Google Previews App Engine 167
An anonymous reader writes "Google is giving a handful of web programmers the opportunity to create and run their own Web applications on their servers. Today's launch of a preview release of Google App Engine signals a new era of collaboration with third-party software developers. 'The goal is to make it easy to get started with a new Web app, and then make it easy to scale when that app reaches the point where it's receiving significant traffic and has millions of users," said Google product manager, Paul McDonald in a blog post."
New Acronym (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Google App Engine: It's just like regular web-hosting, but with developer and user lock-in!
Re:New Acronym (Score:5, Funny)
Looks good and free (for 500MB worth) (Score:4, Interesting)
However, the free 500MB worth of storage is really attrative for anyone who wants to try a few things out online. I wish it supported more than Python, but they say they are working on it now. Getting a few more programming languages supported will make this much more flexible.
I'm signing up for a block. Who knows what I'll do with it. But at no cost, what do I really have to lose?
Re:Looks good and free (for 500MB worth) (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Looks good and free (for 500MB worth) (Score:5, Informative)
Terms of Service [google.com] and Program Policy [google.com] (afaics, just the usual hosting rules: no porn, gambling, piracy, spam, malware, hate speech, etc).
Also, adwords are pretty much 'Step 1' in trying to cover hosting costs for a fledgling webapp.
If all Google wants in return for free-ish hosting is something most people do anyway, I'd imagine most people won't blink.
If nothing else, I'd imagine many niche discussion boards will transition to GAPE in short order, once vBulletin is ported.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
hmm.. with that prediction i should probably start porting my django forum [sphene.net] to GAPE .. at least it is already django and python .. so i would "only" need to support the database backend ? great :)
Re:Looks good and free (for 500MB worth) (Score:5, Informative)
Google's offering is more like a web framework hosted on Google's servers. Much different.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Google is starting to feel the pressure of the shift in the general public's perception of digital privacy rights and is basically looking for ways to squirm
Re:Looks good and free (for 500MB worth) (Score:5, Insightful)
>You run an entire machine image of your choice on Amazon's infrastructure,
>and there's no explicit persistent storage except through the Ec2 interface.
It is geared towards solving some of the same problems as EC2 and S3 (how to deploy scalable web sites without having to build and maintain your own datacenters); however, it takes a different approach.
EC2 and S3 make you design your web stack from the ground up, choose your operating system, etc. They also let you run whatever kind of task you want, including stuff that runs in the background.
In contrast google app store limits your options, and provides it's own web framework, but is probably easy to get started with since they already handle things like load balancing for you, and starts your service up on a new machine if one crashes automatically, etc.
A lot of people have noted that you have to use python to develop, and that is one way that it lacks the flexibility of amazon's offering, but it is by far the least important! Google will doubtless add support for things like java and ruby in the future, as for them it is just an issue or wrapping an API.
The biggest concern that most people are missing is that this is a essentially a really big web server that they are letting you put your software on, and *just* a web server. From "http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/whatisgoogleappengine.html":
"when an application is called to serve a web request, it must issue a response within a few seconds. If the application takes too long, the process is terminated and the server returns an error code to the user."
That means you can perform *no* computationally expensive operations on their service. Most interesting web applications don't just process web requests, they use data that has complicated processing done as part of batch tasks. Internet search is the best example of this. It's not enough to have a database with the whole internet in it, you also need to generate an index, and that is an incredibly expensive batch job that must run on an enourmous cluster. That means if you wanted to implement something big like search on google app engine, you would need to roll your own cluster and then upload your stuff to google, *over the internet*. This is not practical because the terabytes of data involved may be quick to transfer across a lan in a data center, it will take a long time to transfer them across the internet...
In comparison, amazon will let you use the same service and data store both for interactive web applications, and backend batch processes. You could theoretically reimplement google search on top of EC2 and S3, but probably not on top of google app engine.
That said, I think that google is going to kick everyone's ass in this space in the long run. Google hasn't come out with every feature necessary for building big apps without having to worry about scaling, but for the features they have implemented, they've done it right, making it much smoother for the developer by handling administrative tasks. In comparison amazon's efforts give you all of the primitive tools you need, but then require you to roll a lot more of your own code.
When they get around to letting external developers run mapreduces (http://labs.google.com/papers/mapreduce.html) and similar long term distributed tasks by paying for CPU usage, they will have the opportunity to move into this space in a big way.
