Ok simply question. Would you accept any other infra service provider having such poor customer service and not provided updated status of an outage/disruption for 45 min.
I'm sure there are 2bit vps providers that claim to be cloud and are terrible. But for the price and claims of service like Aws I donno they are at the scale where they don't have to care about customers
Very fair but 45 min of an outage/disruption before manually updating public status is poor service and why is that acceptable for Aws to deliver to users
So your logic is to accept poor quality service to keep your service online rather than trying to do better and improve service. So you are saying that rather than rewarding a company trying to do better just accept poor service from Aws.How is this better than "hosting on some dodgy start-up" This is nothing to do with my personal beliefs or opinion I'm trying to understand why it's accepted from Aws but not others
Edited for to add point
But your company is willing to accept poor service and as a result spend more money with the same provider to ensure continuity. So essentially you reward Aws hiding their stats. As they can claim high uptime figures and when an outage happens it's the users fault for not spending enough money with them to have many many instances around the availability zones to ensure your covered the Aws mess up. I get it redundancy is needed in systems but lack of proper reporting message users are forced to over spend our of fear. It's a great business model. Hook the clients in with lies and then get them to reward you for hiding facts. Clearly your company has money to burn wasting it like this. Every one knows they lie and are blatant about it why is it tolerated. As I said I don't see other enterprise providers getting away with this kinda behaviour towards clients
Highlight the lack of transparency on reporting outages and that's a start. If your MPLS or ISP provider operated in the save way. The company wouldn't accept it
Didn't say you have to go "cloud" rent hardware in a DC and run that yourself. Or use a VPS I mean the cloud is just "Other people's hardware" and I'd thank you to not insult gorillas like that by comparing them to Amazon.
Everyone seems to overlook the point here. That yet again Amazon were slow as hell to be honest with their customers. I get it up down reports help but why do you keep using a service which lies to you about availability. I've read on HN in the past how the dashboard can only be updated to reflect an issue with approval. (Comments section on a similar posting, believe it if you wish).
So why not move to a hosting company that is transparent and open about their status. I'll not make suggestions as I don't want to be accused of trying to shill for a specific provider but there are plenty out there. 45 min to update their public dash is too slow. They either don't care, don't monitor or they are trying to hide their stats for fear Jeff will beat the staff for SLA violations.
If any other provider lied to customers the way AWS does they wouldn't be tolerated why do you tolerate this behaviour from AWS?
True and agree and but digital is still only ever a close approximation. The way the tech works is all it ever can be. It gets to the point where you can't notice but it's still a very good approximation
Some of it is nostalgia sure you say film degrades after every run But to counter that argument every time a sound or image is made digital it degrades due to quantisation noise that is added. High bit rates help but it's just an artifact of the digital world
Man that's cool I never worked on the carbon arc machines.
I remember having a Xenon lamp weld itself into the holder which was also the cathode connection. All because someone didn't tighten a grub screw which ment that the gap between the thread on the screw in end welded themselves to the nut mount the lamp screwed into. Had to remove the mount just to break the lamp in a dodgy way just to be able to force the threaded end out.
Only time I had it happen in 7 years was when due to failing bulbs not striking so easy I had to strike em manually and left the manual switch in the on position.
Well there was a power brown out and that killed the basic automation on the machines that would close a dowser when the film stopped. So the film stopped but the dowser stayed open and the bulb burned through. And for good measure that exact same thing happened on 2 machines at the same time. I believe I was heard in a screen as I responded to the situation with something like "For F*k sake" while restarting the other screens before having to splice the 2 burned films.
To clarify these machines were platter fed so no changing reels. The dowser was used to light the bulb while the leader was still running through but not to be on-screen.
Similar to that, I used to find it hard to watch a movie in a different cinema where the projectionist didn't pay too much attention to detail when framing.
Sure most of the picture was on screen but for like 30second more attention it could be great on screen
Things don't always have to be perfect. It's a personal preference.
While I appreciate the helpful suggestion the first part won't really work and but the second part is fair playing the sound at a low level could help with the experience.
What I mean is this is my memory of the cinema and what I enjoyed. Digital achieves "Perfection" but in a way which is lifeless for film. From the point of view of a projectionist every machine had it's own quirks when running a film. I used to run 7 machines in one cinema and once you got to know the tone of the place you would often hear something starting to go wrong before seeing it. A click that shouldn't be there or a platter sounding rough as you laced a film up. The work was interesting in ways that digital never will be. I also prefer some things in electronics to be analogue rather than digital. And no matter the bit rate always remember digital is only ever a close approximation of that colour or that shape it's never perfect. However it may get to a point where the eye can't see the difference and the ear can't hear the difference but it's still only an approximation. I get it I like old tech if that's a crime shoot me.
That's part of it for sure but even on a still scene 35mm projectors still had a small bit of movement because it was mechanical and alignments are never perfect. I know in the cinema I worked in even sat in the screen you could still hear the hum of the machines if you knew what to listen for. To me it was all part of the cinema experience.
Digital has improved compared to the early generations yes. But if you gave me the option I'd watch 35mm over digital any day
Well written and nicely put. I served my time as a projectionist also and miss the job to this day. And digital isn't the same, while they are "picture perfect" with great colours there is still a deadness that I can't explain. Not too long ago I was back in the old projection hall which is now digital and it just sounded wrong I missed the mechanical sound of the old machines.
Not everything digital is better.