Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cloud Microsoft Programming

Microsoft Azure vs. Amazon Web Services, For Programmers 64

Posted by timothy
from the equality-prison-style dept.
Nerval's Lobster writes "Tech writer and programmer Jeff Cogswell does a head-to-head comparison of Microsoft Azure and Amazon Web Services from a pure programming perspective, examining the respective sides' vendor lock-in and vendor-specific APIs (among other issues). 'If you're not using any vendor-specific APIs, then it's safe to say the experience you get on either Amazon or Microsoft will be roughly the same,' he writes. 'But that means you're also not developing an app that necessarily takes advantage of all possible cloud capabilities—not just add-ons, but scalability. Your app might need to expand and grow as your user base grows.' He suggests it's ultimately a tie between the two companies. 'From a strict programming perspective, both companies have their own RESTful API, and their own libraries for using the API.'" The problem with both of these services, though, that RMS could have told you about: "The moment you start using either, you're locked in for the most part."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Azure vs. Amazon Web Services, For Programmers

Comments Filter:
  • by kwerle (39371) <kurt@CircleW.org> on Thursday August 16, 2012 @12:23PM (#41012507) Homepage Journal

    Please google "Cloud Abstraction Layer".

    Here; I'll help you out:
    https://www.google.com/search?q=cloud+abstraction+layer [google.com]

  • Why just those two? (Score:5, Informative)

    by bennomatic (691188) on Thursday August 16, 2012 @12:25PM (#41012525) Homepage
    I wonder why Cogswell ignored Google's cloud services. They've got the Python- or Java-based AppEngine, and they've got a full virtual server service. There are a lot of other platforms, too, but as far as size and industry impact, I'd put Google on a similar level.

    Funny, though, that out of the three of them, if I were to choose the least "evil" one, it'd be Microsoft.

    Last, but not least, if you're using Azure, I'm pretty sure that New Relic has an agent that's compatible, for performance monitoring.
  • Well (Score:5, Informative)

    by kelemvor4 (1980226) on Thursday August 16, 2012 @12:27PM (#41012561)
    I've got an azure account with MSDN and TechNET subscription (I don't remember which of the two came with the azure). Processor time on their service is very expensive if you go beyond the allotment of free time given to you by those subs. The service works well, although getting your code to the servers is a little kludgy. Given the high cost, I think you'd be hard pressed to find value when weighed against leasing a full server or even multiple servers from a regular hosting provider. The exception to that would be if you had a simply massive load requirement and just couldn't muster enough horsepower out of a few traditional servers.

    For what I would am doing, the cost is unreasonable. I've never really looked at amazon; so I can't compare them.
  • Summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by hawguy (1600213) on Thursday August 16, 2012 @12:29PM (#41012585)

    Briefer summary of linked article:

    Amazon and Azure use different API's, if you use one vendor's API, you're locked into that vendor. There might be libraries available that hide the vendor specific API's but that's outside the scope of the article.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16, 2012 @12:30PM (#41012611)

    You're never forced into using AWS APIs. They are there if you want to use them. If you don't want to use S3, you stand up a storage server as an instance. No vendor lock-in. If you don't want to use RDS, you build your own DB instance. No vendor lock-in. If you don't want to use ELB, you build your own load balancer instances. AWS offers shortcuts for those developers who want big features and don't want to build them. It doesn't force them on you.

  • by dave562 (969951) on Thursday August 16, 2012 @12:32PM (#41012645) Journal

    Now I know we don't actually READ the articles around here, but did you even skim the summary?

    "If you're not using any vendor-specific APIs, then it's safe to say the experience you get on either Amazon or Microsoft will be roughly the same,' he writes. 'But that means you're also not developing an app that necessarily takes advantage of all possible cloud capabilities—not just add-ons, but scalability"

  • by chrb (1083577) on Thursday August 16, 2012 @01:35PM (#41013501)

    Funny, though, that out of the three of them, if I were to choose the least "evil" one, it'd be Microsoft.

    Why? Serious question. App Engine doesn't even lock you in that hard - there are APIs for exporting all of your data, and you can run your own App Engine cloud with an open source implementation like AppScale [google.com] or TyphoonAE [google.com]. Google is not hostile to these projects - they actually sponsor AppScale development. Is Microsoft sponsoring any alternative implementations of their server-side cloud software?

The meta-Turing test counts a thing as intelligent if it seeks to devise and apply Turing tests to objects of its own creation. -- Lew Mammel, Jr.

Working...