We've deliberately chosen to accept vendor lock-in with AWS. I probably should have made that explicit in the blog post.
We believe that the value we get from going all-in on AWS is greater that the potential negotiating power you may get by staying higher level and having the illusion of low cost switching to GCP or Azure.
This also accepts the risk that if AWS goes down, we go down.
I think both of those are acceptable risks/tradeoffs at this point.
We believe that the value we get from going all-in on AWS is greater that the potential negotiating power you may get by staying higher level and having the illusion of low cost switching to GCP or Azure.
This also accepts the risk that if AWS goes down, we go down.
I think both of those are acceptable risks/tradeoffs at this point.