You Are Addicted To Cloud Computing | Prime Reacts
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2024
- Recorded live on twitch, GET IN
/ theprimeagen
Become a backend engineer. Its my favorite site
boot.dev/?prom...
This is also the best way to support me is to support yourself becoming a better backend engineer.
Reviewed video: • Why you're addicted to...
By: youtube.com/@F...
MY MAIN YT CHANNEL: Has well edited engineering videos
/ theprimeagen
Discord
/ discord
Have something for me to read or react to?: / theprimeagenreact
Kinesis Advantage 360: bit.ly/Prime-K...
Hey I am sponsored by Turso, an edge database. I think they are pretty neet. Give them a try for free and if you want you can get a decent amount off (the free tier is the best (better than planetscale or any other))
turso.tech/dee...
Like clouds in real life they are pretty to watch from a distance, but actually quite annoying if you are inside them.
I see AWS like Walmart. Anything you can get there you could find a better version of elsewhere, but damn is it convenient to have everything in one place.
Spoken like someone who isn't comfortable with terminal. I use Arch btw
Also it's moist inside them 😉
So is your mom
Lmao gottem
Me and the boys when we in a cloud:
😡
RE: Azure Growth, you have to realize that every enterprise level company in every sector except Tech uses Windows. And user permissions in Active Directory carrying over to your cloud infra is a huge win.
Windows + Office/Microsoft 365.
I send this. Plus SSO integration with everything else (Workday, Power Bi, etc.) make it very valuable.
Exactly, the second you leave the tech world, you see windows everywhere.
I don't think people mean enterprise infrastructure when they discuss these issues. Enterprise infrastructure is a fraction of the web and mostly private, not open for public, you can't expect millions of users. 90% of public facing internet web app/pages will be served by a software running on linux.
Not the case, my company runs windows ec2 instances in the cloud and runs Microsoft SQL Server in various ec2 instances as well. It's a horrible and expensive fate.
The lab I worked for in school got a $25k grant from AWS. We burned through it in less than a year using their recommended architecture, and then were stuck trying to figure out why we had a $3k/mo bill for an application that had at most 1,000 concurrent users at any moment.
Save money and let your kids do admin.
1000 at any moment is not that trivial to be honest. For many online game launch, they immediately run into server crash even the players are only 10k-50k. And you completely forget the cost of operation, if you hire a developer to do this type of job, $3k/month might only get you a terrible junior, and the person might wrote a way worse version than the current architecture that can crash any time.
You might end up shipping nothing or have to be constantly ready for on-call whenever the flow crashes your limited cheap server.
So you see the tradeoff, here. You might also have fewer user but the app consume huge amount of data due to whatever you try to do.
Since you mention lab, I would assume it involves large amount of data uploading and displaying, you might want to monitor the app traffic for apis, to see if you can cache those data if they exist, which might kick your whole 3k down to few hundreds, if that's the symptom.
@@doc8527 To be clear, we are using a series of EC2 to run our application, so not self hosted in terms of on site. We ended up reducing our bill to under $1k a month going this route without adding any extra developers. The recommended AWS architecture was not any less complex than the EC2 solution, it just had different tradeoffs. We will never reach AWS availability guarantees with our current solution (compared to managed services) and we are likely not as secure. However, our solution is cheaper, easier for us to understand because we're not connecting a bunch of black boxes, and completely portable to another provider with minimal cost.
This all comes from understanding the project requirements and constraints. We have low security risk and low availability concerns due to the nature of the project. We are also contained to a very tight budget coming mostly from grants. So the cheaper alternative ends up fitting better for us.
I bring this up to point out that solutions architects are more or less sales people. I don't know if that's intentional, but thats based on three separate experiences with them. They try to push overly complex architectures that use a lot of proprietary vendor lock in kind of services. A good consultant will try to understand all the constraints for the business. I have not had that experience with anyone from AWS spanning three separate companies.
@@doc8527Local servers sound like they would be significantly better than AWS. Game servers (and video streaming) have significantly more processing to do than a lab server - they would have their own dedicated setup for HPC. Furthermore the $3k/month is just hosting fees. Furthermore if the server goes down in the middle of the night, not many people would notice.
