Re:Cracks are showing in Enterprise Open Source's foundations
by geerlingguy on Thursday January 28, 2021 @12:57PM
(#25945817)
Before a couple years ago (when elastic started digging deeper into the paid addon realm), I don't think they could've forked and been able to keep enough compatibility / community around their fork to make it as useful and compatible with everything Elasticsearch did.
But today, I think they have a 50/50 shot of the Amazon-forked ES version becoming the de-facto standard, and Elastic's fading into obscurity.
Re:Cracks are showing in Enterprise Open Source's foundations
by aynyc on Thursday January 28, 2021 @12:42PM
(#25945480)
> Eh? AWS could have killed ELK in 5 minutes.
I don't understand this part. AWS doesn't have anything internally that would compete against ELK. Unless you are taking about AWS buying ELK flat out. But then Azure and GCP can fork ELK and keep selling the service. Is my assumption incorrect?
Re:Cracks are showing in Enterprise Open Source's foundations
by bdcravens on Thursday January 28, 2021 @12:58PM
(#25945833)
Yes: AWS has launched many "native" offerings to compete with the market's open source product, only to give in to demand and launch a managed version of the open source product (CloudSearch/ElasticSearch, ECS/Kubernetes, SQS/ActiveMQ, DynamoDB/MongoDB, etc)
> So AWS was directly competing with Elastic, but *not taking the same responsibility for the open source project or investing in it as heavily as Elastic was*.
Eh? AWS could have killed ELK in 5 minutes. They chose to branch, and contribute it back. Several of the fixes and improvements are from AWS. Did the author want an IBM/CentOS takeover? Or, deny AWS to use Elastic but pretend to be FOSS?