4 ms·

The difference is that you don't pay a monthly subscription to use a garbage collector.

by Raed667 5y ago

minimaxir 5y ago
Garbage-collection-as-a-service would get a ton of venture capital though.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- wyldfire 5y ago
  Oh wow, AR/VR mark/sweep applications! Those VR rooms get messy, who is going to clean them up?
- gosukiwi 5y ago
  Hahaha cloud-based garbage collection. Made me giggle.
- ransom1538 5y ago
  At patent office right now with this. My attorney said will go through the USPO like butter.
- jacobr1 5y ago
  There are a ton of a companies that help you track cloud spend, while some of it is architectural, most is really about waste, old ec2 image backups, s3 with no lifecycle policies ... garbage
geofft 5y ago
There's two things happening in this post: 1. Development environments are running on Kubernetes, and VS Code is remoting into them. You don't have to pay a monthly subscription for that. VS Code remoting is free-as-in-beer and Kubernetes is free-as-in-speech. https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/azure/kubernetes https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/azure/kubernetes 2. The actual Kubernetes hosting is the product "GitHub Codespaces" running on Azure. GitHub certainly isn't paying a monthly fee to themselves for this; they are, technically, self-hosting it. I agree that you probably do want to have the option to run it yourself, but I think you do, given 1.
- fiddlerwoaroof 5y ago
  Microsoft probably does internal billing here, right?
  - geofft 5y ago
    I mean, probably for the actual Azure usage, but that's not different from billing yourself for development VMs or Mac laptops or whatever (i.e., they'd be doing that independent of this approach). I assume the Codespaces team is getting plenty of value out of GitHub dogfooding the product and doesn't need to bill themselves for its use.
dboreham 5y ago
The garbage collector should pay _me_ to use it.
syshum 5y ago
I bet somewhere you just gave a Lang Developer a monetization idea... This will be coming to a cloud service near you
kps 5y ago
> The difference is that you don't pay a monthly subscription to use a garbage collector. In some cities you do, and they're often controlled by organized crime. (Whether this comment is a metaphor for SaaS is left as an exercise for the reader.)
blibble 5y ago
have you heard of Azul Zing? (not entirely serious, but it has a very expensive monthly fee for what is in essence a better GC algorithm)
yunohn 5y ago
This is already a thing, if you look at Java (old-school ik), Oracle vs OpenJDK [1]. I don’t see why that would be a problem though? If I can pay a company to provide improved GC for my infra, where the cost savings made it beneficial, I would do it… [1] https://superuser.com/a/1365224 https://superuser.com/a/1365224

The difference is that you don't pay a monthly subscription to use a garbage collector.

minimaxir 5y ago

Garbage-collection-as-a-service would get a ton of venture capital though.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wyldfire 5y ago
Oh wow, AR/VR mark/sweep applications! Those VR rooms get messy, who is going to clean them up?
gosukiwi 5y ago
Hahaha cloud-based garbage collection. Made me giggle.
ransom1538 5y ago
At patent office right now with this. My attorney said will go through the USPO like butter.
jacobr1 5y ago
There are a ton of a companies that help you track cloud spend, while some of it is architectural, most is really about waste, old ec2 image backups, s3 with no lifecycle policies ... garbage

geofft 5y ago

There's two things happening in this post: 1. Development environments are running on Kubernetes, and VS Code is remoting into them. You don't have to pay a monthly subscription for that. VS Code remoting is free-as-in-beer and Kubernetes is free-as-in-speech. https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/azure/kubernetes https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/azure/kubernetes 2. The actual Kubernetes hosting is the product "GitHub Codespaces" running on Azure. GitHub certainly isn't paying a monthly fee to themselves for this; they are, technically, self-hosting it. I agree that you probably do want to have the option to run it yourself, but I think you do, given 1.

fiddlerwoaroof 5y ago
Microsoft probably does internal billing here, right?
- geofft 5y ago
  I mean, probably for the actual Azure usage, but that's not different from billing yourself for development VMs or Mac laptops or whatever (i.e., they'd be doing that independent of this approach). I assume the Codespaces team is getting plenty of value out of GitHub dogfooding the product and doesn't need to bill themselves for its use.

dboreham 5y ago

The garbage collector should pay _me_ to use it.

syshum 5y ago

I bet somewhere you just gave a Lang Developer a monetization idea... This will be coming to a cloud service near you

kps 5y ago

> The difference is that you don't pay a monthly subscription to use a garbage collector. In some cities you do, and they're often controlled by organized crime. (Whether this comment is a metaphor for SaaS is left as an exercise for the reader.)

blibble 5y ago

have you heard of Azul Zing? (not entirely serious, but it has a very expensive monthly fee for what is in essence a better GC algorithm)

yunohn 5y ago

This is already a thing, if you look at Java (old-school ik), Oracle vs OpenJDK [1]. I don’t see why that would be a problem though? If I can pay a company to provide improved GC for my infra, where the cost savings made it beneficial, I would do it… [1] https://superuser.com/a/1365224 https://superuser.com/a/1365224