@@doc8527lota of "depends" in your comment. First, you don't know where the person lives. 3k/month can get you a mid dev i east europe or vlose to senior depending on the year the op's story happened.
Secobdly, they probably still.needed someone to develop and aws technician just suggestwd the architecture that rhey are thought and gives maximum profit to the aws provider.
Thirdly.. it's a school lab.. like cmon....
You should take into account, most businesses in Europe use Microsoft. Their market share is just huge. Everything starts with the OS and office suite. Then they give introduce you into Azure via easy excel integration
I deleted my initial response because it was incoherent rambling and I can't be bothered to rewrite it. Sorry.
Yeah basically every single company I've seen uses azure here. It's crazy how much they are used
I work in France with other European companies and yes, many many stuff here is with Microsoft. So much that it poses issues regarding "sovereign" cloud techs.
But still, were mostly using Microsoft stuff. From what i gather : the integration with Active directory is great(seamless and all the SSO stuff) and they have a better transparency regarding European rules about personal datas.
I use azure at work, it's fine. It's basically the same as AWS but with better naming for its services. EC2 = Virtual Machines, S3 = Storage etc. When people describe their AWS architecture and it's like we connect the floopidy floop to the thingamybob I just can't help thinking why would Amazon do this?
As a entry level engineer who just graduated, the naming schemes of AWS and the shire number of services they provide is what has deterred me from learning it😭
@@devinjohnson5759 Its all good, anyways if trend continues azure will have more market share at some point in the near future
@@devinjohnson575990% of it is crap. Someone requests a specific use case so they make it a new service and make it cost 5 times what it costs to do it yourself.
Man Azure is better than AWS now, but like ~6 years ago it was actually a massive step better than it is now
maybe it's a kind of psychology to deceive you from the essence of what the service offers.
DHH has been talking about this for ages, but I remember Theo slating this view.
In general, if you are a startup and/or don't have the expertise to handle onsite servers (and all the maintenance, tools and processes that come with it), then go cloud. For scenarios where demand is relatively stable and predictable, and your staff are well equipped in server knowledge, go onsite metal.
I don’t quite know how much I agree with that, although I have never deployed, just written local web code.
My initial response was just… buy another server. I don’t know, is that easier said then done? Even still, you can always use a hybrid approach if you do need to scale. Maybe have a local server for dev and testing, and a cloud one for final deployment or ci/cd.
That said, cloud services are probably good for most people. I will have to get more experience in the field to say one way or another.
Is that your analysis? Brilliant!
We're doing rented bare metal and it's pretty OK. I feel like full on prem is a tad harder
Use vercel < Hire 8 engineers, spend around 250K on hardware and spend the next 5 months making it stable
@@twenty-fifth420does it even matter is it easier. Developers used to be enthusiasts who like to get their hands dirty, and regular admin stuff used to be something one would anyway want to learn/get experience with. Sure, nowadays in the world of (Often unnecessary) k8s etc it has become more difficult/complicated, but not that much. E.g. most AWS stuff is going to be relatively easy (a matter of reading docs) to anyone who understands the basics of system admin and networking. Then, another issue I see are vastly different PoVs, or should be very different. Like here you have a guy receiving $ from Vercel, another working for Netflix, then average kiddo hoping to get a job in a local JS shop (Maybe hoping to get a work at local job market company, a bank, local producer of book keeping software etc.). It's completely different worlds. Then somehow you have this situation where a frontend dev or a designer basically (Without intention of changing the trade) end up learning tech which is a tool for engineers, and being an (Not software, electrical) eng is often a precondition to get such jobs. Crazy.
Azure runs the corporate side of almost all large companies -- i.e. Active Directory and SSO app registrations. AWS is more for web infrastructure.
Azure gets enterprise cloud migrations because of the easy integration with their networks/AD/Entra and office products.
It's really because they've done a great job at selling the idea that "Microsoft works well with Microsoft"...
In reality, that's further from the truth. I've had a lot more success with .NET based applications running on GCP than Azure just because Azure is such a shit platform.
"how did google fumble the bag so hard" applies to all their products at this point, even the search engine is falling behind motherheccin bing
By being google.
That's true, Bing is better than Google, proof, DuckDuckGo is Bing. I'm using it since 2018 and never miss Google anymore.
