I think this is the line that triggered the parent:
"Cloudfront can distribute static content and backends running on Lambda@Edge."
The really scary thing is that the aws products being lampooned are the mainstream ones. Amazon has, what, another couple hundred "offerings"?
Here on HN, there are people that say if you're using AWS only for the basic EC2 you're doing it wrong. They can be correct in the tactical sense, but in the strategic sense, AWS is cackling with glee.
If I were building an IT org, I'd have an Infra as code foundation that from the foundation supported both AWS and other options that are far cheaper. AWS for prototyping and DR/redundancy but it "seamlessly" (I can hear the eyeballs roll and you're all not wrong) will deploy to non-AWS.
It's crazy that the basic tooling for EC2 / google computer / azure / etc to do this is only at the quarter-state. Hey HN, isn't there a massive opportunity for a company to meta-manage this?
"Cloudfront can distribute static content and backends running on Lambda@Edge."
The really scary thing is that the aws products being lampooned are the mainstream ones. Amazon has, what, another couple hundred "offerings"?
Here on HN, there are people that say if you're using AWS only for the basic EC2 you're doing it wrong. They can be correct in the tactical sense, but in the strategic sense, AWS is cackling with glee.
If I were building an IT org, I'd have an Infra as code foundation that from the foundation supported both AWS and other options that are far cheaper. AWS for prototyping and DR/redundancy but it "seamlessly" (I can hear the eyeballs roll and you're all not wrong) will deploy to non-AWS.
It's crazy that the basic tooling for EC2 / google computer / azure / etc to do this is only at the quarter-state. Hey HN, isn't there a massive opportunity for a company to meta-manage this?