4 ms·

It doesn't seem to include Digital Ocean in the comparison.

axaxs 7y ago
DO is my absolute favorite. I really think they could be a long term winner. Their interface is so much nicer than the competitors, in my opinion. I'm not even currently a customer, let alone a shill.
- steve_adams_86 7y ago
  I agree that DO is awesome. I'd argue though that they can make a better UI because they offer less. Everything is a littler simpler. It would be hard to condense AWS into a similar type of interface. Having said that, DO is enough for virtually everything I've ever worked on, and the user experience and price are so much better. They're a clear winner for almost everything I do these days.
  - axaxs 7y ago
    I agree but that's part of the charm to me. I only use what 4 or 5 things in AWS, but each login is information overload. Having to Ctrl F what you are looking for is not an ideal experience. Whether a conscious decision or not, I think offering what the 80ish percent (just a guess) actually use, and streamlining it, is the right decision.
  - freehunter 7y ago
    AWS could really use a dashboard where you can pick the components you want to see and only those show up. If I only use S3 and EC2 I shouldn’t have to search for those two products every time I log in.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      The console already shows the five most recently used components when you log in.
      - freehunter 7y ago
        Yet somehow it always seems to forget.
    - axaxs 7y ago
      This is what I don't understand. AMZ is one of the richest companies ever, but everyone agrees their AWS interface is terrible. It looks like an engineer wrote it 20 years ago and nobody ever bothered to refactor it. Just showing what you're actually using by default would be a 1000% improvement. I don't even have admin access at my current company, quit showing me things I won't and can't use.
      - jrockway 7y ago
        Look at Amazon.com. Same deal. Nobody wants to be the person that redesigns the UI and sees sales drop off by 0.001%. I think they're afraid to touch what made them #1, even if it's objectively terrible.
dindresto 7y ago
Yeah I was very disappointed to see that this is limited to the "regular" three...
- spalas 7y ago
  I went back and added in Digital Ocean per the parent comment's request! The article and Jupyter Notebook now reflect that change.
mjfisher 7y ago
Digital Ocean is still significantly cheaper (unsurprisingly). They don't charge for the control plane, so you just pay the normal prices for the droplets and resources you use. It's well integrated, allowing K8 to provision load balancers and volumes, and the Terraform provider for it works well. My (admittedly small) cluster of 3x 4Gb droplets, an external load balancer, and volumes enough for logs, databases and filesystems costs about 70 USD/Month. It's been absolutely rock solid too. I have very few minor gripes and a lot of positive things to say about it.
- tmpz22 7y ago
  What’s the story for automatically provisions TLS certificates for your load balancer been like?
  - DelightOne 7y ago
    I don't know about terminating on the load balancer level, but it works fine on the ingress-level (http router) with cert-manager, nginx-ingress-controller and the Ingress-definition.
    - status_quo69 7y ago
      Load balancer certs via annotations are supported, but they're a bit iffy when pairing with controllers like ambassador, since ambassador expects to own TLS termination (although the ambassador docs do say this is configurable). https://www.digitalocean.com/docs/kubernetes/how-to/configure-load-balancers/#ssl-certificates https://www.digitalocean.com/docs/kubernetes/how-to/configur...
      - DelightOne 7y ago
        Ah good to know, thank you!
      - bndw 7y ago
        aside: ambassador definitely supports external TLS termination (tested with AWS ELB).
spalas 7y ago
Author here -- I can add DO to the comparison today, I'll ping here once I have done so! --- EDIT: Done! I have updated the notebook with the digital Ocean offering using their General Purpose (dedicated CPU) droplets. The major takeaways for DO are that they: - Also do not charge for the control plane resources - $/vCPU is less expensive than the other providers - $/GB memory is more expensive than the other providers - No preemptible or committed use discounts available For smaller clusters and/or clusters running CPU bound workloads, DO looks like the most affordable option!
- patrickaljord 7y ago
  How about https://www.packet.com/solutions/kubernetes/ https://www.packet.com/solutions/kubernetes/ ?
  - spalas 7y ago
    Hmm... It looks like for smaller machine types the packet bare metal machines are quite a bit more expensive than the equivalent cloud provider VMs, but as you move to larger machine types Packet's pricing doesn't continue to grow linearly (making them more competitive). Also, I would need to do some further research to understand how to fairly compare the physical CPU cores on the bare metal systems w/ the vCPUs offered across the major cloud VMs.
BinaryArcher 7y ago
Because DO is crap and they treat their customers like crap. Constantly breaking SLAs and revoking enterprise accounts.
based2 7y ago
They are not also listed in https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/cloud-providers/ https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/c... https://github.com/ramitsurana/awesome-kubernetes#cloud-providers https://github.com/ramitsurana/awesome-kubernetes#cloud-prov... https://community.hetzner.com/tutorials/install-kubernetes-cluster https://community.hetzner.com/tutorials/install-kubernetes-c... https://www.ovhcloud.com/fr/public-cloud/kubernetes/ https://www.ovhcloud.com/fr/public-cloud/kubernetes/

