5 ms·

The truly interesting thing to me about this product is the pricing. Competitors in this space sell software starting at ~$5,000 all the way up into 5, and I pr

The truly interesting thing to me about this product is the pricing. Competitors in this space sell software starting at ~$5,000 all the way up into 5, and I presume 6 figures. AWS is giving away their software and only charging for the hardware to run this migration software on. The catch is that you need to be migrating to AWS resources which you are paying for. I'm sure this tool will have less features than the more established competitors, but for customers that fit the sweet spot, it will be very attractive. Disclosure: I know some of the people at http://www.dbvisit.com/ http://www.dbvisit.com/, a database migration company, and competitor to this.

Mahn 11y ago
Well it's in Amazon's best interest to get people to use and migrate to their infrastructure at the end of the day, so it's no surprise that a service that helps you move to AWS is competitively priced.
tehalex 11y ago
You can migrate in our out of AWS, but one or both of your endpoints needs to be on AWS.
- LeoPanthera 11y ago
  I wonder if you could realistically do a two stage migration, X -> Amazon -> Y
  - tbrock 11y ago
    Amazon probably wouldn't care if you did. They still get paid to shuffle the bits.
    - Artemis2 11y ago
      What they really want is keep you on RDS, not just get paid for the migration bandwidth.
      - ProblemFactory 11y ago
        Sure. But by forcing you to go through RDS even if you migrate X->RDS->Y, they are halfway there. In the process you need to set up an AWS account, create a RDS database, import your data into it... and perhaps you stop there despite the initial plans. Or use RDS for your next project, since you are already more familiar with it.
swehner 11y ago
The lock-in is where the catch is right.
- matt_wulfeck 11y ago
  There's not a whole lot of lock-in using an rds instance. It's MySQL.
  - nkozyra 11y ago
    ... with automatically managed updates, backups, monitoring, auto-scaling, auto-replication ... The managed services are a huge part of the lock-in with AWS services, because even though they generally cost more than the competitors, they can often come out equal after accounting for those aggregate hours lost to doing those things.
    - rubiquity 11y ago
      That's what you call "paying for a service." Lock-In is an entirely different matter.
      - nkozyra 11y ago
        Lock-in happens when migrating would be expensive, too. And leaving a managed service like this could introduce substantial cost.
        Johnny555 11y ago
        When the vendor lets you export your data in a form that you can easily import into your own copy of the exact same software, I fail to see how that is "lock-in". If the vendor increase the cost of the service or changes other terms in a way that's unfavorable to you, you can easily leave, that's the opposite of lock-in. You can't really accuse a vendor of lock in just because his product is priced lower than it would cost you to do it yourself.

Mahn 11y ago

Well it's in Amazon's best interest to get people to use and migrate to their infrastructure at the end of the day, so it's no surprise that a service that helps you move to AWS is competitively priced.

tehalex 11y ago

You can migrate in our out of AWS, but one or both of your endpoints needs to be on AWS.

LeoPanthera 11y ago
I wonder if you could realistically do a two stage migration, X -> Amazon -> Y
- tbrock 11y ago
  Amazon probably wouldn't care if you did. They still get paid to shuffle the bits.
  - Artemis2 11y ago
    What they really want is keep you on RDS, not just get paid for the migration bandwidth.
    - ProblemFactory 11y ago
      Sure. But by forcing you to go through RDS even if you migrate X->RDS->Y, they are halfway there. In the process you need to set up an AWS account, create a RDS database, import your data into it... and perhaps you stop there despite the initial plans. Or use RDS for your next project, since you are already more familiar with it.

swehner 11y ago

The lock-in is where the catch is right.

matt_wulfeck 11y ago
There's not a whole lot of lock-in using an rds instance. It's MySQL.
- nkozyra 11y ago
  ... with automatically managed updates, backups, monitoring, auto-scaling, auto-replication ... The managed services are a huge part of the lock-in with AWS services, because even though they generally cost more than the competitors, they can often come out equal after accounting for those aggregate hours lost to doing those things.
  - rubiquity 11y ago
    That's what you call "paying for a service." Lock-In is an entirely different matter.
    - nkozyra 11y ago
      Lock-in happens when migrating would be expensive, too. And leaving a managed service like this could introduce substantial cost.
      - Johnny555 11y ago
        When the vendor lets you export your data in a form that you can easily import into your own copy of the exact same software, I fail to see how that is "lock-in". If the vendor increase the cost of the service or changes other terms in a way that's unfavorable to you, you can easily leave, that's the opposite of lock-in. You can't really accuse a vendor of lock in just because his product is priced lower than it would cost you to do it yourself.