There has been a lot of confusion and complaining about the price increases, and this is understandable given the way it has come about. This is one of those oh so obvious things, but you just have to look at it and evaluate.
Besides scalability, app engine can be a great platform from a rapid app development standpoint. It has other nice aspects in addition to the scalability.
And don't forget to look into what may be able to be done to minimize some of the quota impact. Good design changes may be able to have a noticeable positive effect there.
Have a look at AppScale if you are looking at moving off the platform. That may be a way to get 80% of the way there with less monumental changes.
Just out of curiosity, how would you describe what you are currently doing? Can you elaborate on why it might not be a good fit?
I'm honestly just trying to learn from your experience, not disputing anything.
I use App Engine a ton. I won't try to list all the positives.
Of course "is it flexible enough to run big, serious projects" depends on the requirements of your big serious projects. Feel free to get more specific here, or (better yet) in the google app engine forums.
One thing not mentioned yet that is a legitimate concern applying generally to PaaS offerings including App Engine - that is vendor lock-in. There are some way to address that including choice of apis and frameworks and also projects like AppScale and TyphoonAE.
There is much to evaluate when considering App Engine for your projects. the flexibility of the platform from a technical perspective is one of things.
Also note, watch closely the changes that are coming in pricing and the way that Google is offering the service. You don't want to get caught evaluating the App Engine of 2010 for 2012.
This is so true. Doesn't mean the idea is not important, just that, like everything, there are compromises.
More generally, I find that an uncharacteristic proportion of blog entries are written from the perspective of "change the world" efforts. Not everything is like that. I agree with you njharman, most of the time, there are certain things, like the team, that you can't do a whole lot about. The real skill is getting the most out of those situations. If it is a true "change the world" effort then sure, before you join the project demand that everyone else be let go and you hire the team from scratch. <tongue in cheek>
This is so true. Taking the second point first ... I keep thinking that -eventually- the market will find it's equilibrium with regards to price/quality for serious projects. Budding entrepreneurs get on these sites, post something, and get screwed by one of these $5/hr people (often and likely, not every time I admit). You would think that they learn by their mistake and come back the second time with different expectations in price and quality. However, there must be an endless supply of budding "entrepreneurs" as I have not seen any leveling off yet.
I use oDesk and Elance. I have looked at, yes many, other sites but the signal to noise ration is just so low and there are only so many hours in the day. I have had much more success finding serious projects on oDesk more so than Elance. I'm curious what others have experienced. And jwwest, you are absolutely right. There are many projects posted that clearly are not intended to proceed. You can't always tell from the post alone. But after some experience, you can certainly tell from the pattern of how a post ages (in conjunction with how it is written).
One problem I have had with BI suites (specifically JasperSoft but it applies elsewhere) is the bolt-on nature of the solution. I found security integration, with a web app, to be a major pain. But the worst part was the UI and feature set. Honestly, I think modern web dev can be a real alternative to these packaged deals ... of course depending on the circumstances. What do others think?
Another issue I have is that the packaged solutions ~tend~ towards some kind of interface where they are eventually essentially presenting a join syntax to the user. This doesn't seem right to me. I think the value of the solution really needs to be at least a level higher than that. But when you think about it, what else is a generic tool going to do?
I'm really interested in other people's opinions on this. I recognize I am in the minority.
Development background - Java and Python primarily. I'm also really good with JavaScript, server or client.
I'm an expert with Google App Engine. If anyone is looking for something there, I am your man.
Yeah, this doesn't smell right. There are two posts on the blog as of my reading. Neither has much content and they do not sound like someone who has actually been through this.
This does not sound like someone who is really looking to share information. It is too superficial.
Thanks for the article. I have a question. What kind of latency do you experience using MongoHQ? And maybe you could discuss this part of the system a little more?
I like that. I think that is a good approach. However, this seems to me more of a business strategy than an answer to "what is the No. 1 thing you need to do to succeed".
One could argue that the question is somewhat pointless. And I think that, in a way, is what the article is saying. There is no number 1 thing.
I do like that business strategy that you describe though. It is not for everyone and every circumstance of course, but it is a good bet.
And don't forget to look into what may be able to be done to minimize some of the quota impact. Good design changes may be able to have a noticeable positive effect there.
Have a look at AppScale if you are looking at moving off the platform. That may be a way to get 80% of the way there with less monumental changes.