3 ms·

I’ve always said this to our CTO. If we were going to use AWS, we should go all in. Once we stopped trying too hard to avoid lock in, we stopped halfassing our

I’ve always said this to our CTO. If we were going to use AWS, we should go all in. Once we stopped trying too hard to avoid lock in, we stopped halfassing our architecture.

AtlasBarfed 6y ago
And if AWS hikes rates (or reduces discounts) on you once their algorithmic AI determines your switching cost exceeds the rate hike? "Oh they would NEVER do that" And these gee-whiz heavy-binding services would NEVER steal your data. The strange thing at work is people bend over backwards to use AWS stuff: "I made this virtual network card that I can detach and attach to another VM when we want to keep the same address for a box!" How about we use DNS. AWS services are great for things like their Postgres as a service and other things that fundamentally have standards based access. But the others like big data streams will be a bit more convenient in the beginning and then you're beholden to their supported features and the fact you are handing them visibility to your data.
- Tehnix 6y ago
  > And if AWS hikes rates (or reduces discounts) on you once their algorithmic AI determines your switching cost exceeds the rate hike? > "Oh they would NEVER do that" Interestingly, what you insinuate is exactly the opposite of actual reality when you look at what has happened over the years: things have gotten CHEAPER. Off the top of my head: - Lambdas are now billed per 1ms instead of per 100ms which will be a significant cost reduction for everyone using Lambda - EKS started at $200 / month for the cluster and is now at ~$72 / month - Each bump in EC2 instance generation is always cheaper for the same or more performance - DynamoDB added on-demand capacity which is at face value more expensive, but allows you to scale to 0 and will usually result in an overall cost reduction - This December they announced GP3 which can scale storage and IOPS independently allowing you to much cheaper scale up your needs for more IOPS without paying for TBs of unused storage and probably many many more.
  - AtlasBarfed 6y ago
    That's AWS just keeping itself from being irrelevant. Every cloud provider is pushing that, and in order to acquire customers and maintain customers, they have to do that. Right now, times are good. Money is good. Top spot. Discounts if you can negotiate it. But eventually this will commodify more tightly (k8s is just a warning shot). When you buy "binding" AWS services, it is the "nobody got fired for picking IBM" with a BIT more market pressure. AWS non-commodity services are the new IBM mainframe.
- villasv 6y ago
  Nice straw-man. Keep HN being HN, two thumbs up.

I’ve always said this to our CTO. If we were going to use AWS, we should go all in. Once we stopped trying too hard to avoid lock in, we stopped halfassing our architecture.

AtlasBarfed 6y ago

And if AWS hikes rates (or reduces discounts) on you once their algorithmic AI determines your switching cost exceeds the rate hike? "Oh they would NEVER do that" And these gee-whiz heavy-binding services would NEVER steal your data. The strange thing at work is people bend over backwards to use AWS stuff: "I made this virtual network card that I can detach and attach to another VM when we want to keep the same address for a box!" How about we use DNS. AWS services are great for things like their Postgres as a service and other things that fundamentally have standards based access. But the others like big data streams will be a bit more convenient in the beginning and then you're beholden to their supported features and the fact you are handing them visibility to your data.

Tehnix 6y ago
> And if AWS hikes rates (or reduces discounts) on you once their algorithmic AI determines your switching cost exceeds the rate hike? > "Oh they would NEVER do that" Interestingly, what you insinuate is exactly the opposite of actual reality when you look at what has happened over the years: things have gotten CHEAPER. Off the top of my head: - Lambdas are now billed per 1ms instead of per 100ms which will be a significant cost reduction for everyone using Lambda - EKS started at $200 / month for the cluster and is now at ~$72 / month - Each bump in EC2 instance generation is always cheaper for the same or more performance - DynamoDB added on-demand capacity which is at face value more expensive, but allows you to scale to 0 and will usually result in an overall cost reduction - This December they announced GP3 which can scale storage and IOPS independently allowing you to much cheaper scale up your needs for more IOPS without paying for TBs of unused storage and probably many many more.
- AtlasBarfed 6y ago
  That's AWS just keeping itself from being irrelevant. Every cloud provider is pushing that, and in order to acquire customers and maintain customers, they have to do that. Right now, times are good. Money is good. Top spot. Discounts if you can negotiate it. But eventually this will commodify more tightly (k8s is just a warning shot). When you buy "binding" AWS services, it is the "nobody got fired for picking IBM" with a BIT more market pressure. AWS non-commodity services are the new IBM mainframe.
villasv 6y ago
Nice straw-man. Keep HN being HN, two thumbs up.