6 ms·

Just an anecdotal counter point: very happy with gcp. Best network from all and coherent modern ui. Not the usability hell like azure... (You know when clicki

by Demmme 3y ago

Just an anecdotal counter point: very happy with gcp. Best network from all and coherent modern ui. Not the usability hell like azure... (You know when clicking on a often used resource on the start page which let's you jump directly to it but doesn't allow you to jump a level up of all the other resources of the same type which totally works fine when you navigate to it the normal way... Or the huge hassle and complexity of resource groups for f everything...) But you know the tweet not even states what quota was reduced.

textninja 3y ago
[flagged]
- seanhunter 3y ago
  I think they may be being downvoted not because their opinion is different but because usability of the web UI is possibly the least important attribute in choosing a cloud provider for a lot of people given the use of tools such as terraform.
- bluepizza 3y ago
  OP is being downvoted because his anecdotal defense of GCP due to nice UI is irrelevant to the link posted. And probably to cloud computing in general.
- jiggawatts 3y ago
  A resource group is literally just a folder — a name — and is the best feature of Azure. For comparison, any large AWS account is always a total mess. Just an endless list of randomly named things that are totally unrelated to each other. If that is his criticism, he deserves the down votes. I bet his desktop has a hundred icons on it strewn randomly where half of them are named “file.txt” and “document.doc”
  - deathanatos 3y ago
    Well, part of his criticism is that the UI is woefully inconsistent with regards to "upwards" navigation. If you navigate to a resource via the resource group, you can navigate back "up" to the parent RG. If you nagivate to the resource from the home screen, IIRC, you cannot. That's the criticism. Yes, RG's are a pretty killer feature, and trying to understand the organization of resources in GCP is hard by comparison, and an utter nightmare in AWS. I'm not sure why he's knocking that. (And … GCP requires projects, which seem equivalent to the complaint against RGs.) … that said … there are so many other things utterly and horrifically wrong with Azure that I wouldn't put them on a pedestal for resource groups. As much as I do like RGs. (Also, "A resource group is literally just a folder" sigh, no, because they're not hierarchical. Azure goofed hard there.)
  - coredog64 3y ago
    AWS has Resource Groups: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ARG/latest/userguide/resource-groups.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ARG/latest/userguide/resource-gr... Resource Groups are supported pretty well within the CloudWatch ecosystem (you can create an AppInsights application from an RG and you can filter CW alarms by RG)
    - jiggawatts 3y ago
      In AWS, resource groups are just a special tag. In Azure they’re a part of the name. In Azure you can have two resources with identical names, as long as they’re in different resource groups.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  They replied to an incident report with "works for me". (With an implied "sounds suspicious" in the last sentence, but I don't pretend to know whether that's what they meant.)
- baxtr 3y ago
  They’re the top comment now. Sometimes it’s worth to wait and see how it settles.
HatchedLake721 3y ago
UI in the world of terraform and pulumi where some companies even block UI access in prod?
- kccqzy 3y ago
  Blocking UI access in prod is fine, but developers should be able to experiment rapidly and in an agile manner in dev environments. If you forcibly block UI access in those cases, developers simply do less exploration and stick to tried-and-true solutions, even when those solutions no longer suit the problem at hand.
  - throwaway2990 3y ago
    In AWS you can link 2 accounts for single billing and apply a budget to the account. Nice having a dev R&D account not attached to production.
    - Amasuriel 3y ago
      Azure has this too, you can have what they somewhat confusingly call subscriptions, which are logical units with their own billing, limits and permissions inside and organizations account.
      - throwaway2990 3y ago
        Ah yes I forgot about that. Don’t use azure much these days but we used to use that for dev vs production.
elankart 3y ago
This is certainly a troll post. I use all three cloud providers. GCP is the worst of all, just try their simple text to speech UI. It doesn’t work most of the times. Don’t even get me started on a deployment story for GCP their deployment manager is deprecated and redirect you to use terraform. I hate to swallow it but Azure was more usable and straightforward.
- Demmme 3y ago
  And.i don't? I have over 10 years of experience across all cloud providers and you just assume I'm a troll? That's not a way to have a discussion in good faith...
- dimgl 3y ago
  > Azure was more usable and straightforward. There is no world where Azure is more usable and straightforward. Just my two cents.
- VirusNewbie 3y ago
  Azure has had multiple global outages for many services. I believe you can look at overall stability and see it's not in the same league as GCP and AWS.
- predictabl3 3y ago
  Lol can you use ed25519 keys with Azure yet? I doubt it. It was and will continue to be a joke because MS can't pay or promote people that care before they leave.
  - bushbaba 3y ago
    Azure’s target customer group is non-tech enterprise. The type of group who generally buys solutions over builds them in house. Where needing ed25519 keys is not a common ask
- _ktx2 3y ago
  Azure is like if a raging tire fire had a baby with Windows UI
TX81Z 3y ago
