4 ms·

Yet another amazon service to lock you in. And then after two years, when you're no longer startup with 100usd bill, but bigger company, you're completly tied

by rdslw 9y ago

Yet another amazon service to lock you in. And then after two years, when you're no longer startup with 100usd bill, but bigger company, you're completly tied to a jungle of amazon products, and your exit strategy is very very costly. clever amazon, clever.

derefr 9y ago
There is some truth to this, but in a larger sense (on an ecosystem level, rather than from the perspective of an individual company), I can only be happy when AWS enters a new space. It makes that component into table-stakes in the IaaS game, which means every other big player is about to step up with their own offering as well, and the third-party SaaS and open-source self-hosted offerings in the same space all are going to heat up as well. Consider the evolution of container hosting services: first we had PaaSes like Heroku with proprietary container formats; then we got Docker, but Docker Swarm was nascent and there was no serious Docker Swarm IaaS-cloud offering. But then, very quickly, AWS built ECS; Google responded with Kubernetes; and then Kubernetes became the open standard, made everyone forget about Docker Swarm, and took over (and is even replacing ECS now.) That's what happens when AWS enters a space. And it's great.
- dorfsmay 9y ago
  Same with object stores, nobody had an offer before S3 proved to be practical for almost everything.
- PaulHoule 9y ago
  It supports RDF/SPARQL which gives you migration options to twenty or so triple stores such as rdflib, Jena, Virtuoso, AllegroGraph, etc. No lock in at all.
chiefalchemist 9y ago
Yes and no. If you factor in the cost of not taking "the easy way" you'd likely never get past the 100usd phase. You're point is valid. I'm just suggesting the lens / context isn't as one-sided as you've presented. Put another way, plenty of startups and VCs would love to have "getting out from under AWS" at the top of their good problems to have list.

by rdslw 9y ago

derefr 9y ago

There is some truth to this, but in a larger sense (on an ecosystem level, rather than from the perspective of an individual company), I can only be happy when AWS enters a new space. It makes that component into table-stakes in the IaaS game, which means every other big player is about to step up with their own offering as well, and the third-party SaaS and open-source self-hosted offerings in the same space all are going to heat up as well. Consider the evolution of container hosting services: first we had PaaSes like Heroku with proprietary container formats; then we got Docker, but Docker Swarm was nascent and there was no serious Docker Swarm IaaS-cloud offering. But then, very quickly, AWS built ECS; Google responded with Kubernetes; and then Kubernetes became the open standard, made everyone forget about Docker Swarm, and took over (and is even replacing ECS now.) That's what happens when AWS enters a space. And it's great.

dorfsmay 9y ago
Same with object stores, nobody had an offer before S3 proved to be practical for almost everything.
PaulHoule 9y ago
It supports RDF/SPARQL which gives you migration options to twenty or so triple stores such as rdflib, Jena, Virtuoso, AllegroGraph, etc. No lock in at all.

chiefalchemist 9y ago

Yes and no. If you factor in the cost of not taking "the easy way" you'd likely never get past the 100usd phase. You're point is valid. I'm just suggesting the lens / context isn't as one-sided as you've presented. Put another way, plenty of startups and VCs would love to have "getting out from under AWS" at the top of their good problems to have list.