Is this a good idea? I don’t think so
Is this a good idea? I don’t think so
Alas, this relies on many things, not the least of which are peering agreements between cloud vendors that do not punish the consumer for using a service on one cloud with services from another.
It is possible to an extent today, but for competitive reasons, cloud companies do not seem to have a built in incentive to collaborate. Perhaps the cost of switching and lock-in will force cloud providers to work together in the long one, else they risk alienating customers, and then lack the ability to capture a larger market.
In other words, competition is good as long as people can realistically take advantage of it. I think cloud vendors have an obligation to see that this competition is encouraged and supported.
I agree.
It would be swell if, as part of the bigger open source movement, Jeff, Bill, and Larry - who at their disposal have AWS, Microsoft, and Google - competed with one another to submit the meritocratically superior implementation of our meritocratically determined open source standards, and then we, as custodians of the open source project, would select the winner, merge it, and use it - to the exclusion of all other implementations - not because of bias, but because of the truth underlying our meritocracy.
The question for me is - when we engage in said meritocracy, with all these BDFLs calling the shots, will they be the ones to negotiate with Jeff, Bill, and Larry? Or will we?
but are largely not, narrowing to sharing core tweaks, and keeping the PaaS layers proprietary
so it's not the maintainers failing to pick & unify, but Google etc employees not giving back
Or people working to make some *nix tools work on different distributions.
Of course their storage backend is going to be S3 and they are going to send logs to Cloudwatch, we have been doing it in a similar way for quite some time and it is what I expect from a solution managed by AWS.