3 ms·

You don't think your customers are paying for performance and uptime?

• slt2021 2y ago
  I think a lot of customers take it for granted and expect stuff to "just work". If they pay for laravel site - they expect it to work, and don't expect to pay for keeping stuff running for the stuff they paid already (feature development + cloud bill)
• wavemode 2y ago
  To be frank - no. Systems with horrendous performance and uptime still tend to sell perfectly well. Especially when your customers are enterprise users.
• osigurdson 2y ago
  It is kind of an odd chasm. Users care about and pay for pixels. Sometimes decision makers care about underlying technologies as they don't actually interact with the pixels (e.g. SAP). I also think that not caring at all about the underlying stuff (particularly if approached from a standpoint of arrogance) can cause you to miss important inflection points that might make a huge difference. Of course, the opposite (e.g. arrogantly not caring about the pixels) is probably worse.
  • znpy 2y ago
    > It is kind of an odd chasm. It not an odd chasm, it's a wrong (and fake) chasm. If you bring in a bit of (proper) engineering and some common sense it's easy to determine there's a threshold under which it makes sense to pay a PAAS and above which it makes sense to pay an SRE and look at managing infrastructure yourself. Engineering is not a matter of what side to pick and what belief-system to adopt. Engineering is essentially all about trade-offs.
    • osigurdson 2y ago
      >> your customer pays for delivered features I was responding to this comment in a general sense, not weather or not to use managed services.