Hacker News Reader

Comment by ujjvala | Hacker News Reader

I think this would be cheaper for Apple than constructing and maintaining its own data center.

At iCloud's potential scale it would be cheaper to build and maintain your own data center. Either way, they've already built the data center so the point is moot.

There's not a chance in hell that Apple would trust something so core to their business to someone else - let alone direct competitors like Microsoft or Amazon. Next.

There's not a chance in hell that Apple would trust something so core to their business to someone else - let alone direct competitors like Microsoft or Amazon. Next.

I do find it interesting that internally developers were using AWS/Azure. Maybe they were doing it as a learning experience?

In any case, an interesting insight to Apple's internal developer culture. I'm pretty sure that Azure developers would get chided were they to ship code that communicated with AWS (and vice-versa).

Well, they have to use something while the servers are being built, and something that's not local to their campus to give a good feel for how much speed & lag they need to deal with. I'm sure AWS is a fine contender for a test environment while the hardware is being installed.

Why do you think that? We're talking huge scale data, not hosting a web page. Any rates Amazon would charge apple (millions upon millions) would obviously have a profit margin for Amazon (this is how businesses work). Since we're talking petabytes of data, Apple can save money dealing with it themselves.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com