It's usually much more difficult to increase prices later after you've gathered more data. The Web is a much bigger, diverse place today than it was 10 years ago. Start at higher prices as a rule for [esp for non-technical audiences], measure, tweak and repeat.
I find it interesting that feedback like this still abounds (and for good reason), considering the many tools and frameworks and services available online today. Apparently the field for delivering another tool or service continues to remain green :)
Lots of emotional comments with the usual I-hate-MS bent, without a single reference to data showing Azure [Linux VM] users or non-users. Always shocking to see individuals who claim to be rational and open-minded in one domain become irrational, closed and judgemental in another.
Is it really irrational to distrust Microsoft? I mean, they seem to be much more palatable lately, but does that mean we should completely forget their history? I'm all for using the best technology for the job, but when you're in a close call situation I think it's okay to rely on an organizations history to make a decision.
Is there another large tech company with the history of wrongdoing that Microsoft has? They're a convicted monopolist that personally affected a large subset of the developer community with repercussions that took decades to solve (if they're solved at all).
I'm sure Azure has great stats on paper, it's not the simple, easy-to-measure data that concerns us. I'm also sure that Azure is currently treating their clients really well, in the spirit of "the first hit is free". What is concerning, is not the effects of their current actions, but rather what their current actions say about their future plans, given MS' history of "embrace, extend, extinguish".
With MS, the EEE process should be your null hypothesis when you are trying to predict their behavior.
Having said that, I am not against the idea of taking advantage of an opponent who prostrates themselves, just make sure that you can safely extricate yourself from the trap. If you want to deploy on Azure, make sure it's a multi cloud deployment with some insulation above the infrastructure, like Mesos or Kube. Which precludes using the more specialized services, but seriously, who pipes unencrypted data through 3rd party message queues? That's just crazy.
It's never going to change. Just like it hasn't changed for the Church. Sure, _now_ the Church takes care of little old ladies but don't forget the bad old days when they had the Inquisition!
That seems like a huge strawman. All the criticism I've ever seen of the Catholic Church has nothing to do with the Inquisition or anything that far back. There's enough to discuss over the last few decades or even just the present day to fill any serious attempt at the topic.
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a secret weapon, but they have added a HUGE amount of services in a very short amount of time relative to the other player.
More and better layered services (e.g. MLStudio), more regions/locations, option of going hybrid (Azure Stack), better container support with per-second billing, the list goes on and on.
Is their hybrid cloud a real thing now? I remember them touting it around 5 years ago, but for years it just never arrived, till I gave up waiting. Just seemed like a bait and switch actually.
I'm learning Go for working with distributed systems and blockchains, but I'm basically another C#/.NET dude. Apart from the requirements to follow and maintain certain Google Guidelines, I don't mind the language to be honest. Looks neat to me.
Yeah, that would be totally hands off. But I believe you'd have to ensure that your requests didn't timeout, (3 seconds in lambda) and in this example of 10ms response times I couldn't see any issue here. If you're into python, checkout Chalice, it's being built as a "flask" like interface on top of AWS Lambda. https://github.com/awslabs/chalice
> Regarding Daniel - like others here I'm sure it's because cURL has been used extensively for bad purposes he was kicked off the ESTA program. Yes it sucks that they didn't let him know in advance, and they didn't have the smarts to figure that he had nothing to do with the bad actors.
Very strange paragraph right there. I could easily generalize this to Windows powershell is increasingly being used in cyber offensives by non-state actors, let us eject Microsoft from the United States
Yes you can generalize this to Windows powershell.
And no that does not have anything to do with ejecting Microsoft from the US. Microsoft isn't a private foreign individual using a privileged entry mechanism in the US that given any reason whatsoever can be revoked in favour of a perfectly functional visa process that most countries have to use.
ESTA is only available to a few countries, and not all people in those countries.
I don't think Microsoft will be ejected from the US because of an ESTA invalidation.
Great. So what does this rejection accomplish based on your premise of having written software that has been repurposed by evil actors? Dan's GPS coordinates at any time t does not affect whether he writes code that will be used for good or evil, so what gives? :\
No one should be held responsible for a fact that causes damage without direct involvement. The legal system uses `iuris personae` and limited liability precisely for this. Distinguishing a natural person from a legal person in this case is contrary to the purpose of the laws in force.
Each tool can be used for good and for evil: risk management is primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss, and is embedded by the law for companies, and people too.
He wasn't denied entry into the US. He was denied access to a fast track system for entry into the US, so he has to use the slow, annoying, more methodical way.
It certainly sucks, but your summary of the US legal system is irrelevant.
He apparently had his paperwork in order and was rejected when he tried to travel.
Spin it however you like, but the fact is that he was denied entry into the US?
Whether or not he can pay (time, money) to go in the future is irrelevant to being denied today?
Regarding the entire esta vs visas... I'm lucky enough to have passed painlessly through VISA and I don't understand the difference between them? You have to apply for both? You have to provide your identity documents, information about yourself, payment? The only difference I can see is that you don't need to visit an embassy? Why do we draw a distinction, other than marketing?
My purpose was not to criticise your comment, but to offer a starting point for reflection. It is not a secret that (in recent years) the number of people subject to more stringent authorisation procedures are constantly increasing, and this without counting the no-fly.
Having been a great admirer of the US, I can say that what I admire are some principles, principles that seem forgotten. They are probably forgotten because when you teach a CBP employee to look for only the worst of people, this will eventually find something suspicious in anyone.
The recent run into exploiting software vulnerabilities could explain why there’s a focus on developers/hackers. But just putting a critique is not constructive, remembering where we come from, what are our principles, why we have them, and their purpose, is much better to motivate why it's wrong to "discriminate" someone.
It's not just slow and annoying, it's wrong because he’s not responsible.
