After reading its source code, there is really no tall mathematics in it, which is much simpler than the current artificial intelligence.
Some big data technologies invented by Google are also developed based on practice. These are the cornerstones of cloud computing and big data computing.
However, the artificial intelligence companies that have invested a lot of money in real money recently have caused a large number of enterprises to lose money because of the emphasis on concepts, not on the ground, and off practice.
The same is true for PaaS, which has many problems and lacks the accumulation of industry knowledge. However, many domestic PaaS designers ignore reality, the level of enterprise informatization, and the level of China ’s PaaS industry. They do it for PaaS. PaaS.
If you simply build PaaS into a drug that can cure all diseases, it will eventually lead to PaaS becoming a dog skin plaster. It will work everywhere, but it does n’t work.
One of my alumni-employed companies, domestic first-tier Internet companies, in order to improve the supply chain level, launched Oracle NetSuite in 2019 and hired the top domestic implementation team (second-level developers), which cost more than 5 million, which lasted a long time. In the past six months, the end result was a complete failure of the project, some of which were similar to the mid-stage issue disclosed some time ago.
Why, because developing PaaS is not that simple. It is not that NetSuite (PaaS) and secondary implementation developers can be combined to make PaaS.
Making an analogy, the developer has developed a high-rise residential building and advertises that it can support any personalized requirements for any residence at any level.
But when we went to see the house, we found that the developer just built a huge residential skeleton, and the room partition and room decoration at the back needed to be done by ourselves.
Then, the developers appointed some high-quality secondary developers, and said let ’s go to find the most follow-up development work of these developers (similar to PaaS), but there was a problem in the later stage, because it involves multiple parties, who is responsible What?
The big developers will kick the responsibility to the second-tier developers, and eventually some of the customers who suffer from dumb losses will themselves.
The same is true for PaaS. Everyone needs to develop PaaS, and all platforms must integrate PaaS. But PaaS needs to cover many industries. If all are combined into one platform, the structure will be very bloated.
It’s like we have to drink a bottle of water on the road, but are forced to carry a bucket of water all the way. If there is no real focus on an industry, many PaaS are meaningless.
SAP made such a mistake, hoping to apply it to multiple industries through a set of software. The huge and bloated software is extremely difficult and risky to implement, and the optical interface can see the big head.
In addition to too many PaaS, it will also cause very serious performance problems and operation and maintenance problems, and will inevitably gain flexibility