5 ms·
The cost of the next instance size on AWS is often 1/20th the cost of the developer time to make similar efficiency improvements.
by 0xy 4y ago
The cost of the next instance size on AWS is often 1/20th the cost of the developer time to make similar efficiency improvements.
- SanderNL 4y agoIf you just use enough tape you can save money on all those pesky construction dudes. If you just pull teeth instead of fixing them you need less dentists. Everybody wins. Why bother with foundations if you can just tape together whatever works and call it a day? If it crashes you just add tape.
- jezovuk 4y agoWelcome to the future.
- crooked-v 4y ago> If you just use enough tape you can save money on all those pesky construction dudes. But the comparison here is more like the other way around, isn't it? Fixing the problem by just throwing more resources at it is like making up for an inefficient construction workflow by hiring more construction dudes.
- SanderNL 4y agoThe "construction dudes" would be developers, not "compute".
- ro_sharp 4y agoMike Judge was right!
- layer8 4y agoSometimes the slowness is due to using a distributed cloud architecture in the first place.
- snet0 4y agoAn increasing number of sites I interact with seem to love making me wait for API calls for everything. Like the lazy-loading is meant to improve the user experience, but if all I see is blurred placeholders and ...s while you make your six trillion cascading calls to your microservice architecture, I'd rather just go back to waiting for the full content to load in a few HTTP requests.
- kps 4y agoAnd then a team with the same mindset writes the software that runs on my desktop or phone or light bulb. From a certain point of view, that's even better, because someone else is stuck paying for the ‘next instance size’.