Given Google's tendency to loose interest in their latest this-that-or-the-other, how many developers will take the risk that working in this new environment is worth it over the long haul?
For all its highs and lows over the recent years, one thing Microsoft has always had in its favour is developers – millions coding, first for Windows, then .NET. The jury’s out on Microsoft’s Azure cloud, first as a platform and secondly due to Microsoft’s embrace of so many non-Microsoft languages and runtimes. Many have …
Yes. Many of us have been burned by Google casually ditching its old stuff. There is a good reason devs are loyal to Microsoft and other such vendors. Code written 20 years ago using old Microsoft tools will often still run on the latest OS. Code written 2 years ago for Google is usually completely redundant.
Code maintenance is expensive. Devs want to develop new stuff - not rewrite old stuff repeatedly.
as a small, long-nosed, deformed pale creature, sitting all alone in a corner muttering to itself:
"No one like Powershell. Powershell so lonely. Why Powershell exist?"
Which is far more entertaining than trying to have to use it, which is like being repeatedly tested by an over officious teacher whose favourite trick is to lean as close to you as possible and every time you answer just shout "WRONG" as loudly as possible right in your ear...
There is only one person in the world who understands PowerShell. Everybody else just copies their sample code.
Horrid, horrid idea - Microsoft seem to think that if they make Windows admin more difficult it improves Windows in some way. There are now some basic admin tasks that can only be done using PowerShell.
Powershell - copy and paste code hell.
I've tried to bootstrap stuff over to Powershell.
Its not as easy as i should be.
Problem #1 - Different OSes have different Powershell versions, some of which are missing some features that I consider core. Lots of swearing getting an not so old box updated with consistent powershell version.
Problem#2 - Its more a wordy basic programming language than interactive shell. Its really slow to do cmdlines that are easy on Unix.
Problem#3 - Its slow. Really slooooooow. Several seconds to complete some command lines ffrom the interactive shell. I press TAB and wait ..........
Problem#4 - Its needs an editor of benevolent dictator in charge. Too many people shoving in too many commands.
There's some really good things about powershell. Its obvious that WIndows is going to fully adminned by PS and the Azure stack - But it needs a lot of coordination from MS which apperas to be missing.
This is basically a way of using their gcloud command line tool in a more Powershell-native way. Not sure why even a Windows power user would use it over gcloud though...
If they do drop it after a year or two, you can easily go back to gcloud, which is what it's probably using under the hood anyway (I'm guessing).
Either way, it's nothing to do with Apps Script, which runs in the Googlesphere and is used for glueing a bunch of Google Apps together.
I was pretty sure that Azure has kinda proven itself already.
The real question is whether public cloud will survive now that you can build an entire Azurr Stack in a few rack units capable of running ten thousand users. It's now officially cheaper to run Azure Stack instead of Azure, AWS or Google public clouds.
I have a 26U rack with eight 16 Core blades w/192GB each, 80Gb/sec networking to each blade, 8 terabytes of scale-out storage pumping over a million IOPs. I also bought a NetApp FAS2020 for near line backup storage.
The total cost of deployment for the entire system was about $10000 on eBay. I tend to only keep 3 blades running at a time since I only have 100 VDI users at a time. It spins up new VDI systems in about 13 seconds each. It has IIS, Load Balancing, SDN, SDS, etc... I tend to be at about 8% capacity for the three blades for normal office loads with 100 users.
Currently, it's a development pod and classifies as being able to run under the MSDN terms as lab equipment.
Getting Azure Stack up initially was a pain. Now, I've scripted the whole thing. A laptop with a fresh Windows 10 installation can download all the ISOs and deploy the entire Azure Stack in about an hour. I'm not using any fancy tools, just PowerShell. Since prepping ISOs as VHDs needs WAIK anyway, there was no point using anything except Powershell. I wrote it all object oriented and implemented a simple command queue pattern to implement the entire system with test driven development.
Now, Microsoft update does the rest.
re Jury is out?
While I applaud what you have done getting Azure running in-house, I do have to ask Why? The idea of going public cloud was to move the burden of IT depts, updates and so on, out of the business. Why would we want to take it all back in again? I get your point (maybe) on costs but have you included your cost, other staff, lighting, heating and so on?
Seems like we're going back to the good old days of NT server boxes sitting in racks all lovingly managed by a group of bearded techies (I was one once) who talk in a language nobody else understands.
If a business is in IT hosting I can understand it but a plumbing supply company or a supermarket should stick to it's core business and stay out of the IT game.
The cloud is a way for lemmings to eliminate their own job so that the company can pay more anyway when the cloud companies jack up the prices after you are hooked. Cloud is a bunch of hype if you ask me. Maybe it is helpful to some, but, I think one shouldn't assume that it is the end all be all solution for everything. But, of course the lemmings are going to do it anyway to keep up with the Jones'.
There are huge swathes of enterprise development which, for regulatory reasons, can't use public clouds. For the most part, banking is one such area. I've spent my career in financial IT and public cloud is still a non-starter here. Which means, for the moment, that Google don't have a toehold.