5 years ago if you told me bing would be better I would have laughed in your face. Today I exclusively use it over google, google is just absolutely worthless for anything beyond basic information and even then 75% of the results are AI SEO sites. Also bing pays you for stealing your data too, not really sure how many searches it takes, but I've gotten 20 dolla in amazon credit now just from daily searches, it's a nice little bonus that makes the whole data stealing thing at least somewhat less painful
Time for binging
You know, I've often used Edge-Bing when researching on lab computers ('cause that's the default) and I can say this: Edge is a super nice browser, when I look stuff up in Bing there are no less than 3 different icons to click on in order to communicate with MS Copilot, and in addition there's a bunch of AI popups and other "browser tools" that show up...but the search results are trash. I often have to scroll through two pages of search results, find nothing relevant, search up Google, looks past the misleading search bar that MS hilariously puts in front of Google's page, look it up in Google's site, and find the perfect search result first time almost every time. This has happened over a dozen times in the last few months alone. If Bing can get a halfway decent algorithm, they have a good shot at kicking Google, but I have strong doubts that will happen.
I dont know how it got so bad yeah. When i was searching for specific stuff, it used to give me great/straight to the points articles.
Now its websites full of ads.
What the hell
Azure’s customers not just government and medical, it’s actually very even. Most Fortune 500 companies use Azure.
Azure was the first of the two to create a “hybrid cloud” service that mixes on-premise with cloud services and most agree Azure’s hybrid service is better supported than AWS’s.
A lot of companies already used windows servers or the Microsoft stack on-prem, so for them it’s a no brainer to migrate to Azure.
But to your average company, AWS and Azure are the same and any service offered in one is available in the other, so most people just use what they’re familiar with. I think Azure’s services have sensible names unlike AWS, so if you’re looking for something in Azure it’s easy to find.
AWS Activate credits are often dished out in increments of 10-25k up to that cap, you're also required to burn it within two years I think. So they're gaming the FOMO of the credits to get your burn rate up before you start paying.
Yeah. They pretty much set you up for 5k to 10k monthly costs by their credit system.
To the point of Azure:
I work at a giant corporation and we're almost completely exclusive with Microsoft (using Azure, Teams, etc), so I guess there are some contracts that MS does with giant corps
there was a point where i lived in the aws gui for a month, got unaddicted real quick
My guess on MS: they offer companies a very attractive package incl. Windows licences for their work PC fleet, Office desktop + 365 or whatever it's called + Teams + Devops + AI services + Azure. It's just the whole package with one business partner for a good overall price. I think that's what's going on but I could be wrong.
I have a foot in both Azure and AWS day to day at my company and I can tell you I'd rather work in Azure any day of the week. It's so much more logically organized and I don't have to read 4 fucking articles full of deliberately obtuse terminology to do something as simple as change which Vnet a VM is on.
6:27 NEVER underestimate Nadella
That dudes been absolutely killing it. It’s annoying because it’s like MS has swapped with Apple and Google with some of their current offerings
I love Nutella!
I'll keep hammering that it is crazy Slack eve exists at all. But it is crazy Prime is somehow excited about DHH Campfire stuff when ZULIP IS LITERALLY FOSS
I'm not saying that Slack could be replaced with a Markdown filter over an XMPP server.
But I wonder if it could be.
Don't forget Azure hosts Office and therefore Teams, which everybody now has to use because it comes with Office... plus iirc, they're the only one with an option to keep data on EU servers only, which is huge for GDPR
i can confirmyou the last part about EU servers.
While it's sad Europe doesn't have its own "big tech cloud companies", Microsoft are the most "transparent" regarding Data hosting and sharing in the EU.
They have entire teams dedicated to that. Amazon are quite stinky in comparison. That's why while the prices are quite "similar", IT experts are usually going with Azure.
I'm a Platform Engineering Consultant in the UK and our split is at least 70% Azure 30% AWS and very little GCP (I've been on one GCP discovery the whole time I've been here [over 4 years]).
why would you ever use GCP ? and have to worry it could just stop existing overnight as anything from google that's not related to "ads". The worst company for longevity of products.
Only Prime can make a 5 minute video a 25 minute video
Azure is gov, medical, and legacy midwest companies
It's also all of europe
14:35 I dunno, that could resonate with me. "Come over, you can leave us anytime" sounds way better than "once you put your data in - we got you by your balls".
