3 ms·

> Would you say the same thing to someone building all their software to compile on Intel? If they’re targeting Intel processors only and not x86 more generall

> Would you say the same thing to someone building all their software to compile on Intel? If they’re targeting Intel processors only and not x86 more generally? Yes, I would. Otherwise, there’s at least one credible competitor (AMD) that’ll gladly sell you compatible processors, who I’m sure would be happy to see the increased sales if Intel jacked up their prices.

jedberg 6y ago
AWS has two competitors, so I'd make the same argument back to you.
- harshitaneja 6y ago
  You can run something compiled for x86 on AMD without modifications. That is not true for custom proprietary tools from cloud providers. All have more or less equivalent offerings but the cost to migrate are not negligible in a large number of cases. So lock in is more of a concern here. And even with processor architectures, I have started considering ARM migration as ARM has started becoming more popular in cloud. This is not to say I don't believe these tools have their benefits, just that the benefits need to be really weighed against the cost on lock-in, which in my opinion are quite understated with those who choose to use it without a second thought.
- ryukafalz 6y ago
  As a sibling comment pointed out, applications built for x86 PCs don't even need to be recompiled to run on compatible processors by another manufacturer. (Heck, even across architectures you can usually recompile relatively easily provided the software is written in a high-level language with a compiler available there.) That is very much not the case with cloud providers' APIs; they're largely provider-specific. The closest equivalent in the cloud provider ecosystem is probably Kubernetes; there are provider-specific extensions (and I recommend avoiding those where possible) but largely things work the same across providers. I'd say a more representative example of lock-in in the PC ecosystem is that of proprietary OS vendors. If you're targeting specifically iOS/Android (w/ Play Services)/macOS/Windows/etc, then yes, you're beholden to the vendor (to varying degrees in each case). You may accept that risk, but you should always be aware of it.

jedberg 6y ago

AWS has two competitors, so I'd make the same argument back to you.

harshitaneja 6y ago
You can run something compiled for x86 on AMD without modifications. That is not true for custom proprietary tools from cloud providers. All have more or less equivalent offerings but the cost to migrate are not negligible in a large number of cases. So lock in is more of a concern here. And even with processor architectures, I have started considering ARM migration as ARM has started becoming more popular in cloud. This is not to say I don't believe these tools have their benefits, just that the benefits need to be really weighed against the cost on lock-in, which in my opinion are quite understated with those who choose to use it without a second thought.
ryukafalz 6y ago
As a sibling comment pointed out, applications built for x86 PCs don't even need to be recompiled to run on compatible processors by another manufacturer. (Heck, even across architectures you can usually recompile relatively easily provided the software is written in a high-level language with a compiler available there.) That is very much not the case with cloud providers' APIs; they're largely provider-specific. The closest equivalent in the cloud provider ecosystem is probably Kubernetes; there are provider-specific extensions (and I recommend avoiding those where possible) but largely things work the same across providers. I'd say a more representative example of lock-in in the PC ecosystem is that of proprietary OS vendors. If you're targeting specifically iOS/Android (w/ Play Services)/macOS/Windows/etc, then yes, you're beholden to the vendor (to varying degrees in each case). You may accept that risk, but you should always be aware of it.