Your making value decisions based on expertise in your existing delivery methods and trying to map them 1-1 to aws features, that may or may not map 1-1. You keep disparaging aws' pricing (stupidly expensive, serious premium), without providing an alternative/baseline.
Again, if you have numbers and not broad statements we'd appreciate them.
Your making value decisions based on expertise in your existing delivery methods and trying to map them 1-1 to aws features, that may or may not map 1-1
eh, no. You have no idea about my areas of expertise, what features I require, or how I map them, or what I map them to, so you cannot make this kind of statement (well, you can, and you did, but it is a fallacy).
you have numbers and not broad statements we'd appreciate them.
I'm sure you do. Doing what I do today in terms of functional parity, but doing it on AWS, will work out roughly 2.5 times more expensive, and will not gain me any additional features or functionality, and will leave me with about two-thirds of reduction in overall performance against metrics that are of interest to me. Also "we"? You speak for others? Who are the "we" that have appointed you as their speaker?
You started with general pricing arguments with hostile language without providing numbers to support - making generalizations without that data is useless, right? How is a reader supposed to take those statements? It leads to using your experience statement (I offer high performance, managed, HA hosting to selected clients) to make judgements on the comment.
The we should be anybody bothering to read this comment chain - who wouldn't be interested in seeing AWS' lack of value in your use case / competitors that succeed? Having done migrations to and from AWS for past employers, this would definitely interest me in the least.
That's one example and matches a use case where AWS / "Cloud" providers may not be ideal. Hybrid setups with external CDN can mitigate some of this as well.
mdekkers|9 years ago
eh, no. You have no idea about my areas of expertise, what features I require, or how I map them, or what I map them to, so you cannot make this kind of statement (well, you can, and you did, but it is a fallacy).
you have numbers and not broad statements we'd appreciate them.
I'm sure you do. Doing what I do today in terms of functional parity, but doing it on AWS, will work out roughly 2.5 times more expensive, and will not gain me any additional features or functionality, and will leave me with about two-thirds of reduction in overall performance against metrics that are of interest to me. Also "we"? You speak for others? Who are the "we" that have appointed you as their speaker?
jronald|9 years ago
The we should be anybody bothering to read this comment chain - who wouldn't be interested in seeing AWS' lack of value in your use case / competitors that succeed? Having done migrations to and from AWS for past employers, this would definitely interest me in the least.
nh2|9 years ago
AWS Internet traffic costs ~60x as much as renting bare metal servers.
No change in architecture can change that fact.
jronald|9 years ago