5 ms·

Bringing Windows Server to Google Cloud Platform

56 points by Sami_Lehtinen 11y ago

ohitsdom 11y ago
As a .NET developer, very happy to see more competition for Azure.
- buren 11y ago
  AWS supports Windows too :) http://aws.amazon.com/windows/ http://aws.amazon.com/windows/
  - ohitsdom 11y ago
    Yeah I thought about including AWS in my comment :) but I feel that Azure is the default choice for .NET cloud platforms so I (and I think many Windows devs) benchmark Google/Amazon against Azure.
    - boulos 11y ago
      One important distinction between AWS and GCE is price. GCE and Azure both have per-minute pricing while AWS is hourly (which matters a lot for build bots or scaling up and down your website). GCE even charges for Windows per-minute and at a lower rate than AWS ($.04/vCPU/hour vs $.063/vCPU/hour) [0] that matches the "Windows" price on Azure [1] ($.04/vCPU/hour on the A7 "Standard tier" VMs). [0] https://cloud.google.com/compute/pricing#premiumoperatingsystems https://cloud.google.com/compute/pricing#premiumoperatingsys... [1] http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/virtual-machines/ http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/virtual-mac... Disclosure: I work on Compute Engine, but not on anything related to this Windows support.
      - ohitsdom 11y ago
        Good info, thanks!
      - MichaelGG 11y ago
        We switched to GCE because of two main things: 1. Speed. Everything is faster on GCE. From the not-terrible portal, to VM start times, to the machines themselves and storage.[1] 2. Price. Google was a half to a fifth of the price of Azure. Even with an Azure enterprise agreement GCE was far better. Great job. I didn't think I'd like a Google product, and I came in very biased against Google, but you totally won me and others over thru a flatly superior product. 1: Azure still has an embarrassingly bad SSD story. Even when talking to them they don't seem to realize what a useless offering they have. I guess their plan is to focus on software on top of Azure, cause as IaaS it's simply not competitive.
        ohitsdom 11y ago
        The one thing I'm confused about with Google is what product do I select if I want a server to host a website on? Azure has the smallest VM at around $13/month, and on that I can host a website, database, services, etc. Does Google have a similar option? GCE's setup and pricing doesn't seem geared towards that.
        boulos 11y ago
        Are you just looking to have a single VM running Windows Server? We definitely have individual VMs that cost less than that (the f1-micro would be about $5/month for the VM, the g1-small about $13/month). You can hook them up to Autoscaling, Google Cloud DNS and Google Cloud Load Balancing (which Azure's "Basic tier" VMs don't seem to support; I'm not familiar with them, just reading what it says). That said, I'm not sure I'd try to run Windows server on such a small instance (we apparently allow it and only charge $.02/hr in those cases). For example, Chrome's Clusterfuzz team runs Windows bots using the n1-standard-2 (2 vCPUs and ~8 GiB of RAM). Maybe someone can comment as to whether Nano Server would improve this situation...
- StevePerkins 11y ago
  Looking forward to .NET Core and ASP.NET vNext... so I can adopt more .NET at work (at least for the web stuff), without fighting the uphill political battle of bringing in Windows on the server. :)
sudioStudio64 11y ago
Embrace, extend, and wait, whut?
- nivla 11y ago
  Are you extending this phrase to Google or are you seriously accusing Microsoft for letting Google use their product? It really surprises me out of all places HN has users who default to commenting based on a regex of keywords. Doesn't matter the context, does the article have (Windows|Microsoft) let me throw in a comment about embrace, extend, and extinguish and nothing more that adds value to the discussion. It is sad to find out that even Reddit has grown past it.
  - sudioStudio64 11y ago
    I was joking dude. It was a joke because people always put that in any post about Microsoft. So, it was sarcasm. But way to be a tool about it.
    - nivla 11y ago
      Then put a sarcasm tag on it or write it such a way that it is obvious it is a joke. The fact you received a few downvotes for it implies that there were others who took it more as a snark than a joke. Keep in mind, this is HN, people come here for serious discussions (although subjectable), so it is hard to get away with a joke, especially a one that adds little or none to the discussion.
- stinos 11y ago
  Is it that day of the week again? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9851769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9851769
  - sudioStudio64 11y ago
    IT WAS A JOKE. Damn. I thought it was funny, ya know, because it's about Microsoft, but its really about Google...it was a joke. EDIT: And I'm sticking by it. That was funny.

