Linked by David Adams on Thu 1st Mar 2012 22:53 UTC, submitted by judgen
Thread beginning with comment 509313
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-10-11
I think, I wasn't clear. The FU is reprimandable, no doubt.
My line of thinking was that at some point in deployment you pass a point of no return where you are effectively locked-in into the cloud of someone else, because moving becomes very expensive, even more expensive than putting up with a FU.
I guess, what I'm really trying to say is that cloud services lock-in your data and you will suffer the consequences and like it. Beware of the cloud, seriously.