Aside from that, they need to provide better tools to migrate existing web apps to their service. Most people aren't going to write something serious for google from scratch, but might be willing to port an existing app that is facing scaling issues to explore cost/benefits of google's service. Right now, porting is much easier with EC2 since you can just image your existing servers and build on that.
Google needs to provide:
1. Some kind of language independence. Right now, it sounds like (although I do not kn
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if it's anything like some other Google sites, your entire site, if (after a couple years or so) they decide to change their terms of service:
http://lastgoogle.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
That said, I'm looking forward to trying this out. But I'm not planning to use it for anything I consider too important or can't keep mirrored on my own system. Be careful.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
GAPE (adopting the acronym from AccUser) is just a glorified virtual host. Not that it's a bad thing; that might be exactly what you need. EC2 is really more about computing power than the ability to serve up some webpages.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
All the available blocks are now taken in their pre-release test. Much like Apple's iPhone developer program, they're now putting folks on the waiting list but you can download the SDK in the meantime.
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory (Score:4, Insightful)
Jokes aside, if done right, this thing can bring Google to the position of total control over a large part of the Internet, which is a bit scary, to say it mildly..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
First off (Score:4, Interesting)
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Because as a business owner, you recognize that Google is investing in your business by seeding your startup costs?
Because as a software developer you recognize that leveraging the tools Google is offering (and will be adding to over time) will speed your time to delivery?
Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)
So let me get this straight.. I leave myself at the mercy of google in order to save the cost of IT administration? That doesn't sound like a good business decision.
Because as a business owner, you recognize that Google is investing in your business by seeding your startup costs?
Startup costs? You can't be serious, both hardware and bandwidth are dirt cheap, in college (2000) between my four friends and I, we were able to start my first business using pocket money we earned from odd jobs. This is a VERY weak arguement.
Because as a software developer you recognize that leveraging the tools Google is offering (and will be adding to over time) will speed your time to delivery? I'd love an explanation on how this would speed up my time to delivery? I took a look at the video and read the article and it does nothing that I can't already do myself to speed up time to delivery other than have hardware resources readily available. But once again I leave myself at the mercy of Google for access hardware and bandwidth. Thanks but no thanks.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It doesn't? So you don't use any web hosting services then, you host everything yourself? But wait, then you are at the mercy of your ISP. So do you have redundant connections? But wait, you're still hosting everything in one place, so you are at the mercy of floods, earthquakes, power outages, etc. So do you have geographically separated offices, with employees
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and my argument is that if you aren't committing significant resources to the problem, then all you are doing by avoiding reliance on Google is exchanging it for reliance on something else.
Doesn't provide anything of significant value? Google em
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, the key is to evaluate the potential benefits and the potential costs, and make a choice based on what's best for your business.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
The point about App Engine is that it's based on Google technologies like BigTable and GFS (along with a bunch of others that I can't talk about, but are equally cool). The real saving is not on IT administration but on the enormous pain of scaling up your infrastructure as the site grows.
The IT industry is littered with companies that failed the scaling challenge and lost their advantage. Friendster is the canonical example. You really don't want to build a successful business and then see it fall over and die because you aren't equal to the challenge of resharding your MySQL databases every month.
But wait. There are other advantages. App Engine is really a platform for Google to expose its technology to others. Scalable databases is only one part of it. There are plenty of other advantages to running on top of the Google platform. I haven't had a chance to check out the videos yet, so I'd rather not shoot my mouth off, but seriously - the stuff we have here simplifies a *lot* of annoying goop that otherwise you'd have to handle yourself (managing datacenters being only one obvious example).
Having seen for myself what it takes to run a large, popular website at a high degree of availability, I'm pretty excited about the launch of this service (disclaimer: I work for Google but not on App Engine). It means people can spend more time writing interesting software and less time on crap like debugging database replication and figuring out the annoying parts of how to geocode Japanese street addresses - cuz we do it for you.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love an explanation on how this would speed up my time to delivery?
I agree. I ran through the getting started pages and didn't see anything better than http://www.zope.org/ [zope.org] or http://www.djangoproject.com/ [djangoproject.com] (competing python web application stacks).
