AWSs offerings seem fairly vanilla and boring. Google are offering more and more really useful stuff:
- cloud machine learning
- custom hardware
- live migration of hosts without downtime
- Cold storage with access in seconds
- bigquery
- dataflow
AWSs offerings seem fairly vanilla and boring. Google are offering more and more really useful stuff:
- cloud machine learning
- custom hardware
- live migration of hosts without downtime
- Cold storage with access in seconds
- bigquery
- dataflow
I read "Vanilla" and "Boring" as "Horray, I don't have to spend time rewriting all this complicated code I already have!"
If I'm just dipping my toes into (say) Caffe or Theano, I don't have to rewrite it from scratch.
That is a huge advantage---not a disadvantage!---of AWS over google.
Google does boring stuff very well too.. and one can argue much better than AWS as well.. take a look at Quizlet's story: https://quizlet.com/blog/whats-the-best-cloud-probably-gcp
(shamelessly biased Googler)
If you're evaluating something today, how does it change your decision that we were late to market with Compute Engine (and in this specific case "bring-your-own-kernel")?
If it's about future boring stuff, I think the list of boring stuff isn't too long ;).
Disclosure: I work on Compute Engine.
A solid guarantee with AWS is if AWS goes down, then a multitude of Amazon's services also will go down(ex Amazonian myself), so it gives me a belief that AWS's uptime is more important to Amazon itself that it is for external customers.
Before we had custom machine types (November 2015 GA), we wouldn't have been remotely close to what they needed. I'm not even sure we've had anyone evaluate the amount of overhead KVM adds in either latency or throughput.
tl;dr: Don't let Search be your "not until they do it". We've got folks in Chrome, Android, VR, and more building on top of Cloud (as well as much of our internal tooling being on App Engine specifically).
(Firebase Engineer here)
I'd love to hear what other boring stuff has been a showstopper for you, in case we missed something dumb :)
Not implying that AWS hasn't had them. It's just that adopting GCE this early makes you a bit of a guinea pig because GCE isn't used internally at Google.
(I work on TF this year.)
[1] It has been climbing the charts at https://github.com/soumith/convnet-benchmarks for example.
(To elaborate -- it's questions like "how deep should I make this convolution? Should I use tf.relu or tf.sigmoid? How many fully-connected layers should I put here, and how big should I make them?". These are really knotty deep learning design questions, but they're often h/w independent. Not always - we certainly have some ops on TF that we only support in CPUs and not on GPUs, for example - but often.)
1. Best price/performance is tensorflow right now. So, the best software choice is platform X.
2. Then in 2 years.. Well we are using Platform X so tensorflow is clearly the best option.
In other words once you pick conv2d, you tend to also stick with whatever conv2d is optimized for. Which also means HW vendors love to help optimize popular platforms.- Cloud Shell
to name a couple more.