I was happy with Azure but just got a bill with “other” charges for $1k on what is a basic VM used solely as a db replica.
- richieartoul 3y ago
  Interzone bandwidth maybe? They used to not charge for that, but they started doing so recently
  - Shorn 3y ago
    Do you have any links to more info about this? I don't use Azure, so I'm not sure where I would look for something like this. I've been aware of some enterprise projects that are running on Azure, where from the description of how their architecture worked, I couldn't understand how they weren't drowning in network cost. It makes a bit more sense now if I know that Azure weren't charging people for some types of network bandwidth.
- Amasuriel 3y ago
  For what it’s worth there is a tabular view that has more item detail. Things like marketplace subscriptions can often appear as Other in the graph. I’m pretty happy with azure. I’ve not used GCP but vs AWS I find permission management a lot nicer. I have yet to have a billing surprise that didn’t come down to me not reading closely enough. What I don’t like is they sometimes lock private links (aka the ability to not have a service publically routable, only accessible on a vnet) behind premium SKUs, looking at you service bus.
fnordpiglet 3y ago
You lost me at UI. But I’m one who believes if you don’t write your software defined infrastructure as software, you’ll regret life pretty soon.
- Demmme 3y ago
  We have 99% IaC. I still don't mind upgrading a k8s cluster on the UI, monitoring it's healthy and than patching the tf code for the newest minor version.
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    I’ve found no megacorp makes a good UI for their products that speaks to my infra. Frankly I usually use something like Grafana and write my own TUI for the rest ;-) but there are tons and tons of infrastructure management and visualization software products out there. Generally I look at cloud providers for their api, capabilities, etc. Their UI ability is so far down the list that Id rather buy someone else’s for purpose single product strategy than the “oh yeah the console” version the providers must be providing given the economics of things.
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  A UI for cloud services is super helpful to have when exploring, troubleshooting, and noodling around. But yeah, massive red flag if anyone’s using it to deploy production services.
  - brianwawok 3y ago
    I deploy my sql with Ui cuz ugh… I do it once per year max, and it’s docker everywhere else.
- paulgb 3y ago
  That’s a pretty myopic view of what a UI can be used for. I’m all in on IAC but still like having a UI to click around to observe state rather than memorize a bunch of CLI commands.
faizshah 3y ago
I love the GCP UI and the DX in general of their cloud offerings. I also love the feature set of Cloud Run, BigQuery, and DataFlow. My only problem with GCP is that their support is horrible, I much prefer AWS support that’s why I can’t use GCP beyond my hobby projects. I’m trying out Cloudflare workers this weekend so we’ll see how that goes.
- brianwawok 3y ago
  I’ve been very happy with the support overall. Met some solid dudes. And I’m pretty cheap on the spend chart,
- CommanderData 3y ago
  Azure's support has also been fantastic. Depending on priority of ticket, with an enterprise account things get picked up sometimes minutes after raising them. Their AKS offering was a crap show during the first year of general release and I opened countless tickets and they were snappy at the response times which is interesting seeing at the scale they operate. Judging by all the comments GCP seems like one to avoid? Which is a shame because I had a desire to train multi cloud. If they treat their support like the rest of their products then I'll advocate a different IaaS where I'm able to.
  - faizshah 3y ago
    I think most of the comments in this thread are probably about the lower support levels for GCP. I personally have never used enterprise support for GCP. For the lower support levels AWS is miles better than GCP. Not sure about the enterprise support levels. For the hobbyist/early stage, AWS support is the top pick for sure. I read in a much older thread that GCP’s TAM and enterprise support is pretty good: > Hey, thanks for all that you’ve done. My experience with GCP has been an incredibly positive one. GCP documentation has always seemed fantastic. Our TAMs were very responsive. > GCP support has by far been the best support experience. I have to say that the initial days it seemed to suck. The UI was some 90s google group clone which wasn’t even accessible through the GCP console, it was its own separate site which I always found amusing. But over time, the UI and quality of support became more streamlined and predictable, and I consider it one of the best SaaS support experiences today. > One particular incident I’ll never forget is a support person arguing with me why network tags based firewalls are better overall for security than service accounts based firewalls. I expected to have a very cut and dry exchange but the support engineer actually did convince me that tags are superior to using service accounts. I did not ever expect to have had such a discussion over enterprise support tickets. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26898556 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26898556
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bushbaba 3y ago
Gcp used to have a big network offering lead. But not anymore. AWS has a more reliable network (hello no global outages) and there’s not the same performance gap since AWS and azure’s investments in private fiber connectivity panned out.
davidgerard 3y ago
flagged as obvious spam
- Demmme 3y ago
  Spam from you?

