Why I distrust Google Cloud more than than AWS or Azure
[DISCLAMER: I used to work at Google in general, but not at Google Cloud]<p>I&#x27;m not sure whether this has been discussed here before, but I&#x27;d love to take this forum to share an angle from the tech side of things:<p>IMO, Google is _cursed_ to keep deprecating its products and services. It&#x27;s cursed by Google&#x27;s famous choice of mono-repo tech stack.<p>It makes all the sense and has all the benefits. But at a cost: we had to keep every single line of code in active development mode. Whenever someone changed a line of code in a random file that&#x27;s three steps away on your dependency chain, you will get a ticket to understand what has changed, make changes and fire up every tests (also fix them in 99% of the cases).<p>Yeah, the &quot;Fuck You. Drop whatever you are doing because it’s not important. What is important is OUR time. It’s costing us time and money to support our shit, and we’re tired of it, so we’re not going to support it anymore.&quot; is kind of true story for internal engineers.<p>We once had a shipped product (which took about 20-engineer-month to develop in the first place) in maintenance mode, but still requires a full time engineer to deal with those random things all the time. Would have save 90% of that person&#x27;s time it it&#x27;s on a sperate branch and we only need to focus on security patches. (NO, there is no such concept of branching in Google&#x27;s dev system).<p>We kept doing this for a while and soon realized that there is no way we can sustain this, especially after the only guys who understand how everything works switched teams. Thus, it just became obvious that deprecation is the only &quot;responsible&quot; and &quot;reasonable&quot; choice.<p>Honestly, I think Google&#x27;s engineering practice is somewhat flawed for the lack of a good solution to support shipped products in maintenance. As a result, there is either massively successful products being actively developed; or deprecated products.