AWS should buy Architect Serverless. It’s the most AWS-specific and the easiest (infra is a few lines in package.json) and Amazon have shown it on stage at re:invent a few times as one of their preferred ways for customers to do serverless.
Architect, for building database-backed web apps on AWS, simplifies provisioning with a high-level manifest file that turns cloud infra into a build artifact, making the development process faster and more flexible.
Cool stuff:
1. Speedy local development with smart defaults.
2. Equal focus on local, staging, and production environments.
3. Seamless integration with AWS SAM and CloudFormation.
4. Secure least privilege access for resources.
5. Open source under Apache 2.0 and part of the OpenJS Foundation.
Does this mean that Vercel’s hosting features will be available to AWS Gov Cloud users now?
I have a large client that is in dire need of Vercel’s features. However, if they can’t run their own enterprise version behind their private VPC, then it’s a hard pass for them :(
<Vercel CTO here>
It does not mean this immediately. We're currently working with some clients on hybrid solution where a very limited feature set is available in a government context, but the full Vercel feature set is not yet available in AWS Gov Cloud. Definitely happy to have a conversation about it!
Vercel already used AWS infra under the hood, but lots of big corps would not host with them probably because AWS all the things. Now they can get vercel bundled into their AWS bill right?
Existing AWS credits are a big factor as well. We have customers who have 100k in AWS credits and if they can't spend them on our platform it's a blocker to adoption.
But now AWS credit holders can spend them on Vercel via the marketplace.
This is similar to Vercel’s enterprise offerings. We wanted to use Vercel with more than 10 people at a previous employer and opted not to due the price.
It doesn't really start at $250k. It's just a dumb quirk of the AWS marketplace participation process.
As a vendor, if you want to participate, you have to have a public listing page with a price. But many vendors don't actually want you to initiate the buying process that way. They want you to talk to them first, negotiate a deal/contract, and only then handle the payment through AWS marketplace (presumably with pre-committed spend you already have on AWS) via something called "Private OFfers"
So lots of marketplace pages have an absurdly high public listing price to discourage people from using that route.
<Vercel CTO> So, why this price is there is complicated within the way this marketplace works. In practice, you talk to sales and these figures are irrelevant.
From the page: For custom pricing, EULA, or a private contract, please contact awsmarketplace@vercel.com for a private offer.
Former CTO of one of worlds largest banks here. Whether at a 2 trillion enterprise or a 3 person startup, I try very hard to not buy from SaaS that doesn't have a price or makes me deal with a sales person instead of hands on the tech.
Big advocate of AWS Marketplace cutting out the spend on sales instead of engineering, sad to see this ploy destroy its value prop.
We run our own micro service for next js in a kubernetes cluster. It works like a charm. We have not touched the deployment in a while. Hope it keeps getting supported.
Be careful what you deploy to Vercel, you can quite easily rack up a ridiculous bill even with a toy project you are using to learn. Look at the code that caused this huge bill - it's trivial. Be very careful!
How in the world did "serverless" become an acceptable phrase among people who know IT? I'm genuinely curious about this. I think I understand what they're trying to say with it but COME ON. Why not also call them "Electricity-free?" That's literally just as truthful. Which is to say, not at all.
> How in the world did "serverless" become an acceptable phrase among people who know IT?
Isn't it a good phrase? It means you're not responsible for a "server/virtual server/container" 24/7 to provide your backend services - but are paying for usage when your functionality is executed.
No? It's a terrible phrase. What you're saying is you're managing my servers for me cool! Servers as a service or something like that. But that's much different from a term that implies "no more servers?"
It's just really strange. HR Block wouldn't advertise as "tax-less," Waste management wouldn't advertise as "garbage-truck-less." Why not brag on what you're doing? Servers improved? Ultra-servers? Easy-servers? I don't know.
> What you're saying is you're managing my servers for me cool! Servers as a service or something like that
But that’s what virtual machines or container hosting services are doing. This is a level of abstraction higher than that - there’s no link between you code and any server instance. Ultimately when your code runs, it runs on a piece of hardware - a server. But it’s up to the serverless provider to choose where. If during the day your function call is invoked a million times, it could be run on the one or a million servers anywhere in the world.
I think serverless is a better term for that than ultra or easy servers, when you don’t have to think about provisioning the size or quantity of servers you require.
A better real world analogy might be the kitchens that share a seating area in a mall. Although they might still be considered ‘restaurants’ the are also ‘restaurantless’ as the tables and seats are provided to them/their customers on an as needed basis. A kitchen can serve as many diners as they are able, table provisioning is handled by someone else.
