Snapchat was (is?) built on AppEngine and they signed a 5 year 3 billion dollar contract with GCP. I wouldn't be surprised if AppEngine is hanging by a thread outside of a few large users as GCP devs have on multiple occasions signaled new projects with the intention of replacing AppEngine (I forget which ones, feel free to verify that anecdote yourself).
AppEngine is just one product in Google Cloud, and the first they released in 2008. Of course there will be new versions and eventually new products that are recommended like VMs, GKE, Cloud Functions, Cloud Run, and more.
It's still supported and has plenty of usage so I don't see it as "hanging by a thread" unless you have more data than things that people said but apparently you forgot?
So what? I can give you a point-by-point rebuttal of everything on that page.
> The standalone legacy SDK and appcfg tooling
Just use the newer `gcloud` command-line tool.
> Go 1.9 (GA) and Node.js 8 (GA)
Upgrade your language man. This is PaaS. You're expected to keep your app up to date.
> Admin API v1beta4/v1beta5
These are beta versions of the API. Why don't use migrate to the GA versions?
Etc, etc. In fact the large number of deprecations on that page only shows how rapidly new features and runtimes and frameworks are being developed to replace old ones.
While AWS has deprecated runtimes, if you have an old running version of Node for instance on lambda, it will run forever. It will force you to upgrade to a newer version the next time you update the lambda.
As far as I know, AWS has never discontinued a service or turned off an API. They may deprecate a feature or make it unavailable for new accounts or regions.
Heck AWS still supports running an EC2 instance outside of a VPC if your account is old enough,SimpleDB , and using S3 as a BitTorrent seed for old regions.
Optimizing for growth requires forgoing profit, which is the model in place for GCP (and what everyone seems concerned over) so I don’t see what the problem is.
Is it really that you just don’t feel they’re committed enough for your standards?
Like I said, it's double-digit billions product line and has a 10+ year history. And internal metrics show lots of profit margin comparable to AWS, although you'll have to find someone to share that with you in person.
Not to mention that Google is so full of “smart people” (tm) that their sales force is made up of people who probably would never stoop low enough to do lift and shifts as phase 1. They would probably want you to move everything to k8s and rewrite your entire stack.
As opposed to MS. If a business has a legacy app that requires a 10 year old version of Sql Server running on a 12 year old version of Windows, they will put that in Azure and probably offer extended support for the OS for free.
They push you to use a Beta feature as it's the "preferred" way of interacting with their internal APIs. Meanwhile they know definitively that there's a race condition in their code when using this feature that will _take down the entire service_. It took down our entire Production project, they weren't forthcoming with any information to get us a fix for several hours (until we started sending nasty escalation emails about our P1 ticket not being handled) and then they blamed us for using a feature that was still in Beta.
We'd had literal face to face meetings where they'd told us we need to use this feature.
Interestingly enough, we were assigned new reps this week. I wonder if our AM and TAM were laid off.
Worked at a company that signed a contract with Dyn. Oracle asked to try to sell us additional services so we said sure why not.
Oracle flew 23 people across the entire country, all in expensive suits, to sit in a conference room for a full 10 hour pitch meeting where only 2 people talked.
And isn’t that the pitch of every startup? We are worth $billions because the size of the market is $billions x 10 if we only capture $a_small_percentage.
It's hard to believe cloud won't be profitable. You are selling one of the world's greatest engines of innovation (computing) using a proven delivery model (internet services). Combine that with very low execution risk, since big tech has been self-consuming computing as a service over 20 years of growth. It would almost be irresponsible to leave this opportunity on the table. If Google lands in third place $a_small_percentage is actually quite large.
That didn’t work out very well seeing they are still paying Apple a reported $8 - $12 billion a year to be the default search engine and it came out in the Oracle trial that they only made $23 billion in profit off of Android from its inception until the beginning of the trial.
Apple makes more from Google in mobile than Google makes from Android.
Google's Android operating system has generated revenue of about $31 billion and profit of $22 billion since its release, an Oracle Corp lawyer told a U.S. court hearing the software company's copyright lawsuit against Google.
