7 ms·

AWS is the 800 pound gorilla in the cloud space. Are any of the other cloud providers better with customer honesty?

by ioman 4y ago

autotune 4y ago
Also good luck trying to convince your company to migrate to another cloud provider over, say, implementing multi-region strategy, which you should have been doing in the first place.
- hedgehog_irl 4y ago
  Highlight the lack of transparency on reporting outages and that's a start. If your MPLS or ISP provider operated in the save way. The company wouldn't accept it
  - autotune 4y ago
    My company is not going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars or more, and months or even years of effort, and add additional constraints to the given pool of candidates we are hiring for, to migrate to GCP or Azure or DigitalOcean or Hetzner or wherever is considered more trendy than AWS right now due to "a lack of transparency" lmao. I would look completely incompetent to even suggest the idea to anyone internally.
    - simfree 4y ago
      Your company is hiring and retaining people who can't work with tooling outside Amazon Web Services?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - karamanolev 4y ago
        Many companies are hiring and retaining specialists in AWS-lock-in-technology, who lack experience with another-cloud-provider-technology, so I don't know what's surprising.
      - autotune 4y ago
        Training and getting up to speed takes time and money, neither of which are unlimited for any organization. It's not that they/we can't work with other cloud services, it's that it would likely add up to months of additional on-boarding time to get someone who wasn't familiar with another cloud provider productive with infra at scale on said provider.
    - hedgehog_irl 4y ago
      But your company is willing to accept poor service and as a result spend more money with the same provider to ensure continuity. So essentially you reward Aws hiding their stats. As they can claim high uptime figures and when an outage happens it's the users fault for not spending enough money with them to have many many instances around the availability zones to ensure your covered the Aws mess up. I get it redundancy is needed in systems but lack of proper reporting message users are forced to over spend our of fear. It's a great business model. Hook the clients in with lies and then get them to reward you for hiding facts. Clearly your company has money to burn wasting it like this. Every one knows they lie and are blatant about it why is it tolerated. As I said I don't see other enterprise providers getting away with this kinda behaviour towards clients
      - autotune 4y ago
        If you are willing to host your critical infra on some dodgy startup alternative that might go away in 3 months because you refuse to bend on your personal values and separate them from what the typical organization actually cares about, best of luck. I know HN tends to loves the underdog, but there is a time and place for that, and a time and place to accept what you need to do to keep your services online.
        hedgehog_irl 4y ago
        So your logic is to accept poor quality service to keep your service online rather than trying to do better and improve service. So you are saying that rather than rewarding a company trying to do better just accept poor service from Aws.How is this better than "hosting on some dodgy start-up" This is nothing to do with my personal beliefs or opinion I'm trying to understand why it's accepted from Aws but not others Edited for to add point
        autotune 4y ago
        My logic is to build highly resilient infrastructure given the constraints available. Your definition of "poor service" is not what I have experienced in my 10 year career as a SRE, because I build around your definition of what makes it poor and make it work as it should. It's called chaos engineering, and companies like Netflix have been doing it for years with their Chaos Monkey tool and SRE practices. Doesn't matter what cloud provider you go to, there is ALWAYS unexpected and unannounced downtime unless you build around, plan for, and expect it. But sure, go ahead and tell us all how industry leaders like them are wrong for sticking with what you call "poor service."
hedgehog_irl 4y ago
Didn't say you have to go "cloud" rent hardware in a DC and run that yourself. Or use a VPS I mean the cloud is just "Other people's hardware" and I'd thank you to not insult gorillas like that by comparing them to Amazon.
- koksik202 4y ago
  this just bring whole load of new expenses on staffing physical locations creates more problem than it solves
  - simfree 4y ago
    Colocation or especially server rental generally requires no persistent staffing. The datacenter has their own staff for tasks requiring physical intervention, and you have IPMI/iLO access to your servers for doing reboots and similar.
  - hedgehog_irl 4y ago
    Not really renting from a DC provider means you just run the host yourself they deal with power space cooling etc
uuddlrlrbaba 4y ago
I'd ask if there any cloud providers worse with customer honesty instead.
- hedgehog_irl 4y ago
  I'm sure there are 2bit vps providers that claim to be cloud and are terrible. But for the price and claims of service like Aws I donno they are at the scale where they don't have to care about customers

AWS is the 800 pound gorilla in the cloud space. Are any of the other cloud providers better with customer honesty?

by ioman 4y ago

AWS is the 800 pound gorilla in the cloud space. Are any of the other cloud providers better with customer honesty?

Also good luck trying to convince your company to migrate to another cloud provider over, say, implementing multi-region strategy, which you should have been doing in the first place.

hedgehog_irl 4y ago
Highlight the lack of transparency on reporting outages and that's a start. If your MPLS or ISP provider operated in the save way. The company wouldn't accept it
- autotune 4y ago
  My company is not going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars or more, and months or even years of effort, and add additional constraints to the given pool of candidates we are hiring for, to migrate to GCP or Azure or DigitalOcean or Hetzner or wherever is considered more trendy than AWS right now due to "a lack of transparency" lmao. I would look completely incompetent to even suggest the idea to anyone internally.
  - simfree 4y ago
    Your company is hiring and retaining people who can't work with tooling outside Amazon Web Services?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - karamanolev 4y ago
      Many companies are hiring and retaining specialists in AWS-lock-in-technology, who lack experience with another-cloud-provider-technology, so I don't know what's surprising.
    - autotune 4y ago
      Training and getting up to speed takes time and money, neither of which are unlimited for any organization. It's not that they/we can't work with other cloud services, it's that it would likely add up to months of additional on-boarding time to get someone who wasn't familiar with another cloud provider productive with infra at scale on said provider.
  - hedgehog_irl 4y ago
    But your company is willing to accept poor service and as a result spend more money with the same provider to ensure continuity. So essentially you reward Aws hiding their stats. As they can claim high uptime figures and when an outage happens it's the users fault for not spending enough money with them to have many many instances around the availability zones to ensure your covered the Aws mess up. I get it redundancy is needed in systems but lack of proper reporting message users are forced to over spend our of fear. It's a great business model. Hook the clients in with lies and then get them to reward you for hiding facts. Clearly your company has money to burn wasting it like this. Every one knows they lie and are blatant about it why is it tolerated. As I said I don't see other enterprise providers getting away with this kinda behaviour towards clients
    - autotune 4y ago
      If you are willing to host your critical infra on some dodgy startup alternative that might go away in 3 months because you refuse to bend on your personal values and separate them from what the typical organization actually cares about, best of luck. I know HN tends to loves the underdog, but there is a time and place for that, and a time and place to accept what you need to do to keep your services online.
      - hedgehog_irl 4y ago
        So your logic is to accept poor quality service to keep your service online rather than trying to do better and improve service. So you are saying that rather than rewarding a company trying to do better just accept poor service from Aws.How is this better than "hosting on some dodgy start-up" This is nothing to do with my personal beliefs or opinion I'm trying to understand why it's accepted from Aws but not others Edited for to add point
        autotune 4y ago
        My logic is to build highly resilient infrastructure given the constraints available. Your definition of "poor service" is not what I have experienced in my 10 year career as a SRE, because I build around your definition of what makes it poor and make it work as it should. It's called chaos engineering, and companies like Netflix have been doing it for years with their Chaos Monkey tool and SRE practices. Doesn't matter what cloud provider you go to, there is ALWAYS unexpected and unannounced downtime unless you build around, plan for, and expect it. But sure, go ahead and tell us all how industry leaders like them are wrong for sticking with what you call "poor service."

hedgehog_irl 4y ago

Didn't say you have to go "cloud" rent hardware in a DC and run that yourself. Or use a VPS I mean the cloud is just "Other people's hardware" and I'd thank you to not insult gorillas like that by comparing them to Amazon.

koksik202 4y ago
this just bring whole load of new expenses on staffing physical locations creates more problem than it solves
- simfree 4y ago
  Colocation or especially server rental generally requires no persistent staffing. The datacenter has their own staff for tasks requiring physical intervention, and you have IPMI/iLO access to your servers for doing reboots and similar.
- hedgehog_irl 4y ago
  Not really renting from a DC provider means you just run the host yourself they deal with power space cooling etc

uuddlrlrbaba 4y ago

I'd ask if there any cloud providers worse with customer honesty instead.

hedgehog_irl 4y ago
I'm sure there are 2bit vps providers that claim to be cloud and are terrible. But for the price and claims of service like Aws I donno they are at the scale where they don't have to care about customers