56 points by Sami_Lehtinen 11y ago

ohitsdom 11y ago

As a .NET developer, very happy to see more competition for Azure.

buren 11y ago
AWS supports Windows too :) http://aws.amazon.com/windows/ http://aws.amazon.com/windows/
- ohitsdom 11y ago
  Yeah I thought about including AWS in my comment :) but I feel that Azure is the default choice for .NET cloud platforms so I (and I think many Windows devs) benchmark Google/Amazon against Azure.
  - boulos 11y ago
    One important distinction between AWS and GCE is price. GCE and Azure both have per-minute pricing while AWS is hourly (which matters a lot for build bots or scaling up and down your website). GCE even charges for Windows per-minute and at a lower rate than AWS ($.04/vCPU/hour vs $.063/vCPU/hour) [0] that matches the "Windows" price on Azure [1] ($.04/vCPU/hour on the A7 "Standard tier" VMs). [0] https://cloud.google.com/compute/pricing#premiumoperatingsystems https://cloud.google.com/compute/pricing#premiumoperatingsys... [1] http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/virtual-machines/ http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/virtual-mac... Disclosure: I work on Compute Engine, but not on anything related to this Windows support.
    - ohitsdom 11y ago
      Good info, thanks!
    - MichaelGG 11y ago
      We switched to GCE because of two main things: 1. Speed. Everything is faster on GCE. From the not-terrible portal, to VM start times, to the machines themselves and storage.[1] 2. Price. Google was a half to a fifth of the price of Azure. Even with an Azure enterprise agreement GCE was far better. Great job. I didn't think I'd like a Google product, and I came in very biased against Google, but you totally won me and others over thru a flatly superior product. 1: Azure still has an embarrassingly bad SSD story. Even when talking to them they don't seem to realize what a useless offering they have. I guess their plan is to focus on software on top of Azure, cause as IaaS it's simply not competitive.
      - ohitsdom 11y ago
        The one thing I'm confused about with Google is what product do I select if I want a server to host a website on? Azure has the smallest VM at around $13/month, and on that I can host a website, database, services, etc. Does Google have a similar option? GCE's setup and pricing doesn't seem geared towards that.
        boulos 11y ago
        Are you just looking to have a single VM running Windows Server? We definitely have individual VMs that cost less than that (the f1-micro would be about $5/month for the VM, the g1-small about $13/month). You can hook them up to Autoscaling, Google Cloud DNS and Google Cloud Load Balancing (which Azure's "Basic tier" VMs don't seem to support; I'm not familiar with them, just reading what it says). That said, I'm not sure I'd try to run Windows server on such a small instance (we apparently allow it and only charge $.02/hr in those cases). For example, Chrome's Clusterfuzz team runs Windows bots using the n1-standard-2 (2 vCPUs and ~8 GiB of RAM). Maybe someone can comment as to whether Nano Server would improve this situation...
StevePerkins 11y ago
Looking forward to .NET Core and ASP.NET vNext... so I can adopt more .NET at work (at least for the web stuff), without fighting the uphill political battle of bringing in Windows on the server. :)

sudioStudio64 11y ago

Embrace, extend, and wait, whut?

nivla 11y ago
Are you extending this phrase to Google or are you seriously accusing Microsoft for letting Google use their product? It really surprises me out of all places HN has users who default to commenting based on a regex of keywords. Doesn't matter the context, does the article have (Windows|Microsoft) let me throw in a comment about embrace, extend, and extinguish and nothing more that adds value to the discussion. It is sad to find out that even Reddit has grown past it.
- sudioStudio64 11y ago
  I was joking dude. It was a joke because people always put that in any post about Microsoft. So, it was sarcasm. But way to be a tool about it.
  - nivla 11y ago
    Then put a sarcasm tag on it or write it such a way that it is obvious it is a joke. The fact you received a few downvotes for it implies that there were others who took it more as a snark than a joke. Keep in mind, this is HN, people come here for serious discussions (although subjectable), so it is hard to get away with a joke, especially a one that adds little or none to the discussion.
stinos 11y ago
Is it that day of the week again? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9851769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9851769
- sudioStudio64 11y ago
  IT WAS A JOKE. Damn. I thought it was funny, ya know, because it's about Microsoft, but its really about Google...it was a joke. EDIT: And I'm sticking by it. That was funny.