3 ms·
It's a reasonable assumption, but still an assumption and a risk to take on. There are really compelling things about GCP not even mentioned in the article but
by godisdad 10y ago
It's a reasonable assumption, but still an assumption and a risk to take on. There are really compelling things about GCP not even mentioned in the article but I'm not sure if Google's got enough skin in the game to warrant me predicating my infrastructure on it without deep pricing incentives.
Digital Ocean and AWS are dedicated to continuing this line of business and keeping those customers addicted. Google is conducting another large and expensive moon shot which fine since it's part of their DNA.
- KirinDave 10y agoThey've been in the business for 8 years with steady progress. What's more, their container-based solution is also an open source platform that runs competently on Azure and AWS. I'm not sure you can say it is an expensive moonshot at this point. I'm not using them, myself, but I wouldn't consider that aspect of the risk substantial given the fact that I could erect identical infrastructure on AWS in the worst case scenario. And I have had to plan exit scenarios from AWS because ultimately they're a single vendor with arbitrary control over their platform, as well.
- bitmapbrother 10y agoNot enough skin in the game? They're bringing an additional 10 datacenters online in 2017 and they just opened an additional 2 in 2016. Building that many data centers costs Billions. If that's not having "skin in the game" I don't know what is.