive.