18 ms·

The problem with your approach is that you're firmly locked in to the vendor. And in the case of Fargate, Heroku etc you're paying significantly more than if y

The problem with your approach is that you're firmly locked in to the vendor. And in the case of Fargate, Heroku etc you're paying significantly more than if you had made use of Spot instances or shopped around for a cheaper vendor.

sukilot 6y ago
Heroku costs about a nickel an hour per server, yeah? A dollar a day? So I'll worry about that price when I get to at least 10 servers
- JamesSwift 6y ago
  A nickel an hour sounds fine/miniscule, but when you realize thats 30$/month vs an alternative VPS of $5/month then I think the cost premium is pretty clear.
throwaway894345 6y ago
Vendor lock-in concerns are overblown. Unless there’s a real chance you’ll need to pick up and move, don’t worry about it. Your savings by not building/operating everything yourself will dwarf other costs (unless your business has huge scale and you have a world class internal cloud capability which you probably don’t and if you do, you can probably just negotiate a better deal from a cloud provider a la Netflix and Amazon). To that end, you only “save money” by managing everything yourself if you write off the cost of engineering time and talent, which is to say you lose money by doing it yourself because you don’t have the scale or talent to compete with Amazon even with their markup (certainly not when you account for opportunity cost).
- threeseed 6y ago
  Nobody is saying you have to build everything yourself. But you can just use cloud providers for their hardware and not needlessly tie yourself to their software. For example you can use a managed K8s solution like EKS but then have all of your monitoring, logging, databases etc all be self-hosted. And it's not just about cost but also about being able to take advantage of other cloud provider's unique strengths or being truly resilient to outages.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    The same arguments apply to hardware and software. Cloud providers’ core competency is cloud infrastructure and services and they have the scale to economize their offerings. Your business very likely can’t compete with them, so to the extent that you’re owning things that cloud providers could sell you, you’re throwing away money and that figure very likely dwarfs the risk adjusted cost of maybe having to migrate to another provider one day. (Of course, there are services that are overpriced here and there, but the general principle holds).
  - freehunter 6y ago
    > being able to take advantage of other cloud provider's unique strengths If you’re limiting yourself to using only easily portable services, you’re not going to be taking advantage of any cloud provider’s unique strengths anyway. So you might as well just pick one.

sukilot 6y ago

Heroku costs about a nickel an hour per server, yeah? A dollar a day? So I'll worry about that price when I get to at least 10 servers

JamesSwift 6y ago
A nickel an hour sounds fine/miniscule, but when you realize thats 30$/month vs an alternative VPS of $5/month then I think the cost premium is pretty clear.

throwaway894345 6y ago

Vendor lock-in concerns are overblown. Unless there’s a real chance you’ll need to pick up and move, don’t worry about it. Your savings by not building/operating everything yourself will dwarf other costs (unless your business has huge scale and you have a world class internal cloud capability which you probably don’t and if you do, you can probably just negotiate a better deal from a cloud provider a la Netflix and Amazon). To that end, you only “save money” by managing everything yourself if you write off the cost of engineering time and talent, which is to say you lose money by doing it yourself because you don’t have the scale or talent to compete with Amazon even with their markup (certainly not when you account for opportunity cost).

threeseed 6y ago
Nobody is saying you have to build everything yourself. But you can just use cloud providers for their hardware and not needlessly tie yourself to their software. For example you can use a managed K8s solution like EKS but then have all of your monitoring, logging, databases etc all be self-hosted. And it's not just about cost but also about being able to take advantage of other cloud provider's unique strengths or being truly resilient to outages.
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  The same arguments apply to hardware and software. Cloud providers’ core competency is cloud infrastructure and services and they have the scale to economize their offerings. Your business very likely can’t compete with them, so to the extent that you’re owning things that cloud providers could sell you, you’re throwing away money and that figure very likely dwarfs the risk adjusted cost of maybe having to migrate to another provider one day. (Of course, there are services that are overpriced here and there, but the general principle holds).
- freehunter 6y ago
  > being able to take advantage of other cloud provider's unique strengths If you’re limiting yourself to using only easily portable services, you’re not going to be taking advantage of any cloud provider’s unique strengths anyway. So you might as well just pick one.