5 ms·

All roads lead to Azure. Github's user base is far bigger than Azure's user base, and Microsoft wants to eventually get as many people as possible buying IaaS (

All roads lead to Azure. Github's user base is far bigger than Azure's user base, and Microsoft wants to eventually get as many people as possible buying IaaS (or equivalents). The next logical step after Github Actions for CI/CD is to offer Github as a place to run the production code too. You would be buying Azure with fewer steps. It's pretty arbitrary that we develop code in one place while then going off and using a separate suite of tools and processes to run it. Having a suite for everything in one place could be very appealing to the market.

penagwin 7y ago
If they added a button that was essentially just zeit now it would be revolutionary. Especially if they had a generous free tier. Imagine one click hosting for blogs, etc. Now THAT would certainly hook people in
- zenlikethat 7y ago
  Exactly. First you are using Azure through Github actions and do all the leg work to develop Docker images, etc. to test your code. Then you start off hosting on a small free plan. Fast forward a bit and you're paying Azure $$$ because why learn all the IaaS esoterica when you can just click a button on Github.
- rstat1 7y ago
  That sounds a bit like Github Pages which has been a thing for a while.
  - giobox 7y ago
    Sure, if your site is solely static content, which is all GitHub pages supports. You can’t run “production code”. I know some people use the service with a static site generator as a free way to host a blog, but it’s not really the same thing at all.
    - arsa 7y ago
      Works pretty good for blogs and in general if you use serverless tech. However i wouldn't consider it for mission critical stuff - github's infrastructure can't be compared to actual paid-for cloud hosting.
      - reggieband 7y ago
        > github's infrastructure can't be compared to actual paid-for cloud hosting. I think the idea in this thread is that since github is owned by MS, and they have Azure, that won't be an accurate statement for very long. Github doesn't have to build that infrastructure, they just need to competently integrate into MS existing infrastructure. I can't believe I didn't piece this together sooner but I agree with this threads premise. I'm already hosting my source on Github so why not build it there? And if I'm building it there then why not deploy it there? Rather than manage a complicated pipeline, I just `git push` and everything else just works ... all the way to massive scale. As someone who has worked on hand-built github to AWS pipelines ... I can actually see this being the killer feature Azure needs to actually win a large market share.
    - minxomat 7y ago
      The actual equivalent would be something like Azure AppService.
asdfman123 7y ago
Yes, MS is intent on grabbing that cloud market as best as they can. It's phenomenal how many technologies they're coming up with to do that. They want you to use their tools, love them, and naturally start using Azure on your next project.
Rapzid 7y ago
It's very interesting and Microsoft is THE BEST at creating those ecosystems. I'm sure there are warts but the current develop, deploy, debug(in prod!) workflow with Azure and VSCode is supposed to be pretty awesome.

penagwin 7y ago

If they added a button that was essentially just zeit now it would be revolutionary. Especially if they had a generous free tier. Imagine one click hosting for blogs, etc. Now THAT would certainly hook people in

zenlikethat 7y ago
Exactly. First you are using Azure through Github actions and do all the leg work to develop Docker images, etc. to test your code. Then you start off hosting on a small free plan. Fast forward a bit and you're paying Azure $$$ because why learn all the IaaS esoterica when you can just click a button on Github.
rstat1 7y ago
That sounds a bit like Github Pages which has been a thing for a while.
- giobox 7y ago
  Sure, if your site is solely static content, which is all GitHub pages supports. You can’t run “production code”. I know some people use the service with a static site generator as a free way to host a blog, but it’s not really the same thing at all.
  - arsa 7y ago
    Works pretty good for blogs and in general if you use serverless tech. However i wouldn't consider it for mission critical stuff - github's infrastructure can't be compared to actual paid-for cloud hosting.
    - reggieband 7y ago
      > github's infrastructure can't be compared to actual paid-for cloud hosting. I think the idea in this thread is that since github is owned by MS, and they have Azure, that won't be an accurate statement for very long. Github doesn't have to build that infrastructure, they just need to competently integrate into MS existing infrastructure. I can't believe I didn't piece this together sooner but I agree with this threads premise. I'm already hosting my source on Github so why not build it there? And if I'm building it there then why not deploy it there? Rather than manage a complicated pipeline, I just `git push` and everything else just works ... all the way to massive scale. As someone who has worked on hand-built github to AWS pipelines ... I can actually see this being the killer feature Azure needs to actually win a large market share.
  - minxomat 7y ago
    The actual equivalent would be something like Azure AppService.

asdfman123 7y ago

Yes, MS is intent on grabbing that cloud market as best as they can. It's phenomenal how many technologies they're coming up with to do that. They want you to use their tools, love them, and naturally start using Azure on your next project.

Rapzid 7y ago

It's very interesting and Microsoft is THE BEST at creating those ecosystems. I'm sure there are warts but the current develop, deploy, debug(in prod!) workflow with Azure and VSCode is supposed to be pretty awesome.