3 ms·

I think Sam's comment is important: >Note it is important to have full perspective on costs here... All too often I see the "AWS is too expensive" circlejerk

I think Sam's comment is important: >Note it is important to have full perspective on costs here... All too often I see the "AWS is too expensive" circlejerk devolve into a flat cost argument. It is absolutely more expensive in that regard. That being said, I see very few comparisons that take in to account all of the engineering effort saved by some of the AWS feature set. There are non-trivial things that simply aren't a problem anymore on AWS, and time can be spent on actually interesting/difficult problems.

apple4ever 8y ago
Right but then there are other non-trivial things that you have to spend on that you wouldn't on non-AWS. And really there are very few hints that are non-trivial and not a problem on non-AWS either. In the end, AWS is still more expensive time and money wise, it's just a question of whether it's worth it and what you want to spend your time on. (For me, spending it on the AWSy things is not interesting)