4 ms·
I agree with the take, but I don't think it's a bad thing. Sometimes you want to abstract away the cloud provider and you are willing to pay the price for that
by dimitar 5y ago
I agree with the take, but I don't think it's a bad thing. Sometimes you want to abstract away the cloud provider and you are willing to pay the price for that abstraction. Sometimes it's easier/simpler to duplicate a bit more know-how and code.
In terms of consumers Kubernetes may have saved the cloud from becoming an AWS monopoly the way the PC got coupled to Microsoft Windows and Office.
Previously every Cloud provider no matter how small had their copy of EC2,IAM,VPC,S3,ELB and such, but struggled copying the dosens of other commonly used services. It is kind of like the saying that everyone uses 20% of Excels features, but for each user is a different 20%, and you want to keep your options open. Or you are fine with running Linux, but you need this one app that doesn't work on it.
Now all the minor clouds need to catch up is to add Managed Kubernetes and they are competitive with AWS. And vendors like VMWare can also hop on the bandwagon without having to deal with AWS.
- jen20 5y ago> Now all the minor clouds need to catch up is to add Managed Kubernetes and they are competitive with AWS. On one axis, perhaps. This is patently absurd though. "Minor" clouds still need a hypervisor and control plane, still need IAM, still need VPC-style networking, and still need load balancers and object storage to be technically competitive with AWS - just as a starting point. All Kubernetes means here is that there is a common API style for these things.