by Demmme 3y ago

textninja 3y ago

[flagged]

seanhunter 3y ago
I think they may be being downvoted not because their opinion is different but because usability of the web UI is possibly the least important attribute in choosing a cloud provider for a lot of people given the use of tools such as terraform.
bluepizza 3y ago
OP is being downvoted because his anecdotal defense of GCP due to nice UI is irrelevant to the link posted. And probably to cloud computing in general.
jiggawatts 3y ago
A resource group is literally just a folder — a name — and is the best feature of Azure. For comparison, any large AWS account is always a total mess. Just an endless list of randomly named things that are totally unrelated to each other. If that is his criticism, he deserves the down votes. I bet his desktop has a hundred icons on it strewn randomly where half of them are named “file.txt” and “document.doc”
- deathanatos 3y ago
  Well, part of his criticism is that the UI is woefully inconsistent with regards to "upwards" navigation. If you navigate to a resource via the resource group, you can navigate back "up" to the parent RG. If you nagivate to the resource from the home screen, IIRC, you cannot. That's the criticism. Yes, RG's are a pretty killer feature, and trying to understand the organization of resources in GCP is hard by comparison, and an utter nightmare in AWS. I'm not sure why he's knocking that. (And … GCP requires projects, which seem equivalent to the complaint against RGs.) … that said … there are so many other things utterly and horrifically wrong with Azure that I wouldn't put them on a pedestal for resource groups. As much as I do like RGs. (Also, "A resource group is literally just a folder" sigh, no, because they're not hierarchical. Azure goofed hard there.)
- coredog64 3y ago
  AWS has Resource Groups: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ARG/latest/userguide/resource-groups.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ARG/latest/userguide/resource-gr... Resource Groups are supported pretty well within the CloudWatch ecosystem (you can create an AppInsights application from an RG and you can filter CW alarms by RG)
  - jiggawatts 3y ago
    In AWS, resource groups are just a special tag. In Azure they’re a part of the name. In Azure you can have two resources with identical names, as long as they’re in different resource groups.
LoganDark 3y ago
They replied to an incident report with "works for me". (With an implied "sounds suspicious" in the last sentence, but I don't pretend to know whether that's what they meant.)
baxtr 3y ago
They’re the top comment now. Sometimes it’s worth to wait and see how it settles.

HatchedLake721 3y ago

UI in the world of terraform and pulumi where some companies even block UI access in prod?

kccqzy 3y ago
Blocking UI access in prod is fine, but developers should be able to experiment rapidly and in an agile manner in dev environments. If you forcibly block UI access in those cases, developers simply do less exploration and stick to tried-and-true solutions, even when those solutions no longer suit the problem at hand.
- throwaway2990 3y ago
  In AWS you can link 2 accounts for single billing and apply a budget to the account. Nice having a dev R&D account not attached to production.
  - Amasuriel 3y ago
    Azure has this too, you can have what they somewhat confusingly call subscriptions, which are logical units with their own billing, limits and permissions inside and organizations account.
    - throwaway2990 3y ago
      Ah yes I forgot about that. Don’t use azure much these days but we used to use that for dev vs production.

elankart 3y ago

This is certainly a troll post. I use all three cloud providers. GCP is the worst of all, just try their simple text to speech UI. It doesn’t work most of the times. Don’t even get me started on a deployment story for GCP their deployment manager is deprecated and redirect you to use terraform. I hate to swallow it but Azure was more usable and straightforward.

Demmme 3y ago
And.i don't? I have over 10 years of experience across all cloud providers and you just assume I'm a troll? That's not a way to have a discussion in good faith...
dimgl 3y ago
> Azure was more usable and straightforward. There is no world where Azure is more usable and straightforward. Just my two cents.
VirusNewbie 3y ago
Azure has had multiple global outages for many services. I believe you can look at overall stability and see it's not in the same league as GCP and AWS.
predictabl3 3y ago
Lol can you use ed25519 keys with Azure yet? I doubt it. It was and will continue to be a joke because MS can't pay or promote people that care before they leave.
- bushbaba 3y ago
  Azure’s target customer group is non-tech enterprise. The type of group who generally buys solutions over builds them in house. Where needing ed25519 keys is not a common ask
_ktx2 3y ago
Azure is like if a raging tire fire had a baby with Windows UI