Vercel is the Kick of AWS Cloud Computing.
Vercel is the one live-streaming a kick livestream
@@peanutceleryThis made me laugh, absolutely.
I have a theory that Amazon intentionally makes their AWS UI that difficult so you have to get certified to use it and then fall prey to the “sunk cost fallacy”
Non-technical managers are living and breathing Microsoft Office products. That gives huge brand recognition benefits to Azure, right right where it matters the most. That’s probably why it’s the fastest growing cloud provider.
Businesses already have an Azure Tenant just to handle users et al., in the enterprise space. Migrating to azure was just easier for them.
I'm ex-AWS and I can confirm that AWS is the business that brings in the most profit for Amazon.
I only used lambdas for work, all my projects run on plain old servers and im happy like that
My place of work uses Azure, we do a lot of government/military contract work. We're a manufacturing shop and we very frequently have many ITAR and other "confidential" blueprints on site. Not sure if Azure is used for security purposes or why, but I know our network is pretty darn locked down.
I was yelling "enterprise" at the same time as everyone else. Microsoft packages a lot of Azure resources into larger enterprise contracts. Further, I've now been at three medium-sized companies that used AWS and we had monthly AWS bills in excess of $250k at each of them. We didn't have huge numbers of users. We had complex systems powering financial transactions, so it's not like we were running Mastodon, but the actual user counts were measured in the single-digit thousands. That is bonkers expensive.
I use Vercel for hosting simple things mostly to showoff or that I don't expect will get any traffic, and that's because it is so simple to use. Don't want to bother with AWS for hosting a simple static site.
Amazon has no idea how to do good UX/UI. That goes for their stores and AWS. if they weren't already that big, they'd have no chance to survive.
my cloud is an old thinkpad serving all my 10 users
"Aint no way youre doing it successfully" Meanwhile the company i am working for for has h complete datacenter as well as every one of the major cloud providers lol
I use Azure at my company and never had a major issue with it. It's got some quirks for sure but it's fine.
This is the 2nd time recently I hear about Ahrefs. The 1st time was me researching Melange.
Amazon's profit being so low is no accident. When they have money left over they spend it on R&D. Since that's an expense, that money won't get taxed
No matter how bad slack is, at least it is not teams
Another thing that worries me about cloud is egress time. Even assuming you can foot the bill on its own, how long would it take you to transfer the data somewhere else? This traffic will slow down, or even require you to shut down your site altogether, which is as much of a problem as the bills themselves.
Hosting at home is the future, I have been hosting an app that has 2-3k requests per hour for the past year with almost zero downtime. It's not that hard. And it's actually fun.
That "Docker", "Kubernetes" and "cloud" garbage must disappear yesterday. It's the worst thing which ever happened to the information technology industry. Make clean OS packages instead!
Fr
@@theairaccumulator7144 what is "Fr"???
Azure was among the biggest PITA I've ever dealt with, every little thing involved jumping through 5 hoops and odd choices of defaults, now that its working, the costing is trivial,
S3 egress is what keeps me awake at night.
Just my org where I work has a monthly GCP bill around $25k. I think we spent like $100M last year, total, and it's all because our "infrastructure" teams wouldn't hire some OpenStack consultants to install and run it on our own hardware (that we already owned).
@ThePrimeTime Azure did raise because: European companies for example are often times using Azure. They have existing contract with MS and are later in joining the SaaS train
Retail in general is a high revenue, but extremely low margin business.
Amazon has higher margins because it's a monopoly.
My company has a million+ monthly AWS bill, its nuts
AWS is off their fucking rockers. They started charging 3.5$ per IP address, making the cheapest EC2 instance cost 5$/month. You pay 2x more for a fucking IP address than you do for the compute... Also, their whole shit is fucked. It's not a UI problem, its that they have 10 million different services that somehow kind of integrate with each other, but they really don't. In the end, you have no fucking idea what you are even paying for and that shit is practically impossible to track. The whole UI is just "Hey kid, you want some smack?" "Sure stranger, what could go wrong" and at the end of the month you just see the fucking bill for 50$ extra because you clicked on one big round button.
I maintain multiple small accounts and can barely stay on top of all the pricing bombs hidden there. I really wonder how much money is burned in huge orgs because of some shitty config or architecture decisions...
Needing a UI in AWS is a skill issue. Use CLI and TF
To be fair their cli is bad.
TF sucks the soul out of me. Like cdk more
It's still bad overall.
what i noticed with azure is its not mainly used by startups thats gonna bankrupt in the next year or so, unlike mainly gcp!
14:45 actually a point i always consider is how locked in I am and how easy it would be to switch
So, it's a good deal to learn some Cloud platform ?🤔
Tech companies like AWS.
Most other companies like Azure. Think manufacturing, medical, banks
Multicloud is possible it's just a ton of plumbing. It's the future, though. There must be a way to decouple business logic from vendors, pricing, and developer experience.
Take a look at Data Mesh architecture. I feel like that paradigm indicates the mood that we shouldn't be chaining ourselves to any specific provider.
Lot's of places consider Amazon a competitor so for example I worked at a company that had Walmart as a client and they didn't want to do business with us if we used AWS so whole stack was moved to GCP
Heard this one before - They like to throw this out there as why, but in actuality there’s a family tie between executive leadership with Walmart and Microsoft. Amazon doesn’t care if a customer has Walmart as a client. It serves Amazon zero interest to put their whole cloud business at risk to “one up” Walmart.
Where is my Openstack crowd?
2:40 Idk how he hovered his mouse over the part that showed AWS was producing $5.4B in profit while the Amazon store was producing a loss of $2.9B and still didn't notice.
8:11 i honestly think AWS keeps the platform difficult to use because A) it creates an ecosystem of courses and certificates that they can make another revenue stream out of and B) to build a bigger moat for themselves, because even if they fall out of grace in the public eye in any way people will still unknowingly be using their services via a third party
"Cloud" could also just mean having managed k8s at a medium sized hosting provider and you'll probably be fine if you don't aim for international delivery.
Amazon paying 3.45% taxes on their profit is just amazing. I pay 40% on my salary.
yea and then every single person that they pay including their shareholders gets taxed again and again and again down the chain. Corporate taxes are just double taxation.
I have found cloud computing has resulted in moving away from maintaining hardware to spending that time configuring multiple environments where the most difficult one is making it work locally.
I think it should be part of all startups to have a cloud exit strategy
Prime hair being transparent in the video 🤣
9:05 I want what he's having but for creamy chocolate cake. That is a crazy number of cigarettes.
once it's up and running aws is much much higher margin than their retail stuff. they have to spend a lot of money to make retail work at all, while the cost of 1 more AWS instances is negligible if you have the servers built out
I multi cloud easily , I host my frontend on vercel for easy deployment through cli. I host my backend on linode
1:36 lol, it was literally there
I love your rants on slack. So good.
I will say, having closely seen negotiations with folks burned by AWS, it is no small selling point to mention no egress fees. Once burned, folks legitimately worry about trading one tyrant for another
AWS just announced free egress out if you want to leave AWS. It’s like they heard you and responded lol
It would take forever for them to make the. UX/UI, why do that when you have vercel like companies doing the job for them
amazon’s business was always putting everyone else out of business undercutting them
As far as I know "getting the bag" is literally what selling out is? 16:30
I'm a zoomer so I don't know about this but how did startups work pre-AWS if the cost and pain to manage bare metal is too high?
Server ownership gives you control over hardware and uptimes at a cost of 1500$/mo. VPS 60$ to get something good that can handle lots of load.
One thing that many did was rent older servers on datacenters. An 8 core (16vcpu) with 64GB RAM and 250GB of storage could go as low as $120/mo back in 2017. You could rent infrastructure that would be enough for almost any startup for the cost of a larger EC2 instance.
What nearly killed that business model was the ransomware wave, but to be honest, it was the ransomware scare.
By renting space at a datacenter. The datacenter handles maintenance, backup, etc, and you pay them money for it. The difference with this new "cloud"? They had no autoscaling. So if you need to scale up, you have to actually, manually, rent additional space.
Also, sawattara taihou~ 🎵
@@kissuosts4704$1500 is much higher than reality. Try $150.
