7 ms·
Microsoft Drops Prices for Some Azure Instances by Up to 17%
- wstrange 11y agoCompetition in the cloud space is a beautiful thing. I really hope we don't end up with Amazon being a monopoly provider. Now if they could all lower network egress pricing I'd be really happy.
- jedberg 11y agoI doubt that will happen. Very few people list that as their deal breaker, and it's their entire business model. If egress were cheap you could easily load balance between providers.
- wickawic 11y ago"Cheapest cloud hosting service as a service"
- bedhead 11y agoMainframes: IBM - natural monopolist PC's: Microsoft/Intel - natural monopolists Mobile: Apple - natural monopolist Cloud: Amazon - .... (take a guess where this is going)
- frik 11y agoMobile: Google Android 70+% (Apple iOS is only 20% worldwide) Cloud: Amazon, then Digital Ocean is the second, than long nothing, ...(?)..., Azure, ...
- kbart 11y agoApple iOS is only 20% worldwide AFAIK, it's <15%.[0] 0. http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-market-share.jsp http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-market-share.jsp
- TheLogothete 11y ago>Cloud: Amazon, then Digital Ocean is the second, than long nothing, ...(?)..., Azure, ... Can you provide some metrics and sources for that?
- pjmlp 11y agoWho is using Digital Ocean in Europe?! It is all about AWS and Azure over here.
- _Codemonkeyism 11y agoSince they have a data center in Frankfurt we use it for some stuff. But on the edge for Hetzner vServers.
- bedhead 11y agoApple reaps 100% of the PROFITS. They are effectively a natural monopolist. Who cares about money-losing Android customers??? [praying I don't start some juvenile iOS/Android flame war] I've never asked this before but why did my post above get so many downvotes??? It's 100% true and not snarky or anything. I'm confused.
- peteretep 11y agoI don't have a use-case for Azure, but very happy MS are in the space.
- vmarsy 11y agoLike you I don't have any valid use case right now, but I'm interested in Service Fabric[1] though. It looks like Amazon Lambda, it screams vendor lock-in but much less than Lambda, as it seems easier to code and import dlls [1] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/service-fabric/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/service-fabric/
- xufi 11y agoI guess this is the new field in what they want to try to venture more into. I think the CEO was the former cloud head so no doubt its apart of his strategy
- melted 11y agoAzure is like 8 years old at this point, so it's by no means a new field for them. It's just that before there was no Google forcing everyone to cut their crazy fat margins.
- kevindeasis 11y agoNow I want more competitors for platforms like Heroku just so that they can put their prices down. Heroku is great, but it is crazy expensive. Furthermore, I don't see any signs of Heroku lowering their price at all.
- mark_l_watson 11y agoIs Heroku really that expensive? I use their new $7/month instances and I have no complaints with performance and features. $50/month for a managed Postgres database is a bit expensive but other cloud storage options like Cloudant (use the service in same AWS region as Heroku) can be very reasonable.
- kevindeasis 11y agoIt adds up really fast. $7/month for an instance then $20/month for ssl (even if you don't want the wildcard) and add another $9/month for backend. $ 36/month in 12 month is $432/month That is indeed a cheap service. However, relatively expensive for people not making a profit for their projects. It would be nice if Heroku lowered their prices occasionally as well.
- criley2 11y agoHeroku is expensive when considering you can use similar tools on a vps for a fraction of the cost (or get a whole lot more for your money). And yeah, when you charge $20 for SSL, you're expensive.
- cheez 11y agoWhen you have to spend even 10 hours a year maintaining that vps, I think most PaaS pay for themselves.
- criley2 11y agoI'm sorry but at $20/mo for basic SSL, you can easily spend $40/mo on Heroku for ONE app, almost $500/yr! A private VPS with enough resources for 4 of those same apps would be 2-4X cheaper. If your time is so valuable that you can waste money like that, congratulations, but many of us find halving a price and learning marketable skills in the process to be valuable.
- thisisdallas 11y agoThere are a lot of great services Azure offers and I would absolutely love to throw my money at Microsoft...but not all of it. I find it crazy that their SLA on VMs only applies if you have two VMs. Essentially, you are having to pay double just to maybe get 99.95% connectivity. https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/support/legal/sla/virtual-machines/v1_0/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/support/legal/sla/virtual-...
- spo81rty 11y agoAny type of high availability requires multiple servers
- matt_wulfeck 11y agoThings are really going to pick up when interconnections between clouds becomes faster and easier. AWS's switch to VPC is actually moving this along nicely. Many people actually want to be in two clouds for redundancy.
- tszming 11y agoDear Azure team: you will be more awesome if you offer Linux VM running natively on Linux Host, more developers will come.
- ygra 11y agoWhat difference does the host make? You're not interacting directly with it anyway, as far as I know.
- tszming 11y agoIf your Windows host need Windows update, then all the Linux guests would need to be rebooted (but seems they've managed to reduce the number of reboot significantly since last year). But regarding the performance and security, most people using Linux still prefer a Linux VM host.
- windowsworkstoo 11y agoWow, not really. If perf is fine who cares about the hypervisor. Regarding reboots, if they are using hyper-v they are probably on top ofServer Core which minimises patch surface and thus reboots.
- tuyguntn 11y agoAm I only one who is experiencing terrible speed of Azure CDN? http://imgur.com/2pAzabn http://imgur.com/2pAzabn http://imgur.com/xiymJUt http://imgur.com/xiymJUt
- shanselman 11y agoThat's the Azure.com website's CDN, but I can check on that.