4 ms·

Google completely gave away K8s including even the brand. So not sure what you think Google will do? They are giving away everything they learned with Borg a

Google completely gave away K8s including even the brand. So not sure what you think Google will do? They are giving away everything they learned with Borg and you somehow take it as a negative? Really? Do think from a business standpoint not sure why Google would give up the K8s brand but it is good for everyone. I really worry that Google will stop opens sourcing and more important sharing so much through papers when people b*tch so much. Starting to be hard to see why they even do it any longer. Who else have a huge competitive advantage with something like Borg and just gives it away to the industry? But I am someone super curious and just probably spend more time on https://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html https://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html Read most of the paper. But then what they presented at NIPS. My favorite paper right now is https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01208 https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01208 Bigger example is how much they give away in terms of AI/ML.

hellepardo 8y ago
> Bigger example is how much they give away in terms of AI/ML. You think they are publishing all these papers and open-sourcing TensorFlow for the good of the community solely? No... if the entire ML community publishes papers with TensorFlow as code, then now Google can sell that many more TPUs and that much more access to their cloud systems to run the models...
- jacksmith21006 8y ago
  No not solely. But often it is mutual benefit. But the one that seems most crazy is giving away Borg. I was shocked they gave away the K8s brand. Now that was ballsy and surprised necessary.
LamaOfRuin 8y ago
>Do think from a business standpoint not sure why Google would give up the K8s brand but it is good for everyone. Because with Borg they only had an advantage with their own products' operations. That's nice, in that they are able to maintain a decent amount of technical superiority and have their product reliability be leading or tied for first, but it's not a clear line between this and them generating more revenue. They want their cloud offering to compete with AWS and Azure, which is why they want K8s to gain mindshare. GCE has huge potential for growth and significant switching costs; meaning they need to get new products on it sooner rather than later, and developer mindshare is the way to do that.
- jacksmith21006 8y ago
  I listen to a interview with a higher level Googler that explained why and it made a ton of sense to me. They were tired of writing something up as a paper and then someone implemented as OSS and then companies and engineers knew the OSS implementation instead of their own. So instead do a OSS version and then drive what everyone learns. I found this a bit funny. One solution would have been to not write the papers. But so glad Google does. Spend a lot of time on their research site. https://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html https://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Still not as much as Microsoft Research.
    - cromwellian 8y ago
      Quantity != Quality though. Arguably, a lot of Google published research papers have spawned entire software categories. The original papers on Map/Reduce, Bigtable, Dremel, Dapper, Spanner, directly spawned a bunch of successful open source implementation projects as well as companies.
      - jacksmith21006 8y ago
        Google papers have fundamentally changed the industry.

hellepardo 8y ago

> Bigger example is how much they give away in terms of AI/ML. You think they are publishing all these papers and open-sourcing TensorFlow for the good of the community solely? No... if the entire ML community publishes papers with TensorFlow as code, then now Google can sell that many more TPUs and that much more access to their cloud systems to run the models...

jacksmith21006 8y ago
No not solely. But often it is mutual benefit. But the one that seems most crazy is giving away Borg. I was shocked they gave away the K8s brand. Now that was ballsy and surprised necessary.

LamaOfRuin 8y ago

>Do think from a business standpoint not sure why Google would give up the K8s brand but it is good for everyone. Because with Borg they only had an advantage with their own products' operations. That's nice, in that they are able to maintain a decent amount of technical superiority and have their product reliability be leading or tied for first, but it's not a clear line between this and them generating more revenue. They want their cloud offering to compete with AWS and Azure, which is why they want K8s to gain mindshare. GCE has huge potential for growth and significant switching costs; meaning they need to get new products on it sooner rather than later, and developer mindshare is the way to do that.

jacksmith21006 8y ago
I listen to a interview with a higher level Googler that explained why and it made a ton of sense to me. They were tired of writing something up as a paper and then someone implemented as OSS and then companies and engineers knew the OSS implementation instead of their own. So instead do a OSS version and then drive what everyone learns. I found this a bit funny. One solution would have been to not write the papers. But so glad Google does. Spend a lot of time on their research site. https://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html https://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Still not as much as Microsoft Research.
  - cromwellian 8y ago
    Quantity != Quality though. Arguably, a lot of Google published research papers have spawned entire software categories. The original papers on Map/Reduce, Bigtable, Dremel, Dapper, Spanner, directly spawned a bunch of successful open source implementation projects as well as companies.
    - jacksmith21006 8y ago
      Google papers have fundamentally changed the industry.