DO is my absolute favorite. I really think they could be a long term winner. Their interface is so much nicer than the competitors, in my opinion. I'm not even currently a customer, let alone a shill.

steve_adams_86 7y ago
I agree that DO is awesome. I'd argue though that they can make a better UI because they offer less. Everything is a littler simpler. It would be hard to condense AWS into a similar type of interface. Having said that, DO is enough for virtually everything I've ever worked on, and the user experience and price are so much better. They're a clear winner for almost everything I do these days.
- axaxs 7y ago
  I agree but that's part of the charm to me. I only use what 4 or 5 things in AWS, but each login is information overload. Having to Ctrl F what you are looking for is not an ideal experience. Whether a conscious decision or not, I think offering what the 80ish percent (just a guess) actually use, and streamlining it, is the right decision.
- freehunter 7y ago
  AWS could really use a dashboard where you can pick the components you want to see and only those show up. If I only use S3 and EC2 I shouldn’t have to search for those two products every time I log in.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    The console already shows the five most recently used components when you log in.
    - freehunter 7y ago
      Yet somehow it always seems to forget.
  - axaxs 7y ago
    This is what I don't understand. AMZ is one of the richest companies ever, but everyone agrees their AWS interface is terrible. It looks like an engineer wrote it 20 years ago and nobody ever bothered to refactor it. Just showing what you're actually using by default would be a 1000% improvement. I don't even have admin access at my current company, quit showing me things I won't and can't use.
    - jrockway 7y ago
      Look at Amazon.com. Same deal. Nobody wants to be the person that redesigns the UI and sees sales drop off by 0.001%. I think they're afraid to touch what made them #1, even if it's objectively terrible.

dindresto 7y ago

Yeah I was very disappointed to see that this is limited to the "regular" three...

spalas 7y ago
I went back and added in Digital Ocean per the parent comment's request! The article and Jupyter Notebook now reflect that change.

mjfisher 7y ago

Digital Ocean is still significantly cheaper (unsurprisingly). They don't charge for the control plane, so you just pay the normal prices for the droplets and resources you use. It's well integrated, allowing K8 to provision load balancers and volumes, and the Terraform provider for it works well. My (admittedly small) cluster of 3x 4Gb droplets, an external load balancer, and volumes enough for logs, databases and filesystems costs about 70 USD/Month. It's been absolutely rock solid too. I have very few minor gripes and a lot of positive things to say about it.

tmpz22 7y ago
What’s the story for automatically provisions TLS certificates for your load balancer been like?
- DelightOne 7y ago
  I don't know about terminating on the load balancer level, but it works fine on the ingress-level (http router) with cert-manager, nginx-ingress-controller and the Ingress-definition.
  - status_quo69 7y ago
    Load balancer certs via annotations are supported, but they're a bit iffy when pairing with controllers like ambassador, since ambassador expects to own TLS termination (although the ambassador docs do say this is configurable). https://www.digitalocean.com/docs/kubernetes/how-to/configure-load-balancers/#ssl-certificates https://www.digitalocean.com/docs/kubernetes/how-to/configur...
    - DelightOne 7y ago
      Ah good to know, thank you!
    - bndw 7y ago
      aside: ambassador definitely supports external TLS termination (tested with AWS ELB).

spalas 7y ago

Author here -- I can add DO to the comparison today, I'll ping here once I have done so! --- EDIT: Done! I have updated the notebook with the digital Ocean offering using their General Purpose (dedicated CPU) droplets. The major takeaways for DO are that they: - Also do not charge for the control plane resources - $/vCPU is less expensive than the other providers - $/GB memory is more expensive than the other providers - No preemptible or committed use discounts available For smaller clusters and/or clusters running CPU bound workloads, DO looks like the most affordable option!

patrickaljord 7y ago
How about https://www.packet.com/solutions/kubernetes/ https://www.packet.com/solutions/kubernetes/ ?
- spalas 7y ago
  Hmm... It looks like for smaller machine types the packet bare metal machines are quite a bit more expensive than the equivalent cloud provider VMs, but as you move to larger machine types Packet's pricing doesn't continue to grow linearly (making them more competitive). Also, I would need to do some further research to understand how to fairly compare the physical CPU cores on the bare metal systems w/ the vCPUs offered across the major cloud VMs.

BinaryArcher 7y ago

Because DO is crap and they treat their customers like crap. Constantly breaking SLAs and revoking enterprise accounts.

based2 7y ago

They are not also listed in https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/cloud-providers/ https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/c... https://github.com/ramitsurana/awesome-kubernetes#cloud-providers https://github.com/ramitsurana/awesome-kubernetes#cloud-prov... https://community.hetzner.com/tutorials/install-kubernetes-cluster https://community.hetzner.com/tutorials/install-kubernetes-c... https://www.ovhcloud.com/fr/public-cloud/kubernetes/ https://www.ovhcloud.com/fr/public-cloud/kubernetes/