3 ms·
It was MS buying LI and then wanting them on Azure. There's a huge Azure branding play here that - I'm guessing - drove this work. A distant second was some c
by lallysingh 3y ago
It was MS buying LI and then wanting them on Azure. There's a huge Azure branding play here that - I'm guessing - drove this work. A distant second was some cost savings in the far future.
The hit to Azure's brand for this is probably significant. Who was looking at a migration to Azure before who's now discouraged?
- hasty_pudding 3y ago> was MS buying LI and then wanting them on Azure. LinkedIn's been extremely independent of Microsoft and still are just like GitHub and openAI. This was a 100% internal LinkedIn management decision.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lallysingh 3y agoCould LI have selected a competitor?
- hasty_pudding 3y agoLI is a monopoly in professional social networking. there are no competitors
- lallysingh 3y agoI meant a competitor to Azure
- hasty_pudding 3y agoThe only other option is their own internal stack. I cant imagin being owned by MS they would be allowed to use Google cloud.