The most objective critique I can give of any low-code abstraction tool is feature latency. Major cloud providers such as AWS and Azure release dozens of new services, instance types, or deep granular configurations every single year. Because DuploCloud sits as a translation layer between the engineer and the cloud provider, there is naturally a slight lag before those brand-new features show up in DuploCloud portal or in its custom Terraform provider. If our team wants to experiment with a newly launched AWS machine learning instance type or a highly specific EKS feature, sometimes we have to wait for DuploCloud to build it into their UI or find a temporary workaround via native cloud consoles. While DuploCloud is designed to make standard compliant infrastructure setups incredibly fast, sometimes edge cases can happen. The platform does a fantastic job of automating the ninety percent use case, but if an application requires a highly exotic legacy network topology and unconventional Kubernetes Ingress configuration, fighting against the platform's rigid safety guardrails can sometimes feel restrictive, which we faced in one of our testing projects last year. The UI simplifies everything, so when we actually needed to inject the raw, highly complex native Kubernetes YAML modifications, the escape hatch to override standard rules can sometimes have a learning curve, which we have already faced. Streamlining how advanced overrides to default settings work without breaking the compliance engine would be a great user experience improvement. The platform actively monitors for compliance drifts and logs system configuration perfectly. However, the searchability, filtering, and reporting element inside the administrative audit log UI could be more intuitive.
There seems to be significant effort toward vendor lock-in. During the sales pitch, we were told it would be very easy to turn off Duplo and its software, but upon closer inspection, the workflows make use of vendor-specific software without a technical reason. The backups are vendor-specific for disaster recovery unless one specifically requests otherwise. They also use their own Terraform provider, which does not provide any advantage over the generic providers. The software portal can be quite buggy. Although some fixes have been done over time, the root causes were not resolved. The panel does not support everything, so features like termination protection are missing. Additionally, automated services running on the portal have performed unexpected actions, such as deleting RDS instances.
Agile and DevOps Services streamline software development and delivery through practices that promote collaboration, flexibility, and ongoing improvement, thereby enhancing efficiency and innovation.
Agile focuses on iterative development and customer feedback, enabling teams to respond quickly to changing requirements. DevOps enhances this by bridging the gap between development and operations, ensuring continuous integration and delivery. Together, they offer a holistic approach to...
The most objective critique I can give of any low-code abstraction tool is feature latency. Major cloud providers such as AWS and Azure release dozens of new services, instance types, or deep granular configurations every single year. Because DuploCloud sits as a translation layer between the engineer and the cloud provider, there is naturally a slight lag before those brand-new features show up in DuploCloud portal or in its custom Terraform provider. If our team wants to experiment with a newly launched AWS machine learning instance type or a highly specific EKS feature, sometimes we have to wait for DuploCloud to build it into their UI or find a temporary workaround via native cloud consoles. While DuploCloud is designed to make standard compliant infrastructure setups incredibly fast, sometimes edge cases can happen. The platform does a fantastic job of automating the ninety percent use case, but if an application requires a highly exotic legacy network topology and unconventional Kubernetes Ingress configuration, fighting against the platform's rigid safety guardrails can sometimes feel restrictive, which we faced in one of our testing projects last year. The UI simplifies everything, so when we actually needed to inject the raw, highly complex native Kubernetes YAML modifications, the escape hatch to override standard rules can sometimes have a learning curve, which we have already faced. Streamlining how advanced overrides to default settings work without breaking the compliance engine would be a great user experience improvement. The platform actively monitors for compliance drifts and logs system configuration perfectly. However, the searchability, filtering, and reporting element inside the administrative audit log UI could be more intuitive.
There seems to be significant effort toward vendor lock-in. During the sales pitch, we were told it would be very easy to turn off Duplo and its software, but upon closer inspection, the workflows make use of vendor-specific software without a technical reason. The backups are vendor-specific for disaster recovery unless one specifically requests otherwise. They also use their own Terraform provider, which does not provide any advantage over the generic providers. The software portal can be quite buggy. Although some fixes have been done over time, the root causes were not resolved. The panel does not support everything, so features like termination protection are missing. Additionally, automated services running on the portal have performed unexpected actions, such as deleting RDS instances.