> This and the parent vendor-lock in comment are so over-played out it's tiresome.
It's also tiresome that I'm losing access to my preferred music streaming platform that I pay $20/month for. No other platform lets me seamlessly put up a playlist with music from their streaming library and my own uploaded music[0].
People aren't dredging up the past here and being needlessly cynical. It continues to come up in discussions because it continues to happen.
[0]: Any streaming service that doesn't let me listen to Neil Cicierega is inherently flawed.
> People HN act like they are entitled to a product they like existing and being supported forever.
No, people here are more predisposed to understand the business needs behind a given service. You're more likely to find people who understand why a service is being shut down here than picking out of a crowd.
However, they're also apt to perform a deeper risk evaluation than the average person. And a glance at Google's track record shows that their services are pretty likely to be axed, and so should not be relied upon.
It's not entitlement to be upset that a paid service is being shuttered in favor of another paid service with fewer (or at least very different) features by the same company. I'm paying for it. If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't be actively developing a clone of their own product.
It's really their best play to try to get some business when they're so far behind AWS and Azure in market share.