Eh, even corporate GSuite changes from time-to-time. Google products and services are less stable than AWS. I’m not talking about uptime, necessarily, but for all of AWS half-baked ills you know that half-baked service is going to be around forever.
I don’t think it’s a tired argument: Google is much more likely to cut bait than Amazon.
If my cloud provider said, “hey we released a half baked service and we’re deprecating it” at least that would give a solid reason to fix some obvious technical debt. Otherwise you may just be band-aiding technical debt for years.
Anecdotally, I’m thinking of ElasticSearch Service around 2017. We were pushing almost a terabyte an hour into ESS.
We ended up tacking on SearchGuard, ElastiAlert, some SSO proxy, and about 3-4 other products, when what we wanted was X-Pack.
It took a lot of toil before we convinced the org to go permit a migration off of ESS.
You might accept it, but I wouldn’t. Telling product owners that their timelines have been pushed because our cloud provider is removing something we depend on again is not a conversation I want to have.
Large enterprises are complicated beasts, and they value stability a lot. Even removing a single feature might cause dozens of teams to drop everything in order to go and fix the mess that someone else made. Why risk it? Especially if the alternative is someone who will wait to release a feature until it’s more than half baked and support it for a decade or more?
etxm|5 years ago
If my cloud provider said, “hey we released a half baked service and we’re deprecating it” at least that would give a solid reason to fix some obvious technical debt. Otherwise you may just be band-aiding technical debt for years.
Anecdotally, I’m thinking of ElasticSearch Service around 2017. We were pushing almost a terabyte an hour into ESS.
We ended up tacking on SearchGuard, ElastiAlert, some SSO proxy, and about 3-4 other products, when what we wanted was X-Pack.
It took a lot of toil before we convinced the org to go permit a migration off of ESS.
ashtonkem|5 years ago
Large enterprises are complicated beasts, and they value stability a lot. Even removing a single feature might cause dozens of teams to drop everything in order to go and fix the mess that someone else made. Why risk it? Especially if the alternative is someone who will wait to release a feature until it’s more than half baked and support it for a decade or more?