8 ms·
As usual, the pricing is not very friendly, and apparently designed to lock your data into AWS or exploit your weak negotiating position once you buy in. While
by devit 11y ago
As usual, the pricing is not very friendly, and apparently designed to lock your data into AWS or exploit your weak negotiating position once you buy in.
While you can send in 50TB for $200, taking the same 50TB out costs an additional $1500 charge (50000 * 0.03).
[assuming they are not transferring the data over the Internet, the cost to AWS should be the same or cheaper for reading]
- x5n1 11y agoSame service needs to run the other way for the same price. $200 to get all your data shipped to you on an appliance/hard drive.
- Hello71 11y agoplus $200 for the job
- utrex 11y agoteraflop was right, it's $200 per snowball device job, which is currently limited to 50TB. Maybe that will change. You can order multiple jobs to import more data. You have 10 days to complete the transfer and ship it back and then it's $15 a day. $200 buys you 50TB per job, great encryption, and speedy migration. Sources: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-importexport-snowball-transfer-1-petabyte-per-week-using-amazon-owned-storage-appliances/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-importexport-snowball-t... and https://aws.amazon.com/importexport/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/importexport/pricing/
- teraflop 11y agoAfter reading those pages, I think you're wrong, and the $200 is actually per-device. For one thing, the documentation says you can use multiple Snowball devices, but carefully tiptoes around saying whether or not there's an extra charge for doing so. All of the language that actually talks about pricing just says "the device", singular. For another thing, the screenshots of the "create a job" workflow are missing any way to specify that you want multiple devices. It sure looks like one job == one device. (This reminds me of the pricing issues around AWS's Glacier service. It's not even that the pricing model itself is bad -- it's that the marketing is obfuscatory to the point of being arguably deceptive.)
- utrex 11y agoYou are right. I think that the value add is that in addition to getting to use 50TB of storage you also get good encryption and usable software.
- jeffbarr 11y agoYou can request multiple devices at once. I didn't include that screen in the blog post.
- teraflop 11y agoAh, good to know! I would edit my comment with a correction if the option was still available.
- desdiv 11y ago$1700 is amazingly cheap when you consider that it costs $4300 [0] to transfer that same 50TB out of EC2. [0] https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/ $4300 = 10000 * $0.09 + 40000 * $0.085
- devit 11y ago... which is also wildly overpriced. According to multiple sources, Internet transit in the US now costs less than 1$ for a 1 Mbps line for large deals, which translates to 1$ for 324GB, which translates to 0.003$ / GB. Amazon charges 15-30 times that. (it appears that traffic can be much more expensive in places other than the US and presumably Europe)
- utrex 11y agoIt may cost that much to buy that capacity, but it costs a lot more than that to run the large scale organizations (CAPEX/OPEX) that build and buy these services. You're not just paying for a pipe, you're paying for the corporation.
- johansch 11y ago> You're not just paying for a pipe, you're paying for the corporation. You are paying their profit margin, yeah. It is wildly overpriced, no matter how you look at it. Operating costs even when done on a much smaller and more inefficient scale than for AWS do not make the total cost for incremental bandwidth usage THAT much larger.
- jonknee 11y agoWell if you sent it in you already have a copy. Don't delete it and you can save the $1500.
- kobayashi 11y agoI think the idea is that if one needs to recall the data from AWS it's due to something like data loss
- soneca 11y agoi.e. Snowball is the price model of AWS.