71–80 of 257 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the contrary, downtime is inevitable and I think I'd rather have downtime when all my competitors do too.
How about having uptime while your competitors have downtime?
Have fun with that…
I think this adds some momentum to the pendulum swinging back the other way. Maybe cloud teams can patch your services better than your in-house team can (See 2 critical issues in Azure the last 3 months, _caused_ by MS itself). Maybe the cloud has a higher uptime than your on-premise infrastructure (see the AWS, Azure outages). Make sure to compare the actual outage time v.s. the stats doctored by various political…
Even if you can manage more uptime on your own than through the cloud (which I doubt), being on the cloud means downtime is correlated with downtime of other services. That's usually a good thing. Your customers will be more understanding if your outage is part if a wider outage that makes national news. Any services you integrate with are likely down too. If two services with 99% uncorrelated uptime together drops t…
I think this adds some momentum to the pendulum swinging back the other way. Maybe cloud teams can patch your services better than your in-house team can (See 2 critical issues in Azure the last 3 months, _caused_ by MS itself). Maybe the cloud has a higher uptime than your on-premise infrastructure (see the AWS, Azure outages). Make sure to compare the actual outage time v.s. the stats doctored by various political…
What would be more valuable to you:
1. 99.5% uptime where unscheduled downtime is max 10 minutes vs.
2. 99.5% uptime where unscheduled downtime comes in 2-5 hour chunks.
Only the most informed and rational companies will see how and why most of this "in the cloud" thing is a bad idea. Most will accept it as a fact of life and continue to pay for it both directly and indirectly, as long as there's cheap money going around the cloud business can't do wrong. But it's hilarious to see people indulging in byzantine "World scale" resilient systems that depend on a single vendor.
Would you rather have to fix your own data center, or wait 4 hours. AWS works 99% of the time,plus it's someone else's problem
Only the most informed and rational companies will see how and why most of this "in the cloud" thing is a bad idea. Most will accept it as a fact of life and continue to pay for it both directly and indirectly, as long as there's cheap money going around the cloud business can't do wrong. But it's hilarious to see people indulging in byzantine "World scale" resilient systems that depend on a single vendor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gotta love how polite standard business Japanese is. It's no wonder they named their moon probe after this national treasure of a philosophy.
I don't follow. It seems like an almost exact translation to all the other languages for this error page.
I mean, you could say they mean we're sorry and please wait, but that's also just wrong in a whole other way.