So, the downside is learning a new application stack and the upside is free hosting for now. This sounds like it is targeting college students who can't afford the quite minimal ISP hosting costs currently available in the market. I can't see building a business around this for the same reason that SaaS has not predominate
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because as a business owner you recognize the benefit of not having to invest in IT administration overhead? So let me get this straight.. I leave myself at the mercy of google in order to save the cost of IT administration? That doesn't sound like a good business decision. Because as a business owner, you recognize that Google is investing in your business by seeding your startup costs? Startup costs? You can't be serious, both hardware and bandwidth are dirt cheap, in college (2000) between my four friends and I, we were able to start my first business using pocket money we earned from odd jobs. This is a VERY weak arguement. Because as a software developer you recognize that leveraging the tools Google is offering (and will be adding to over time) will speed your time to delivery? I'd love an explanation on how this would speed up my time to delivery? I took a look at the video and read the article and it does nothing that I can't already do myself to speed up time to delivery other than have hardware resources readily available. But once again I leave myself at the mercy of Google for access hardware and bandwidth. Thanks but no thanks.
I'm trying to figure out how anyone can claim Google's Central/Mainframe Engine using Python is somehow something new. Is it that IBM and Akamai being some dream solution is somehow a new concept that must be embraced because it's Python? Startup costs are salaries, materials, equipment, medical benefits, etc., and the least cost is buying servers and having them hosted inside of Akamai's datacenters for a tier fee structure, based upon need. Google is realizing that it needs new ideas to sustain it's wi
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a business owner and a wel developer
I watched the whole presentation. I failed to notice where they would help me to reduce any costs. I can already have (for free) everything I saw in this presentation (hosting excluded...And I don't pay this part...My clients do). It looks like a well balanced API, I won't certainly bash the work of those developers but there are already dozens of comp
Re: (Score:2)
I failed to notice where they would help me to reduce any costs. I can already have (for free) everything I saw in this presentation (hosting excluded...And I don't pay this part...My clients do).
So you charge your clients for an in house development environment? Where do you do your development and testing? They are offering free hosting and you say "Except for the free hosting, I don't see where I can save money." It's free hosting...that's what it is. I don't think anyone's trying to tell you to go ahead and move over everything you've got on some server somewhere to the google engine but yo...it's free hosting. Fire off a development environment...or whatever.
flawed business model (Score:3, Interesting)
The only persons able to use AppEngine are programmers. As such, setting up a LAMP configuration shouldn't be too hard. You can get hosting for 6 euro/month. Basically what they are saying is: we are between the 6 euro/month line and 0 euro/month. I don't see the business advantage here.
Scalability and performance management: they don't mention numbers. I therefore do not trust them.
Exit strategy: I can find a lot of LAMP providers, I know of only one Google AppEngine
Re: (Score:2)
Basically what they are saying is: we are between the 6 euro/month line and 0 euro/month. I don't see the business advantage here.
That's nicely put, but I think they're looking at a longer game than that. They're playing for a future in which application delivery is a bulk commodity. I don't just mean space - they've already demonstrated that once you've built the data centre, space is as cheap as water - but the capacity to compute and deliver.
It's already happening, as it does in every computing medium: layers of abstraction build up to meet less expert users and more expert users create new possibilities on top of them. The kids w
Re: (Score:2)
Re:flawed business model (Score:4, Insightful)
And those cheap hosting plans don't provide any sort of scaling. If you want to scale, you have to move to their dedicated servers, which cost just as much as everyone elses. Want to scale past a single dedicated server? You're on your own. They'll sell 'em to you, but load ballancing, database sharding... that's all on you.
This offer is unique. There is no comparable platform on the market.
Re: (Score:2)
About the performance/scalability: they haven't provided any numbers on performance. You call it unique, I call it 'unknown'. They haven't given any prices either.
Re: (Score:2)
But, what you describe isn't all that hard..
Been there. Done that. Have the t-shirt.
The place in particular I'm referencing was behaving badly on one server when we got together. They were using about 45Mb/s bandwidth, and were always out of CPU and memory. Their old provider insisted that they spend a fortune on new equipment.
We bought a bunch of commodity machines, tweaked things properly, and let it grow.
It scaled out to sever
Re: (Score:2)
As a software developer and business owner why would I want to leave myself at the mercy of Google like this by being tied to their service?
Who said anything about tying yourself to Google? The apps are written in Python, they'll give you an appserver to run on your own machine. How is this service tying yourself to Google any more than using any other provider (including yourself)?
Re: (Score:2)
Google certainly won't be licensing out BigTable anytime soon. And certainly not for small-scale uses.
This can be abstracted away (and it SHOULD be) but most of the developers that are jumping on the GApps bandwagon here are, I feel it's safe to say, not going to bother with a proper data abstraction layer.
That's the sorta thing that keeps them locked-in in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
As for Google, they get many other people developing applications that will all become part of the Google ecosystem, as far as end user is concerned. I think they will keep an eye on the mo
That's a ligitimate question (Score:2)
What we need is a wrapper around S3 and google datastore that exposes a high level API that they can both support. Then, this proprietary platform suddenly transforms into a commodity.
That said, I'm sure that isn't what google is hoping will happen. They don't want to be just another hosting company competing with all the other
Microsoft, take note (Score:4, Insightful)
If I where working at Microsoft development I'd be shitting my pants right about now (imagine pictures of Ballmer dancing and screaming "developers! developers! developers!" here). This is clearly what google's after now that they own search (and web advertising). They have been building huge datacenters for a while now, they own probably one of the largest distributed computing systems on earth (and know how to keep it up and running), *and* they own parts of the netwerk that connects it all together (fibre etc.).
And now they are offering all web developers the ability to use this infrastructure..
On the other hand, I do see some important privacy and security concerns here. If I owned a company, I'm not sure I'd trust all my source code, data etc. to be stored on Google's servers, which are (in my case) even in a completely different country with different laws, jurisdiction etc. Not to mention, what if I later want to migrate because I don't like the terms of service, etc. Or, what happens if you would create anything that takes off and Google decides that they like it..
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Coding is never holy grail...it is a combination of the initial idea and the (often more importantly) the implementation of that idea that make or break a company.
No business that creates an application within the currently published infrastructure of Google Apps Engine is going to have enough rocket science in it to worry about having it stolen by Google (or any competent set of developers
Re: (Score:2)
It's not as if Ebay or Facebook does anything that is particularily tricky to figure out how to do.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But it is very very little web 2.0 software where looking at an existing implementation makes it any more easy to clone the implementation.
Remember that google still have to do a complete and independent implementation.
I do for example not really think that looknig at the slasthdot code, would make it any more easy for me to implement a complete clone of slashdot.
Re:Microsoft, take note (Score:5, Informative)
What you get from Google is the free hosting and access to the Google hardware. It might not be long before other providers offer Google App Engine hosting - it could become a standard. It looks like Django on steroids...
Re:Microsoft, take note (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That said, the SDK is all under the apache license, so you could always dig in and optimize it to work well enough. In particular, the query syntax is very similar to SQL (actually, it's a subset of the syntax of SQL), so you could probably toss it onto a mysq
Re: (Score:2)
But apparently I'm supposed to be shitting my pants, because google is taking over.
Re: (Score:2)
Just sayin'.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Which leads me to wonder...
Around here (developing Southeast Asia), connectivity to the rest of the world has its good days and its bad days.
People can either host locally, which means paying a lot, getting lousy customer service... and having good connectivity to internet users in the country, which is quite important.
Or they can host in the US, which means paying much le
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
CouchDB is an interesting project, but it's not going to revolutionize anything. CERTAINLY not web-development which isn't even the target-market for Couch.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
good idea but in 48 hours two serious bugs on gmail and chaptcha if ballmer says: developer developer developer actually google say: marketing marketing marketing :D
Ok, except for the fact the the Live Mail CAPTCHA breaking [zdnet.com] event happened weeks before so I'm sure that Microsoft isn't going to throw any stones Google's way anytime soon over that. Also, are we going to call that a "Bug"? Really? A bot being able to sign up for an account is a "bug". Really? A *serious* bug? Really?
... run my own Web applications? ... (Score:2)
wait
you meant on THEIR servers
right.
Very Different from EC2 (Score:5, Informative)
EC2 allows you to configure a GNU/Linux environment to your liking and use it almost the same as you would use a dedicated server or VPS. Google's App Engine allows you to create Google Applications. They're written in Python (one of Google's production languages) and need to be written specifically to use things like Google's Bigtable.