TX81Z 3y ago

I was happy with Azure but just got a bill with “other” charges for $1k on what is a basic VM used solely as a db replica.

richieartoul 3y ago
Interzone bandwidth maybe? They used to not charge for that, but they started doing so recently
- Shorn 3y ago
  Do you have any links to more info about this? I don't use Azure, so I'm not sure where I would look for something like this. I've been aware of some enterprise projects that are running on Azure, where from the description of how their architecture worked, I couldn't understand how they weren't drowning in network cost. It makes a bit more sense now if I know that Azure weren't charging people for some types of network bandwidth.
Amasuriel 3y ago
For what it’s worth there is a tabular view that has more item detail. Things like marketplace subscriptions can often appear as Other in the graph. I’m pretty happy with azure. I’ve not used GCP but vs AWS I find permission management a lot nicer. I have yet to have a billing surprise that didn’t come down to me not reading closely enough. What I don’t like is they sometimes lock private links (aka the ability to not have a service publically routable, only accessible on a vnet) behind premium SKUs, looking at you service bus.

fnordpiglet 3y ago

You lost me at UI. But I’m one who believes if you don’t write your software defined infrastructure as software, you’ll regret life pretty soon.

Demmme 3y ago
We have 99% IaC. I still don't mind upgrading a k8s cluster on the UI, monitoring it's healthy and than patching the tf code for the newest minor version.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  I’ve found no megacorp makes a good UI for their products that speaks to my infra. Frankly I usually use something like Grafana and write my own TUI for the rest ;-) but there are tons and tons of infrastructure management and visualization software products out there. Generally I look at cloud providers for their api, capabilities, etc. Their UI ability is so far down the list that Id rather buy someone else’s for purpose single product strategy than the “oh yeah the console” version the providers must be providing given the economics of things.
Waterluvian 3y ago
A UI for cloud services is super helpful to have when exploring, troubleshooting, and noodling around. But yeah, massive red flag if anyone’s using it to deploy production services.
- brianwawok 3y ago
  I deploy my sql with Ui cuz ugh… I do it once per year max, and it’s docker everywhere else.
paulgb 3y ago
That’s a pretty myopic view of what a UI can be used for. I’m all in on IAC but still like having a UI to click around to observe state rather than memorize a bunch of CLI commands.

faizshah 3y ago

I love the GCP UI and the DX in general of their cloud offerings. I also love the feature set of Cloud Run, BigQuery, and DataFlow. My only problem with GCP is that their support is horrible, I much prefer AWS support that’s why I can’t use GCP beyond my hobby projects. I’m trying out Cloudflare workers this weekend so we’ll see how that goes.

brianwawok 3y ago
I’ve been very happy with the support overall. Met some solid dudes. And I’m pretty cheap on the spend chart,
CommanderData 3y ago
Azure's support has also been fantastic. Depending on priority of ticket, with an enterprise account things get picked up sometimes minutes after raising them. Their AKS offering was a crap show during the first year of general release and I opened countless tickets and they were snappy at the response times which is interesting seeing at the scale they operate. Judging by all the comments GCP seems like one to avoid? Which is a shame because I had a desire to train multi cloud. If they treat their support like the rest of their products then I'll advocate a different IaaS where I'm able to.
- faizshah 3y ago
  I think most of the comments in this thread are probably about the lower support levels for GCP. I personally have never used enterprise support for GCP. For the lower support levels AWS is miles better than GCP. Not sure about the enterprise support levels. For the hobbyist/early stage, AWS support is the top pick for sure. I read in a much older thread that GCP’s TAM and enterprise support is pretty good: > Hey, thanks for all that you’ve done. My experience with GCP has been an incredibly positive one. GCP documentation has always seemed fantastic. Our TAMs were very responsive. > GCP support has by far been the best support experience. I have to say that the initial days it seemed to suck. The UI was some 90s google group clone which wasn’t even accessible through the GCP console, it was its own separate site which I always found amusing. But over time, the UI and quality of support became more streamlined and predictable, and I consider it one of the best SaaS support experiences today. > One particular incident I’ll never forget is a support person arguing with me why network tags based firewalls are better overall for security than service accounts based firewalls. I expected to have a very cut and dry exchange but the support engineer actually did convince me that tags are superior to using service accounts. I did not ever expect to have had such a discussion over enterprise support tickets. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26898556 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26898556

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

bushbaba 3y ago

Gcp used to have a big network offering lead. But not anymore. AWS has a more reliable network (hello no global outages) and there’s not the same performance gap since AWS and azure’s investments in private fiber connectivity panned out.

davidgerard 3y ago

flagged as obvious spam

Demmme 3y ago
Spam from you?