4 ms·

$140 user here. I need DO to stay online for its simplicity. I simply don’t understand AWS and I’m too scared to wreak a subnet while trying to add lambdas and

$140 user here. I need DO to stay online for its simplicity. I simply don’t understand AWS and I’m too scared to wreak a subnet while trying to add lambdas and API Gateways. I wouldn’t mind spending double if necessary. Also, clicking in Create Droplet then on a big « $10, xGB RAM » button is incredibly clear to me. Then I « ansible » it and it’s live. Please don’t add too many services to Digital Ocean ;)

busymom0 7y ago
That's another thing I liked about DO more than AWS. AWS seems too overwhelming as they have too much going on. DO is simple. The thing I am proposing about the ACL on firewall already exists in DO - but it only exists for the droplets. I don't think it would be too hard for them to port it over for the firewall too without making things too complicated.
getlawgdon 7y ago
I'm glad someone said it. I dont understand AWS either.
steve_adams_86 7y ago
I put a lot of work into understanding AWS and gave it an honest try for 6 months or so, and ended up realizing it's an approach to solving a problem that simply doesn't jive with me. I went back to DO, and it made both personal sense for me and economic sense for the product. It's obviously an incredible platform with excellent tooling, and it probably powers most of the websites I use. But like most trades the same job can be done to a similar standard at a variety of scales using wildly different processes and tooling. And that's fine. The economics seem to be inverted (AWS is large scale and quite expensive in my experience while DO is smaller and cheaper), but it's also not a perfect analogy. I just won't begrudge anyone for using a tool or process I don't love. If it gets your blog or multi-million dollar revenue product online, that's awesome. I'm glad I can say I used some AWS stuff on my resume, but for my own work I'd only use it if it had a clear advantage over whatever else I'm using.
tracker1 7y ago
About the only two services I'd like to see added near term are a message queue system and a distributed k/v (bigtable) storage. Similar to Azure's Storage Tables and Queues, or AWS SimpleDB/DynamoDB and SQS. I know DO is just stretching their legs on hosted solutions beyond simple storage and droplets (compute), but these are two features I'd rather not manage myself, that have some pretty big value. Being API compatible to AWS (or even GCP/Azure) would be relatively big... that said, would just be nice additions that would round things out a lot imho. I don't think I am really wanting for anything else (since DBaaS with PostgreSQL started).
NetOpWibby 7y ago
Do you have any Ansible scripts to share?

busymom0 7y ago

That's another thing I liked about DO more than AWS. AWS seems too overwhelming as they have too much going on. DO is simple. The thing I am proposing about the ACL on firewall already exists in DO - but it only exists for the droplets. I don't think it would be too hard for them to port it over for the firewall too without making things too complicated.

getlawgdon 7y ago

I'm glad someone said it. I dont understand AWS either.

steve_adams_86 7y ago

I put a lot of work into understanding AWS and gave it an honest try for 6 months or so, and ended up realizing it's an approach to solving a problem that simply doesn't jive with me. I went back to DO, and it made both personal sense for me and economic sense for the product. It's obviously an incredible platform with excellent tooling, and it probably powers most of the websites I use. But like most trades the same job can be done to a similar standard at a variety of scales using wildly different processes and tooling. And that's fine. The economics seem to be inverted (AWS is large scale and quite expensive in my experience while DO is smaller and cheaper), but it's also not a perfect analogy. I just won't begrudge anyone for using a tool or process I don't love. If it gets your blog or multi-million dollar revenue product online, that's awesome. I'm glad I can say I used some AWS stuff on my resume, but for my own work I'd only use it if it had a clear advantage over whatever else I'm using.

tracker1 7y ago

About the only two services I'd like to see added near term are a message queue system and a distributed k/v (bigtable) storage. Similar to Azure's Storage Tables and Queues, or AWS SimpleDB/DynamoDB and SQS. I know DO is just stretching their legs on hosted solutions beyond simple storage and droplets (compute), but these are two features I'd rather not manage myself, that have some pretty big value. Being API compatible to AWS (or even GCP/Azure) would be relatively big... that said, would just be nice additions that would round things out a lot imho. I don't think I am really wanting for anything else (since DBaaS with PostgreSQL started).

NetOpWibby 7y ago

Do you have any Ansible scripts to share?