4 ms·

Oh, it's that many businesses (and all Enterprises) just can't often use PaaS. You need to deal with regulations, customers who want you to retain tight control

Oh, it's that many businesses (and all Enterprises) just can't often use PaaS. You need to deal with regulations, customers who want you to retain tight control of data, private links back to corporate networks, SSO, IAM, support and availability contracts, NDAs, code quality gates, security scanning, policy auditing, dedicated performance guarantees, microservice ecosystems, network access control for partners, overall cost. And as far as "lock-in" goes, you can't get much more locked-in. Enterprise won't even use hosted CI/CD [unless it's for an open source product/service]. You have to fit a very specific niche to be Enterprise-compatible.

viraptor 7y ago
I don't buy it. If you're an enterprise which needs a PaaS but policies prevent an external one, then you build an internal one. HP did it. Oracle did it. I'm sure others do it too. This still doesn't prevent millions of non-enterprise companies from using it. If you don't want to create something from scratch you can even use ready solutions like Flynn.
- peterwwillis 7y ago
  Well first of all, I'm not the enterprise :) They are fiiiiiiiine with building from scratch. They love building rocket ships when they really just needed a wheelbarrow. It's kind of a problem. My point is more like, a lot of the time we don't need a PaaS, we just need to do less "integrating", if cloud providers all implemented the equivalent of Terraform providers. But going further, that we shouldn't need to use K8s if the operating system came with similar functionality and exposed it as an ABI. All these things would let you "build from scratch" distributed parallelized network services, with a lot less layers of technology, in a more standard way. Rather than building a spaceship just to run errands, we could be cruising around on city rental bikes, or golf carts, or something. This comparison might have gone off the rails.

viraptor 7y ago

I don't buy it. If you're an enterprise which needs a PaaS but policies prevent an external one, then you build an internal one. HP did it. Oracle did it. I'm sure others do it too. This still doesn't prevent millions of non-enterprise companies from using it. If you don't want to create something from scratch you can even use ready solutions like Flynn.

peterwwillis 7y ago
Well first of all, I'm not the enterprise :) They are fiiiiiiiine with building from scratch. They love building rocket ships when they really just needed a wheelbarrow. It's kind of a problem. My point is more like, a lot of the time we don't need a PaaS, we just need to do less "integrating", if cloud providers all implemented the equivalent of Terraform providers. But going further, that we shouldn't need to use K8s if the operating system came with similar functionality and exposed it as an ABI. All these things would let you "build from scratch" distributed parallelized network services, with a lot less layers of technology, in a more standard way. Rather than building a spaceship just to run errands, we could be cruising around on city rental bikes, or golf carts, or something. This comparison might have gone off the rails.