Except timescaledb is open source: https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb
They criticize AWS for making money on Elasticsearch for example, AWS is "taking advantage of the R&D efforts of others". So Amazon is making money on a "serverless" / cloud experience. At the same time, it is known that Amazon is contributing back to Elasticsearch [1]. To that regard, I find their business model really similar to the one AWS is relying upon.
[1] https://www.techrepublic.com/article/aws-contributes-to-elas...
Some people would want k8s, some docker swarm or whatever, some an aws config, others ansible, etc etc etc.
If I want a managed service, I _want_ to pay for that. The price includes people responding to pages and fixing problems, as well as fiddling with configs.
And I'd much rather be paying that money to a small (relatively) open-source company than a behemoth like AWS.
Is this not what S3 is? You are free to use Elasticsearch and handle everything yourself, but if you want a managed service, you can use AWS. They are "attacking" the S3 offering, I still struggle to see any difference with them hosting Postgres.
> And I'd much rather be paying that money to a small (relatively) open-source company than a behemoth like AWS.
I am 100% with you on this, I do not want to defend AWS nor do I want to promote their products. The vendor lock-in situation you are in when using AWS is pretty bad and quite scary... An yes, I agree that the way they monetize open-source software is questionable.