On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Ish Sookun <ish.sookun_at_lsldigital.mu> wrote:
> Hi SM,
>
> I was reading an article on thenextweb.com [1] and it mentions that the
> cloud isn't as robust as we think. What is your opinion on having
> cloud-based web applications?
>
> [1]
> http://thenextweb.com/facebook/2015/10/01/its-not-just-facebook-that-goes-down-the-cloud-isnt-as-robust-as-we-think/
>
Hi Ish,
The cloud is made up of machines, data centres, networks, software, and,
let's not forget, people to operate it too. These things can fail. You can
only build in so much redundancy before you start hitting the limits of
your budget, human technology, and ultimately physics. High availability is
*hard*.
Not all applications should depend on the cloud. For example, does a simple
todo list app need to be a web application? No. My todo list should be
available even if the network is down. However, the ability to sync via the
cloud is a convenient feature. So make it an option, but not a dependency.
However, if your application:
- Needs more computing power than is available on location (location
being a wrist, pocket, desk, or even a room)
- Needs more data storage than is available on location
- Needs to sync or share data
- Needs to autoupdate
Then you might need a cloud component. You will be introducing a dependency
on the network, but sometimes it's the only way you'll be able build your
application.
Cheers,
Shane
Received on Thu Oct 01 2015 - 12:49:04 PST