I used to be upset too in the beginning. Eventually I realised it does not matter. The world has decided that “serverless” should be the word that we use when speaking about services that allow us to host websites etc on other people/other companies computers, where we are not responsible for managing the server. Serverless does not mean that there are no servers. Serverless means that there are no servers that you need to worry about. Accept it and life is ok :)
You have, perhaps inadvertently, confirmed my worst suspicions?
In IT, when "the world" has decided something that we geeks are just supposed to accept, it feels like most of the time it means both the geeks and regular people are getting screwed in favor of BUSINESS MARCHES ON.
It's serverless in the sense that you are responsible for 0% of server configuration or operation. It's your deployment that is serverless, not that servers don't exist.
Whatever the merits of calling it "serverless", it's been a term for years and is probably not going away. Debating it here (a common pastime) is a fruitless exercise.
Even if I don't change what people do, it's FAR from a fruitless exercise. It could at least ARGUABLY be a measure of "level of bullshit in the industry" which merits discussion.
Hm, I was hoping they'd go the opposite direction and run their own cloud on dedicated hardware, cut pricing and be competitive with both CF and Lambdas.
54 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 106 ms ] threadAlso Vercel's and Netlify's serverless function might be similar but ain't exactly 1:1 the same.
I think vercel is more powerful, netlify seems more oriented to frontenders or so to me, dunno
All of them are UX wrappers of AWS infra underneath anyways
My prediction is that somebody is going to merge with somebody. Or somebody is going to acquire another when the finance markets stabilize.
Cool stuff:
1. Speedy local development with smart defaults.
2. Equal focus on local, staging, and production environments.
3. Seamless integration with AWS SAM and CloudFormation.
4. Secure least privilege access for resources.
5. Open source under Apache 2.0 and part of the OpenJS Foundation.
6. Backward compatibility and regular updates.
https://arc.codes/docs/en/get-started/why-architect
They should have just started with name dropping nextjs
https://vercel.com/design
When I had to update any really old nextjs/now projects that was a bit of a pain, you had custom runtimes and whatnot in now which was cool
I have a large client that is in dire need of Vercel’s features. However, if they can’t run their own enterprise version behind their private VPC, then it’s a hard pass for them :(
I would love to chat. How can we connect?
Vercel already used AWS infra under the hood, but lots of big corps would not host with them probably because AWS all the things. Now they can get vercel bundled into their AWS bill right?
But now AWS credit holders can spend them on Vercel via the marketplace.
https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-lwqascgzju3bo
As a vendor, if you want to participate, you have to have a public listing page with a price. But many vendors don't actually want you to initiate the buying process that way. They want you to talk to them first, negotiate a deal/contract, and only then handle the payment through AWS marketplace (presumably with pre-committed spend you already have on AWS) via something called "Private OFfers"
So lots of marketplace pages have an absurdly high public listing price to discourage people from using that route.
Big advocate of AWS Marketplace cutting out the spend on sales instead of engineering, sad to see this ploy destroy its value prop.
https://twitter.com/shoeboxdnb/status/1643639119824801793
https://twitter.com/rauchg/status/1644099739959590912
(I am not working for Vercel)
I think the vast majority of us can deal with outages as opposed to dealing with a sudden $3000 bill.
Isn't it a good phrase? It means you're not responsible for a "server/virtual server/container" 24/7 to provide your backend services - but are paying for usage when your functionality is executed.
It's just really strange. HR Block wouldn't advertise as "tax-less," Waste management wouldn't advertise as "garbage-truck-less." Why not brag on what you're doing? Servers improved? Ultra-servers? Easy-servers? I don't know.
But that’s what virtual machines or container hosting services are doing. This is a level of abstraction higher than that - there’s no link between you code and any server instance. Ultimately when your code runs, it runs on a piece of hardware - a server. But it’s up to the serverless provider to choose where. If during the day your function call is invoked a million times, it could be run on the one or a million servers anywhere in the world.
I think serverless is a better term for that than ultra or easy servers, when you don’t have to think about provisioning the size or quantity of servers you require.
A better real world analogy might be the kitchens that share a seating area in a mall. Although they might still be considered ‘restaurants’ the are also ‘restaurantless’ as the tables and seats are provided to them/their customers on an as needed basis. A kitchen can serve as many diners as they are able, table provisioning is handled by someone else.
In IT, when "the world" has decided something that we geeks are just supposed to accept, it feels like most of the time it means both the geeks and regular people are getting screwed in favor of BUSINESS MARCHES ON.