News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by dsr_ on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @09:26AM (#18015048)
Small companies are terrible at working together, even when it's in their best interests.

Can any single customer smaller than the US government get a policy change at Amazon by threatening to walk away?

Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by rbanffy on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @09:56AM (#18015307)
Very unlikely to happen because of fees, but plausible if the customer is high-profile enough that news about the move damage the reputation of the service provider.

Usually the new provider will advertise the win in such a way it highlights their competitive advantages. This can be extremely painful for the company that lost the very high profile brand.

Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by dfsegoat on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @09:49AM (#18015254)
I'd put Netflix up there as a first candidate...
Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by rbanffy on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @09:57AM (#18015324)
Are they still a pure AWS house? I'd expect that, at their scale, they'd have boxes and VMs everywhere the round-trip time justifies.
Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by testvox on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @10:28AM (#18015612)
They use AWS for everything except content delivery which is handled by their Open Connect content delivery system that they built and operate. https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/
Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by rbanffy on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @11:25AM (#18016073)
Interesting. For a moment I thought they would aggressively optimize encoding for frame cost but then I realized that's probably a rounding error compared to their costs in storage and co-located infrastructure.
Re:Multi-Cloud Is a Trap by karambahh on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @10:29AM (#18015620)
They have boxes at every major ISP borders, but they're solely caching infrastructure.

They publicly advertise this under the "Netflix Open Connect" initiative:

https://openconnect.netflix.com