That's not necessarily a bad thing. Google's infrastructure is top notch, but don't expect to try and launch the next Web 2.0 app this way. If you use Google's App Engine, your only course is independent or being bought by Google - because you'd have to rewrite so much of your app to migrate to other infrastructure. With EC2, it's decently easy to switch to dedicated servers. S3 could be replaced by a MogileFS cluster. That's much more appealing to anyone that isn't Google.
Essentially, Google's App Engine locks you into Google in a way that EC2/S3 doesn't lock you into Amazon (in fact, some of the considerations like lack of persistent storage make it easier to move away).
Unless someone implements Google App Engine on EC2 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Very Different from EC2 (Score:4, Insightful)
http://simonwillison.net/2008/Apr/8/forms/ [simonwillison.net]
I would imagine that someone will also write some code to sit between your app and database, pretending to be the data backend that Google is providing, simplifying migration away from teh Goog.
Direct from the source (Score:2)
Google's infrastructure is top notch, but don't expect to try and launch the next Web 2.0 app this way. If you use Google's App Engine, your only course is independent or being bought by Google - because you'd have to rewrite so much of your app to migrate to other infrastructure.
From google's page on the Google App Engine:
At the moment, only Python is supported. Judging by Google's strong faith in Java (i.e. Android) (ps. which i approve of), one can only assume
Re: (Score:2)
Or, if you're actually building an application that even remotely needed Google-level scalability, you could write an abstraction layer for your data. If you built it correctly it would be relatively trivial to port to a different environment.
Do you really want to give your code to Google? (Score:2, Insightful)
A lot of talk is made about making web applications scalable, but in reality, you're not likely to have 200 million users overnight. Facebook and MySpace have about 50 million users a piece, and the reason that they can't scale is because everyone who works at those places is a moron. I mean MySpace runs on Windows and SQLServer, and then they wonder why they can't handle the traffic,
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Quit confusing people with facts." - Bill O' Reilly
Re: (Score:2)
Now, while I am sure they could never hold themselves up to you high levels of genius, cough cough, that does not make the morons. And running around calling people morons doesn't work in the real world, and is just plain rude here.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Really? You actually LIKE Struts? You have to be kidding me. Your statement may have been true 5 years ago but most of the Java industry has tried to move past Struts (including its author) and into something more testable and less verbose. Seriously, have you actually ever unit tested Struts code?
Your code sucks.
I love how this is the default answer. Sigh. A lot goes into supporting a million concurrent users besides "goo
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I am a Linux user(Gentoo) and I hate Microsoft. As a matter of fact, out of the 20 machines I have at home, not one runs any Microsoft product.
Just because someone doesn't like Google's business practices doesn't mean that they're a fan of Microsoft, except in some bizarre Manichean universe. If I had to rank the level of evil of technology companies I would probably rank them like so (from most evil to least evil):
1. IBM: For planning and orchestrating the Holocaust.
Vendor Lockin (Score:2)
The App Engine datastore is not like a traditional relational database. Data objects, or "entities," have a kind and a set of properties. Queries can retrieve entities of a given kind filtered and sorted by the values of the properties. Property values can be of any of the supported property value types.
Say you create a successful app that really starts to take off. Are you stuck with google because the DB API will require massive rework if you want to migrate to another vendor.
Re: (Score:2)
And when I say "smart" I mean "unrealistically idealistic"
Learn some design patterns (Score:2)
Re:Vendor Lockin (Score:5, Funny)
[x] Limited Language Choices
[x] Non-relational Database
[x] Giant, Centralized Processing resource
[x] Said resource shared with others
Oh, Goody! Google just invented the Mainframe.
Where do I sign up for my timeslice?
Re: (Score:2)
But if you're good at what you do, you'd write a data abstraction layer that interfaces w/ the Google Data Objects.
Migrating would only force you to adapt that abstraction layer to whatever platform you're migrating to.
This is a common practice since all current RDBMS implementations do things a little differently. Right now it's relatively easy to write such a layer.
W/ GApps it would be a little more difficult, since the
The future (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the key ways Microsoft won the desktop OS wars was basically making it easy for developers to create applications for it. Google has realised that the focus for application development is moving from the desktop to the web. If they can create a system that makes it easy for developers to create web based applications, then developers are going to integrate what they develop with Google services, effectively giving Google the kind of lock-in that Microsoft had with the web.
