Getting away from AWS is a big step! I hope the company I work for will think about it too. But maybe the time has come. A few months ago, people thought you were crazy if you talked about moving to another cloud service, but I hope the mood has changed with big impact for the future and which services we trust.

We have a looooong way to go. Even this cluster is just one product we consume from AWS.

And don't get me started on O365...

But the fact that there's money available for this is a big shift.

Oh yeah, replacing AWS may be easier than replacing O365... or otherway around? My company also went all in for O365. It's about replacing Mail, Teams, Teamwebsites, OneNotes and for sure so much more... We also ship our patches via Teamwebsite, it sounds stupid but well, it works... And talking to costumers when they still have Teams but your company ditched it, how would that work and so on... You have to have a lot of hope to think that all this will or can be replaced in the near future.

My wish for this christmas is for some large-ish organization to pull this off and then release a series of blogs discussing the tradeoffs. It's such a steep hill to climb, I think many believe it impossible unless there is a success story to refer to

I think STACKIT is worth watching. They are owned by Schwarz Group, the largest european retailer, and seem to be on a significant growth path with major investment and commitment from the parent company.

Do they offer managed services?

Their website suggests so but I'm not familiar with them.

They offer managed PaaS services such as databases, logging, secrets management. They also offer quite some managed SaaS services like ServiceNow or soon SAP Rise. These are not (yet) advertised on their website.

Another example of their managed services is Kubernetes.

If someone is interested in getting to know STACKIT, feel free to contact me. I'm working for a STACKIT partner.

Interesting to see this in B2B, which is normally unemotional about choice of supplier. But the business risk is now real, especially when you consider GDPR safe harbour.

I've seen this once before a few years ago with Huawei stuff.

Shouting to the Board of Directors at any company about security risks and geopol implications usually meant screaming into a void.

"But their HQ is here." "We have a solid security annex in the contract!" "Their sales person was here and he promised me." Classic lawyer C-suite talk.

But when the attitude started shifting billions were thrown around to move back to Ericsson.

C-suite people will constantly get these questions and start to feel like they 'have to' go European just like how they all thought we 'had to use Agile' and 'had to do something with blockchain'.

Few forces in economics are stronger than C-suite FOMO.

Herd behavior in CEOs is a very strong problem. It's one thing to make a mistake, but if you make a different unorthodox choice and something goes wrong then it looks especially bad.

One man's problem is another man's opportunity, I suppose.

There is a reason every product page usually has a reel showing what other well known companies 'trust' their solution. It works.

If everyone’s email is down then the ceo might grumble at the golf course and have a nice dinner to apologise from the sales reps next month.

If only your company is down then you’re made and fire the cto

If only your company is up then nobody notices as “the internet is down”.

The fear is trade war (rising prices to extortion levels), blockades of network traffic (holding data hostage) and war (which leads to sabotage, manipulation and destruction of data).

It seems to me that this is still unemotional (where really I'd rather say mercenary, as I've seen so many business decisions driven by ego, which is definitely emotion).

Businesspeople have seen the U.S.A. do things like the Citibank account freezes, which is explicitly welching on paying money owed on a contract to companies in its own country, turning off and on supplies to a country at the personal whim of its leader, putting air traffic safety at risk as a means of privatization (using the OCP playbook straight out of RoboCop), and arresting foreigners at its borders.

If they've been paying close attention they've seen civil suit court orders ignored, lawyers having executive writs of attainder proclaimed against them, and rulings handed down about blanket and extensive executive privilege and immunity that take things back to the centuries past when banks could go out of business by lending to monarchs who then just decreed that they weren't going to pay.

Even the dumbest CEO would by now be thinking of the business risks of things like flying in personnel to a business conference or to visit a satellite office; let alone of supply chain reliability, whether U.S.A. courts are still capable of enforcing any civil decisions or U.S.A. lawyers capable of doing their jobs on behalf of foreign businesses, and what this means for loan risks and banking stability.

IMHO this is the big story here.

Large companies aren’t driven by opinion/ethics/politics except where there’s a branding incentive, so the motivation here is cost/risk.

That these same companies are actively trying to nope right out of the US tech market where they can shows that they’ve priced in very real costs to both Trump’s unpredictability and the very predictable response to tariffs in their domestic markets.

Trump’s second term may end up being a great thing for tech markets outside of the US, as it drives investment into those regions and actively away from the status quo of SV hegemony.

>Large companies aren’t driven by opinion/ethics/politics except where there’s a branding incentive

The USA tech corps are falling in with Trump, presumably so as to get favourable tax situations and such. That makes them subject to his vagaries.

Surely, Trump might rug pull your IT services if you're competing with someone who gave him a bribe is a massive reason to move.

Companies need to operate under the rule of law which is now vacant in USA.

With threats, no matter how stupid, to invade allies. What are European companies going to do when Trump has their compute switched off? Or trade embargoes are put in place because Trump tried to takeover Greenland?

These seem to be real risks to business continuation that arise out of Trump's politics.

Companies operate in these sorts of conditions all the time - always have done.

Buy off the junta that runs the place and you can do what you want. Oil companies, mining companies, clothing companies, all the same.

Normally the company is bigger than the people you’re bribing though, and that makes the USA unique, and more akin to working in North Korea rather than Nigeria.

> IMHO this is the big story here.

Its not until we actually see numbers. This guy could be making up/exaggerating ( "everyone" really?) these stories, because thats what ppl do on the internet.

These type of protests usually die down because human beings always choose convenience and lower price.

Also see blm, dei and other "movements" that died down as soon as news cycle changed.

It's not just a consumer movement, it's Europe itself moving to get away from an unreliable schizophrenic ally. You can't make long-term plans when every 4 years you're playing russian (eh) roulette with your partner.

The movement might slow down, but it's fundamentally different from a social movement limited to the US.

>You can't make long-term plans when every 4 years

Well, Trump did promise to make it so people would never have to vote again.

BLM, DEI etc are things that people care about, and will continue to care about. The news cycle promotes or rejects such concerns because they're driven by advertising and political favour. If you know about these things because of the news cycle, and your opinions are shaped by the news cycle, then the vested interests of advertising and political favour are cheering.

The news cycle should be orthogonal to your opinions on such matters. It shouldn't form them. A good acid test is to ask yourself if you had an opinion on something before it appeared in the news. If not, be very wary of the opinion that you adopt.

> The news cycle should be orthogonal to your opinions on such matters. It shouldn't form them. A good acid test is to ask yourself if you had an opinion on something before it appeared in the news. If not, be very wary of the opinion that you adopt.

The thing is - a lot of actually very important topics got swept under the rug for a loooong time. Let's just take gay people for example. Up until the late 90s, gays got routinely beaten up by police, called "pedophiles"... hell it took until 2011 until open gays could serve in the military. That all only changed due to widespread outrage (and a few constitutional courts reinterpreting constitutional wording).

I hope also devolopers get rid of Nginx becaouse it is Russian/American software.

Caddy/Envoy all the way

Nginx is open source.