4 ms·

I think this is also one of the hidden benefits of commercial open source and similar models: individual adoption grows corporate adoption.

by ezekg 1y ago

apples_oranges 1y ago
Clearly, yet many open source contributors just work for free..
- ezekg 1y ago
  I specifically said commercial open source, which is different -- one hopefully has a business model and the other does not need/want one. Working on open source outside of a commercial context has never promised compensation, and expecting compensation for it ends in pain.
scarface_74 1y ago
Except for that whole every company that tries it ends up either not making money money on it, get Amazoned (where Amazon offers a hosted version and makes money), or ends up seeing the error of their ways and using a more restricted license and still struggles.
- ezekg 1y ago
  Agreed. There are better models to commercial open source that align better with business sustainability, like fair source. I was mainly referring to bottom-up adoption, not sustainability.
- ta1243 1y ago
  Amazon already has a relationship with your corporation, it's easy to buy their hosted elastic search Even if the original elastic company offers it cheaper, or better, that's a massive hill to climb. Corporations don't care about costs, they care about pieces of paper, or less charitably nice dinners with the sales team.
  - scarface_74 1y ago
    For every AWS offering aside from maybe MySQL/Postgres Aurora and DynamoDB, there are better cheaper alternatives. You choose the AWS alternative because they are 80%-90% “good enough” and you have one pain of glass, one IAC implementation, one set of permissions, one point of governance, one account manager, one TAM etc. That by itself is worth the extra cost for some organizations. While I’m a big fan of AWS as a technology provider and have been heavily in the ecosystem for 8 years, I’m no fan of the company or the organization as a former employee.
    - fijiaarone 1y ago
      DynamoDB is actually an anti-product, and MySQL/PostgreSQL costs $10/month for a faster, more scalable version.
      - nothrabannosir 1y ago
        You consider PostgreSQL more scalable than dynamodb ? This is certainly a novel take. Since dynamo is hosted are you talking about a hosted pg as well or how even are we comparing this?
        scarface_74 1y ago
        And even with Postgres, I doubt their definition is “multi AZ with a shared storage layer between data centers that is also fault tolerant and replicated across multiple data centers”. Meaning that if your database server goes down, your backup servers are immediately up to date because of the shared storage engine in the same region but the underlying storage was also replicated across multiple AZs.
      - scarface_74 1y ago
        Not if you need multiple databases for failover or read replicas. Aurora’s storage engine is head and shoulders above what you are going to get for $10

I think this is also one of the hidden benefits of commercial open source and similar models: individual adoption grows corporate adoption.

by ezekg 1y ago

I think this is also one of the hidden benefits of commercial open source and similar models: individual adoption grows corporate adoption.

apples_oranges 1y ago

Clearly, yet many open source contributors just work for free..

ezekg 1y ago
I specifically said commercial open source, which is different -- one hopefully has a business model and the other does not need/want one. Working on open source outside of a commercial context has never promised compensation, and expecting compensation for it ends in pain.

scarface_74 1y ago

Except for that whole every company that tries it ends up either not making money money on it, get Amazoned (where Amazon offers a hosted version and makes money), or ends up seeing the error of their ways and using a more restricted license and still struggles.

ezekg 1y ago
Agreed. There are better models to commercial open source that align better with business sustainability, like fair source. I was mainly referring to bottom-up adoption, not sustainability.
ta1243 1y ago
Amazon already has a relationship with your corporation, it's easy to buy their hosted elastic search Even if the original elastic company offers it cheaper, or better, that's a massive hill to climb. Corporations don't care about costs, they care about pieces of paper, or less charitably nice dinners with the sales team.
- scarface_74 1y ago
  For every AWS offering aside from maybe MySQL/Postgres Aurora and DynamoDB, there are better cheaper alternatives. You choose the AWS alternative because they are 80%-90% “good enough” and you have one pain of glass, one IAC implementation, one set of permissions, one point of governance, one account manager, one TAM etc. That by itself is worth the extra cost for some organizations. While I’m a big fan of AWS as a technology provider and have been heavily in the ecosystem for 8 years, I’m no fan of the company or the organization as a former employee.
  - fijiaarone 1y ago
    DynamoDB is actually an anti-product, and MySQL/PostgreSQL costs $10/month for a faster, more scalable version.
    - nothrabannosir 1y ago
      You consider PostgreSQL more scalable than dynamodb ? This is certainly a novel take. Since dynamo is hosted are you talking about a hosted pg as well or how even are we comparing this?
      - scarface_74 1y ago
        And even with Postgres, I doubt their definition is “multi AZ with a shared storage layer between data centers that is also fault tolerant and replicated across multiple data centers”. Meaning that if your database server goes down, your backup servers are immediately up to date because of the shared storage engine in the same region but the underlying storage was also replicated across multiple AZs.
    - scarface_74 1y ago
      Not if you need multiple databases for failover or read replicas. Aurora’s storage engine is head and shoulders above what you are going to get for $10