Bilingual

De cloud in soorten en maten - Bert Hubert's writings
a day ago
- The text outlines six levels of cloud adoption, from no cloud (own datacenter) to full Software as a Service (SaaS), each with varying degrees of control and vendor lock-in.
- Level 1: No cloud (own servers) offers maximum control but slow provisioning; Level 2: Renting servers reduces datacenter management; Level 3: Renting capacity (containers, IaaS) provides flexibility and scalability.
- Level 4: Cloud-native with limited managed services (e.g., databases) reduces the need for specialized staff but introduces some lock-in; Level 5: Advanced cloud services (AI, global databases) create strong dependency on US providers (Amazon, Google, Microsoft).
- Level 6: SaaS (e.g., MS 365) offers total convenience but extreme vendor lock-in, with almost no possibility to switch providers.
- Key insight: Lower levels (1-3) are widely available in Europe and allow switching; higher levels (4-6) are dominated by US providers and involve significant lock-in, especially for critical data.
- The text emphasizes the trade-off between control and convenience, and advises choosing lower levels for sensitive or critical business operations to avoid dependency on a single provider.
The (European) cloud ladder: from virtual server to MS 365 - Bert Hubert's writings
a day ago
- The article explains a 'cloud ladder' with six levels: no cloud, renting servers, renting capacity, limited cloud-native, full cloud-native (advanced services), and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) like MS 365.
- Higher levels (SaaS, advanced services) offer more convenience but create strong vendor lock-in, especially to Amazon, Google, or Microsoft.
- Lower levels (servers, capacity) are more standardized and have European providers, reducing dependency and allowing easier switching.
- The optimal balance for many organizations is around capacity level (3-4), where control and flexibility are preserved while offloading work.
- European governments and experts advocate for staying at lower levels to avoid lock-in, while providers push higher-level solutions for profit.
- MS 365 is the ultimate example of vendor lock-in: only Microsoft provides it, and leaving is nearly impossible.
'The cloud' is not just servers. 'Going to the cloud' could also mean locking into a forever sub-contractor - Bert Hubert's writings
a day ago
- The phrase 'going to the cloud' is ambiguous: it can mean renting servers (low lock-in) or integrating proprietary cloud services (high lock-in, becoming an eternal subcontractor).
- Using basic cloud services like servers and databases is relatively safe and interchangeable, but advanced proprietary services tie the operator's intellectual property to the cloud provider, making migration difficult or impossible.
- Benefits of deep cloud integration include faster development, access to specialized services, and reduced need for infrastructure skills, but downsides include loss of ownership, eternal dependency, and loss of migration skills.
- Geopolitical risks arise when cloud providers are based in unstable or adversarial countries, making data sovereignty and long-term reliability concerns.
- Organizations should apply governance to limit dependencies on non-replaceable cloud services, either by restricting the number of such services or ensuring alternatives exist, and senior management must be involved in these decisions.
- A practical approach is to use only widely available, fungible cloud services (e.g., servers, databases) and avoid proprietary services that deeply integrate into the solution.
Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps
23 days ago
- Anthropic's Claude subscription and API face issues including enshittification, vendor lock-in, consumer malpractice, and price gouging, while open-source models become more competitive.
- Claude's API is notoriously unreliable, and Claude subscriptions force users to rely on Anthropic's servers, with no compatibility with third-party harnesses without extra costs.
- Anthropic introduced 'extra usage' billing for third-party tools and split subscription billing into separate pools for first-party and third-party usage, significantly increasing costs for heavy agent users.
- The author criticizes 'vibecoding' and agent-driven development for causing skill degradation, advocating instead for agent-assisted development using AI as an autocomplete tool.
- Open-source models like Qwen, GLM, and Deepseek offer viable alternatives to proprietary models, with AI gateways enabling flexible, cost-effective, and private model usage.
- The article concludes by condemning Anthropic's unethical practices, such as locking customers into closed systems and changing terms without notice, and encourages moving to open-source alternatives.

vendor lock-in

De cloud in soorten en maten - Bert Hubert's writings

The (European) cloud ladder: from virtual server to MS 365 - Bert Hubert's writings

'The cloud' is not just servers. 'Going to the cloud' could also mean locking into a forever sub-contractor - Bert Hubert's writings

Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps