If AWS bought it for the product, what reason would there ever be to stop the current business model entirely rather than leaving it on its current trajectory for a few months, untill said "needs" are addressed?
If AWS bought it for the product, what reason would there ever be to stop the current business model entirely rather than leaving it on its current trajectory for a few months, untill said "needs" are addressed?
Just tell us if you just wanted the employees, just wanted some rights, wanted to integrate their product for your use, or just wanted to kill something off. I'm sick of reading the same new release for every acquisition knowing it's bullshit.
If it was just acquihire there probably wouldn’t have a big blog post tying it to AWS. Just negative publicity for acquirer when they could shut down quietly.
It never happens.
If $BIGCO had any intent to keep the product along, you'd be reading the post on $BIGCO's blog, not $FAILEDSTARTUP's blog.
Fig is only two, three years old at most.
That’s a good point.
But what reason is there to disable new registrations?
By preventing sign ups, they fix the number of accounts that will need to be migrated in future.
I'd assume the same thing is going to happen here.
I worked at AWS from 2010 to 2014 after also getting acqui-hired (AWS SDK for PHP, fka CloudFusion).
That’s an easy one: if it’s burning money like crazy on its current hosting, but only because of rents extracted by one of their competitors, not for any inherent OpEx-intensity; and that therefore Amazon expects it to be profitable when moved to live rent-free on their hosting.