3 ms·

True, however at AWS at least, customers are specifically told "multi-cloud doesn't allow you to fully leverage the benefits of AWS", whatever that means. It m

True, however at AWS at least, customers are specifically told "multi-cloud doesn't allow you to fully leverage the benefits of AWS", whatever that means. It makes sense that cloud companies are inclined to keep customers from giving money to competitors, but they way they sell it and structure services, reserved instances, and enterprise discounts is such that you basically are putting all of your eggs in one basket.

Spooky23 6y ago
People are given the agency to make their own decisions. Nobody got fired for buying IBM, until they did.
blahyawnblah 6y ago
Probably means that if you use a service that only aws offers and you failover to a competitor your product/service/website will be degraded
theptip 6y ago
> "multi-cloud doesn't allow you to fully leverage the benefits of AWS", whatever that means. One of the selling points of cloud providers is managed services like SQS. If you run a multi-cloud architecture, you either can't use managed services, or have to build abstraction layers on top of them (and only use the features that exist in both cloud providers' versions of the managed service). If you want to use a managed service that only exists on AWS, then that's obviously incompatible with a fully multi-cloud architecture.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > If you run a multi-cloud architecture, you either can't use managed services, or have to build abstraction layers on top of them (and only use the features that exist in both cloud providers' versions of the managed service). And this is, of course, why they do everything they can do discourage it. Because if you do that, not only are you not reliant on them for availability, you can switch more of your business to the other provider(s) based on current pricing, and they do not want that big time.
Nasrudith 6y ago
I thought that was something trivially obvious stated about fully leveraging the benefits - that they don't control other's clouds and thus they can't use all of the same sorts of performance or efficency boosting tricks. (People would be way more mad if they did as it would require hacking into say Azure to gain root access.) Not a domain expert but it is my interpretation. If you make the engineering decision to go multicloud for whatever reason those are inherent trade offs you need to be aware of. They have their own agenda of course in addition to any actual fundamental "real" in bulk efficiencies that price reflects.

Spooky23 6y ago

People are given the agency to make their own decisions. Nobody got fired for buying IBM, until they did.

blahyawnblah 6y ago

Probably means that if you use a service that only aws offers and you failover to a competitor your product/service/website will be degraded

theptip 6y ago

> "multi-cloud doesn't allow you to fully leverage the benefits of AWS", whatever that means. One of the selling points of cloud providers is managed services like SQS. If you run a multi-cloud architecture, you either can't use managed services, or have to build abstraction layers on top of them (and only use the features that exist in both cloud providers' versions of the managed service). If you want to use a managed service that only exists on AWS, then that's obviously incompatible with a fully multi-cloud architecture.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> If you run a multi-cloud architecture, you either can't use managed services, or have to build abstraction layers on top of them (and only use the features that exist in both cloud providers' versions of the managed service). And this is, of course, why they do everything they can do discourage it. Because if you do that, not only are you not reliant on them for availability, you can switch more of your business to the other provider(s) based on current pricing, and they do not want that big time.

Nasrudith 6y ago

I thought that was something trivially obvious stated about fully leveraging the benefits - that they don't control other's clouds and thus they can't use all of the same sorts of performance or efficency boosting tricks. (People would be way more mad if they did as it would require hacking into say Azure to gain root access.) Not a domain expert but it is my interpretation. If you make the engineering decision to go multicloud for whatever reason those are inherent trade offs you need to be aware of. They have their own agenda of course in addition to any actual fundamental "real" in bulk efficiencies that price reflects.