81–90 of 221 posts
I'm curious how they're making basing these predictions since Google Cloud revenues aren't currently reported.
I was working at Google when AWS launched in 2006. The internal message was, we don't want to build a competitor. We have the technology to compete in this area, but it is fundamentally a low-margin business, whereas reinvesting in our core business is high-margin, so we should keep our infrastructure to ourselves. I wouldn't say the Google strategy was wrong per se - their stock has about 10x'd since then. But it's…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More. A lot more. Azure is growing 20 points faster than GCP and from a much higher base too (and I will point out that it is in Microsoft's DNA to run this sort of business, unlike Google's).
How is it in Microsoft's DNA? They've always run the software, not the hardware. And for Azure, they just took all their Office customers and rebranded them as "Azure" customers, pumping their cloud numbers.
The hardware is just the hidden infrastructure that businesses don't really care about as long as it meets the SLAs, like I don't care about what the physical building materials are when I go and buy groceries or get my hair cut so long as the building meets it's SLAs (which for a building is I guess not falling down when I am inside it etc) I just want the service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More. A lot more. Azure is growing 20 points faster than GCP and from a much higher base too (and I will point out that it is in Microsoft's DNA to run this sort of business, unlike Google's).
How is it in Microsoft's DNA? They've always run the software, not the hardware. And for Azure, they just took all their Office customers and rebranded them as "Azure" customers, pumping their cloud numbers.
Google is excruciatingly awkward in the room with that group. Amazon is in the middle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That list is probably the exact list of google customers that get any real support from google
Anyone can get Google support with Google One [0] for as low as 2$ a month (along side 100GB of storage). The issue is people expect free products they haven't paid a penny for to have live customer support, which doesn't make much sense at the billion user scale. [0] https://one.google.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never have any luck figuring out how to do most things in GCP. The disjointed UIs, the documentation that is out of date, etc leave me just going back to AWS.
I had such a different experience when I was trying out the two platforms in parallel about fours years ago. I came from a background where we'd created/ran all of these kinds of services in-house - simply because we started building our stuff before AWS/GCP existed in any meaningful way. Anyway, after switching employers four years ago I had a greenfield project. I had zero investment in either platform. (I had join…
I was working at Google when AWS launched in 2006. The internal message was, we don't want to build a competitor. We have the technology to compete in this area, but it is fundamentally a low-margin business, whereas reinvesting in our core business is high-margin, so we should keep our infrastructure to ourselves. I wouldn't say the Google strategy was wrong per se - their stock has about 10x'd since then. But it's…
Obviously I have zero information about how they came to that conclusion, but it sounds to me like they looked too far into the future. With basically every major tech company (Amazon, Google, Microsoft, IBM) now having some cloud offering and so many companies switching their on-site infrastructure for the cloud, it seems like it's only a matter of time until compute time becomes a commodity. Once that happens prici…
I was working at Google when AWS launched in 2006. The internal message was, we don't want to build a competitor. We have the technology to compete in this area, but it is fundamentally a low-margin business, whereas reinvesting in our core business is high-margin, so we should keep our infrastructure to ourselves. I wouldn't say the Google strategy was wrong per se - their stock has about 10x'd since then. But it's…
I feel they entered the business because they AWS showed the industry that it actually has pretty good margins. However, I think the sentiment is probably true that selling VPS is low-margin over the long-term, but i think the margins come from the other bits: global economies of scale, good infrastructure management & practices, and providing their proven internal technologies (ML/AI, managed distributed services).…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not that I want to defend Google or anything, but there are some impressive customers here [1] [1] https://cloud.google.com/customers
How they're using GCP probably varies a ton. A lot of places are doing multi-cloud for risk mitigation. Maybe some are using it for Kubernetes workloads that they can spread across public/private clouds. Probably a lot like the PaaS products like Firebase for prototyping. I haven't seen any shops that have bet the farm on GCP the way they do on AWS or Azure.
Your examples sound a bit biased. Based on your argument, using GCP as part of a multi-cloud solution for risk mitigation could also imply that those clients don't trust AWS or Assure to provide a reliable service, thus they are compelled to use GCP for reliability. Using Kubernetes workloads means that GCP is trusted above any other competing offer to provide a fundamental service. Using GCP's PaaS offers means that GCP is able to better fulfill the client's needs with their enticing higher-level services. Your hypothetical claims ring as true as there statements, but your bias points in a different direction.
Google Cloud is worth $225B and Waymo is worth $100B [1], so the rest of Alphabet is worth less than $500B in market cap? The math doesn't add up. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/waymo-valuation-cut-40percen...
It's actually consistent. The point here is that Google Cloud is undervalued, hence the high buy rating with a target of $1.6k. That would imply a market cap of $~1.1 trillion, meaning that the worth of the rest of Alphabet (sans Cloud/Waymo valued @ $335B) would be $775B.
When the tech bubble bursts, either everyone gets bailed out, and it does become worth 200B. Or we are going to find out much of this tech money was speculation.
What's hard about running a server farm? Does it lend to this valuation?