Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The problem I see with this kind of vendor lock in is you can get screwed in several different ways if you let yourself get locked in enough.

The 'good': a competitor overtakes AWS and is able to offer vastly cheaper or better value services than you have access to, rendering you less competitive than people who are able to move to that platform easily.

The 'bad': Amazon starts deprecating services you rely on and you're forced to port things anyway.

The 'ugly': Amazon decides that it's happy with its market share or its shareholders start demanding they bring in more revenue and they realise that those who are locked in to AWS are easy targets. It'd be easy to just jack up the higher tiers of things like lambda, dynamo DB, API gateway, etc. and on those who they have bespoke agreements with without even necessarily affecting their marketshare.

It's really a risk/reward thing when going for these platform specific serverless systems. It's like asking if you trust a big company enough that you want to give up all of your bargaining power with them, and that you're going to put thousands or even millions of dollars where your mouth is on that.



As far as I know, in the entire existence of AWS since the first services launched in 2006, they have never abandoned a service.


Like Oracle.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: