Skip to main content

who is paying for whom?

Some months ago there was talk about the rich and the middle class. The question was who was paying the bulk of the taxes. Some talking head said that the top one half of one percent pays more than the rest of the country.

Bu that's not my point.

I like CoreOS. I like that they have found products and services that let them earn a living, put food on the table and send their kids to school. But where I get frustrated is that Quay.io costs $12/mo for 5 private repos. But if you're an enterprise customer it costs $1200/mo for 1000 repos. If you do the math it seems that the starter user is subsedising the enterprise user.

Consider this that the enterprise user likely has larger projects with many more servers and many more users. You cannot tell me that once the initial setup is performed that the enterprise user is benefiting from any amount of scale. Furthermore, bitbucket charges for each user in the private repo and githut charges for the number of repos. The reality is that as a startup users I have multiple projects and false starts but I only work on one project at a time.Whereas in an enterprise I might have many hundreds of programmers all smashing away at my repo at the same time.

As for the CoreOS' managed solution the minimum charge is $995/mo for 10 servers. As a startup I'd be lucky to have 10 servers. But right now everything is manual and I'm writing my own automation scripts. I'm not total embedded with CoreOS infrastructure. Their pricing is $100/mo per server; which extends to $1200/yr. In my case I have 3 CoreOS machines that I use for development. I need an HA solution because my hardware is unreliable. Each Server is an Intel Nuc and cosys $350. There is no way I'm going to pay 4x or a managed solution.

What CoreOS fails to realize is that the difference between my unmanaged servers are their managed solution is their dashboard. My systems still auto upgrade on schedule. Everything else I orchestrate manuyally or automate myself. By the time my code get's out of DEV I cannot demonstrate the power of the managed solution because it's not.

If I were in charge of CoreOS' sales and marketing....

  • $1/mo for a registered startup per service (managed CoreOS, Quay, Tectonic) paid in advance
  • FREE email support 9-5/m-f
  • Pay for phone support
  • FREE online documentation
  • At least 5 machine licenses locked to NIC or something like that (3 clustered etcd2, 2 workers)
Now for $36 per year you have my credit card, my money, and my hardware. Getting a little greedy I might want a second set of 5 (no more than five in a group) so that I can test operation in multiple datacenters or even production vs dev/staging.

In closing, if you've ever been the purchasing manager or decision maker for buying some new service you know how complicated it is to get someone to fork over money while in a beta or extended beta. If you start of with a program as I've outlined you have a better chance to convert these startups to enterprise.

Popular posts from this blog

Prometheus vs Bosun

In conclusion... while Bosun(B) is still not the ideal monitoring system neither is Prometheus(P).

TL;DR;

I am running Bosun in a Docker container hosted on CoreOS. Fleet service/unit files keep it running. However in once case I have experienced at least one severe crash as a result of a disk full condition. That it is implemented as part golang, java and python is an annoyance. The MIT license is about the only good thing.

I am trying to integrate Prometheus into my pipeline but losing steam fast. The Prometheus design seems to desire that you integrate your own cache inside your application and then allow the server to scrape the data, however, if the interval between scrapes is shorter than the longest transient session of your application then you need a gateway. A place to shuttle your data that will be a little more persistent.

(1) storing the data in my application might get me started more quickly
(2) getting the server to pull the data might be more secure
(3) using a push g…

Entry level cost for CoreOS+Tectonic

CoreOS and Tectonic start their pricing at 10 servers. Managed CoreOS starts at $1000 per month for those first 10 servers and Tectonic is $5000 for the same 10 servers. Annualized that is $85K or at least one employee depending on your market. As a single employee company I'd rather hire the employee. Specially since I only have 3 servers.

The pricing is biased toward the largest servers with the largest capacities; my dual core 32GB i5 IntelNuc can never be mistaken for a 96-CPU dual or quad core DELL

If CoreOS does not figure out a different barrier of entry they are going to follow the Borland path to obscurity.

Weave vs Flannel

While Weave and Flannel have some features in common weave includes DNS for service discovery and a wrapper process for capturing that info. In order to get some parity you'd need to add a DNS service like SkyDNS and then write your own script to weave the two together.
In Weave your fleet file might have some of this:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=/opt/bin/weave run --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
In sky + flannel it might look like:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=docker run -d --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStartPre=etcdctl set /skydns/local/ncx/bob '{"host":"`docker inspect --format '{{ .NetworkSettings.IPAddress }}' bob`","port":8080}' ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
I'd like it to look like this:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=skyrun --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
That's the intent anyway. I'm not sure the exact commands will work and that's partly why we…