"you got yourself a little nepotism going on in the EU" -> this hits hard
Just another bit of ignorance from an Ami tbh
dude doesnt even understan the meaning of the word
Isn't that low profit tax related? There was some news regarding them showing losses the whole time to reduce tax burden.
at least for me azure is getting in by offering $100 free to students and is the only thing used at my university (fsu) which isn’t exactly small
Alleviating the cost of egress of a service is a way to alleviate its cost of entry: "Now I can enter and try it without worrying too much about how to exit".
And no, voluntarily signing a contract where you have to pay to transfer data out is not "techno feudalism".
Slaves voluntarily signed contracts with their masters, because the alternative was deth.
I've been poking AWS recently (my work place is using it) and I have to wonder if people go there because it's a "default cloud". The UI/UX is so darn obnoxious.
BRB creating an abstraction layer over netlify.
TBF, my company spends millions/m on AWS... It's just crazy
How did Azure grow: those numbers include cloud versions of Office 365.
Amazon purposefully runs their profit at close to cost as a competitive strategy.
I'm so glad I don't care about cloud computing at all.
Yes! I seen a big honey pot. Get you hooked then keep raising the prices. So glad I just setup proxmox on two e waste laptops. 12 cores, 38gb memory. Idk what that would cost on AWS.
@@hotrodhunk7389 all the benchmarks I've done for my company's use case both AWS, Azure and GCP are more than 10x more expensive.
@@hotrodhunk7389 really? Something tells me it's not for any business that makes money, but for simple homelab server for you to mess around and host jellyfin 😏
@@hotrodhunk7389 That's a small fortune on AWS.
@@hotrodhunk7389 Is proxmox production ready and stable?
Just saw Microsoft projections and it is crazy. They basically own the market now that they got their hand on Open AI.
Azure is popular because they have SLAs that make GDPR compliance easy, AWS afaik still doesn't
"If you leave me you'll spend all of eternity toiling with servers. Only I can protect you. Only here can you grow. Only I can offer the services you need. So stay. Where it's safe. Only I will ever love you"
AWS - gaslinghting programmers since 2006
Az’s UI is better and they know how to sunset a product. GCPs UI is somehow just as bad, in some ways worse, than AWS. Az also gives pretty deep discounts. All that said, for my personal project I’m hosting my own server and it’s much cheaper than hosting it in the cloud(not even close). I’ve seen AWS’s “quotes” for twitch streamers and it’s so laughably inflated im surprised they haven’t floated away. The main benefit is regional hosting. For small businesses I’d personally recommend a combination of metal and cloud/cdns if you’ve the know how and infrastructure. You’ll save 10’s of thousands rather quickly.
what would be the best option for a real estate online app for brokers, which whould serve their listings by API for them to use on their websites? regarding transfer costs, for the images they upload of each listing.
did you actually mentioned techno-feudalism, the Yianis varoufakis book?
I use AWS for years and is always what we can do, they have everything
Microsoft has absolutely corned the mid-tier software market for enterprise. You need a pretty quick and safe application, use C#. All of a sudden you're balls deep in visual studio and Azure Dev Ops. Your repo. Microsoft. Your editor. Microsoft. Your code. Microsoft. Your hosting. Microsoft. FUCK IT. Your server. MICROSOFT.
Developing software targeting windows makes perfect sense especially for business targets. DEPLOYING SERVERS THAT RUN ON WINDOWS IS CRAZY WTF WHY WHY WHY.
the simple answer is a free tier
cloud computers are the easiest to get free tiers on
You don't need to buy a server here in Europe you can also rent V-Server , a real hardware server and cloud all from the same company xD Seriously this is still an option which seems completely forgotten.
8:11 actually, they've been doing that for years, they've already destroyed lots of companies.
Redefining selling out? Yes selling out literally means selling out. That is the only meaning.
I clicked to see the video, and got a non financier’s viewpoint on how Amazon makes Gross Profit from its revenue channels.
90B from AWS isn't that much. That's only half Jeff Bezos' net worth.
Prime lives in a california webshit bubble and doesn't realize that everywhere else every business computer runs windows, every company is organized in active directory and that many of them will move to azure instead of upgrading their onprem servers.
Azure, very popular in Europe
Oh no. Overly Attached Girlfriend is a boomer meme. I'll go choose my assisted living facility now.
The first part was so frustrating. Its watching a drunk stumble through an obstacle course. The chart was right there. You didn't have to do the stupid breakdown.