3 ms·
Some ideas: * Since their license is Apache (most likely because they have an Open Core business model) instead of AGPL, they could offer extra services on Ela
by acatton 6y ago
Some ideas:
* Since their license is Apache (most likely because they have an Open Core business model) instead of AGPL, they could offer extra services on Elastic's managed service. Amazon wouldn't able to offer since these parts are proprietary.
* They could partner up with other Cloud Providers (Microsoft, Google, ...) to offer a managed Elastic on these clouds, before these cloud providers do it themselves.
* They could offer other proprietary products that run on top of elastic (managed by them), that would force customers to use their managed service.
- retzkek 6y agoThey actually do all of these already. Most of their development and marketing for the last couple years has been pushing their add-ons (things like machine learning, threat detection, application tracing), that are only available on their cloud or on-prem with a paid subscription. Cloud partnerships: https://www.elastic.co/partners/microsoft-azure https://www.elastic.co/partners/microsoft-azure https://www.elastic.co/partners/google-cloud https://www.elastic.co/partners/google-cloud So that's what's really puzzling to me, what's really driving this change? Is their considerable revenue from all of that still not enough to justify their valuation and growth? Or is it really just a personal vendetta against AWS?