I don't know why people keep comparing this to Amazon's EC2. This I think is very different, both technically and strategically, and it is all about providing online developers with a rich way to incorporate Google services into their applications.
Startup farming (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's all about the APIs.
If Google would leave this as-is, it's a huge flop with no real potential. It's buzz-generating, but a novelty.
However...
If they roll-out APIs for Search, GMail, Docs, YouTube, AdSense/AdWords, OpenSocial, etc, and they integrate these carefully with this App Engine... well.. that's a horse of a different color.
THAT would be something to talk about.
And THAT would be something on the order of a Next-Gen-Win32API-like-advantage.
This is made of win and awesome (Score:5, Interesting)
- A system on which I can create and deploy applications that will always scale automatically, the only difference when doubling my traffic being the invoice I get by the end of the month. I don't have to deal with engineering or choosing a safely scalable application framework, looking, paying and dealing with a scalable application server, database, shared storage system (e.g. a SAN) and load balancer, run and maintain a fast network, perform backups, etc. All I do is write and run the application as I need.
- A system where such costs (application server, database, storage, load balancing, network and backups) scale perfectly with the actual use (and presumably profit) of my application, without having to make any huge investments.
- A system that will allow me to start for free and try it all, or just work freely for my hobby community, granting me no less than 500 MB. The competition today consists of a handful sub-par free hosts with 50 MB, a crappily configured PHP 4.3 and don't ask for speed or availability.
- Integration with Google applications (GMail; presumably, with all of them in the future).
- A standarized development environment based on a truly high-level, productive, modern language (not that Java business crap, but something that actually allows you to work fast and smart).
Google hosting it? I couldn't give a damn. My applications are usually GPL, including the business ones. It's not the application what's sold, it's the development and the service, and even if it were the application, I would trust Google as much as I would trust any other host.
The only caveat I see would be the datastore, which is not a relational database supporting SQL, but I'd have to see how good it is. At least it supports transactions, which are the single most difficult feature to implement in your own storage system. Everything else is just comfort, and when you work in Python, a language with first-class functions, builtin lists and dictionaries, list comprehensions, generators, a real object system, decent properties, operator overloading, mixins and dynamic modification of anything, and a dozen more features traditional languages such as Java or PHP couldn't dream of, I'm not worried about being able to query my data comfortably.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Note that transactions are semi-limited - you have to loosely partition your data into smallish chunks, and any given transaction can only act within one chunk. (There's no performance penalty to having /too small/ chunks, and indeed the default is to put e
Re: (Score:2)
Then you obviously haven't used the "new and improved" GMail interface lately. Much slower than the original, especially if you happen to use the web app for what it's for: Storing many e-mails. In fact, it's to the point where I use my GMail account as sparingly as possible.
I think that while Google probably works hard to improve scalability, its obvious just fr
No socket library access? (Score:2, Interesting)
From the FAQ [google.com]: "Sockets are disabled with Google App Engine".
Don't get me wrong, I think the service is really cool, and I understand that maybe sockets could be abused but... am I the only one that thinks disabling access to the net severely limits a web app?
That said, I put myself on the waitlist. Even if I only ever use this for fun, it's worth exploring.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Feel stupid replying to myself, but whatever...
I realize that the fetch API will allow access to web services, which these days will probably cover most people's needs. I guess the only thing other than http that I often use sockets for in a web application is mail (pop/imap) and I suppose Google isn't clamoring to enable webmail competition for gmail.
On the other hand, I don't like the idea of having to sit around waiting and hoping for Google to implement a new API every time I want access to some new n
Would the last one to leave Web 1.0... (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks.
GQL Queries lack search. (Score:2)
Also, no primary keys?
I'm guessing there may be issues adding this kind of search to a distributed database. Whatever the reason, it's a shame.
Embrace, Extend, and then what? (Score:2)
So, what's to stop the extingush part? Letting Google say, hey, host here and we will make sure that your search results don't "change", or you get better results, etc. Given the dem
Too much lock-in. VC's won't like it. (Score:2)
Besides, persistent storage and redundancies will eventually become "easy" as following a tutorial for EC2 + S3 + SimpleDB. I haven't looked, but I expect they're out there already.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you don't built *applications* in HTML. This isn't geocities, it's an application platform.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If anybody does it they should make a documentary of it.
Sell it in the horror section.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)