Github being aquired by MS could be a thing if Gitlab was not doing this transition before that. Some of the jobs listing for Gitlab were specifying GCP knowledge because they were migrating from Azure (and this was written there).
Can someone explain how exactly does MS acquiring GitHub forces GitLab to move out from Azure? Like is it some kind of fear that Microsoft will meddle with the data or something?
It's simple. Some people don't want their open source projects hosted on a site owned by Microsoft, a company that extremely hostile to Linux and open source for several years was, spreading a lot of misinformation and engaging in many shady actions against it. Now, if you migrate from Github to an Azure-based platform, you are indirectly supporting Microsoft, and some people would prefer to avoid that. I don't think anyone expects MS to meddle with their data in any way.
I understand that Gitlab helm charts are now beta in 11.0, does it also mean Gitlab is fully running on Kubernetes on Azure (there's no mention of AKS)?
I wonder if they'll also publish the difference in cost between the two platforms.
For everyone saying this is a political decision, I don't see why Gitlab would be afraid of being political, especially seeing as a lot of developers were annoyed/angered at the Microsoft buyout.
I also can't see on a technical level a company planning this kind of maintenance operation this quickly. It would be reckless.
They claim this is because of their focus on Kubernetes, but I have to wonder how much of this has to do with Microsoft acquiring Github. That aside, that's a tough slight for AKS.
To be fair, AKS wasn't generally available until about a week ago. And while in preview, there were some significant issues with AKS (they themselves recommended not to do production deployments on it for the preview period).
Indeed. This moves them closer to reversing that. Now to complete that, all that has to happen is for GitHub to move to Azure. They probably wouldn't want to do that now because it would look like they were implementing the merger before regulatory approval.
A year or two ago Y Combinator startups would be given around $1M in Azure credits, should they move to Azure. GitLab.com at the time moved over to Azure, with the goal being to reduce costs before we consumed those credits. I think we consumed all of it in a matter of months. Once you're stuck with a hosting provider (Azure or not), it's difficult to move away from it.
It's interesting how companies balance that decision, like Netflix's use of AWS despite Prime video being a competitor. That said, I'm skeptical that they made a major decision like this so quickly after the acquisition was announced.
Is amazon video their biggest competitor? I’d have thought that Hulu, HBO Go, iTunes and other streaming services might be more popular than Amazon Video. I have no data to back that up though.
ps: given that Amazon Video is available for all prime members, we can’t compare total number of subscribers. Hours of videos watched per day might be a better number to look at.
Amazon is definitely Netflix's biggest competitor when comparing who's spending the most on original content in streaming. They're also a major competitor when it comes to bidding for exclusive rights but there are many participants in that fight, including cable plus companies like Disney setting up their own streaming service.
It would be an enormous risk for any cloud provider to attempt to degrade the use of their platform or snoop on how it's used by a company who is a competitor in another area, be it streaming or code management.
Correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't Netflix run their billing / search / recommendation /... systems on AWS and their whole video content streaming are engineered / hosted internally in collaboration with ISPs?