4 ms·
So these are for people who want to do quick compatibility testing? For that use case, how does it not make more sense to go with MacStadium? If you end up need
by cjaybo 6y ago
So these are for people who want to do quick compatibility testing? For that use case, how does it not make more sense to go with MacStadium? If you end up needing to test for two days instead of one, you're already in the pricing territory where you could have gotten a full month of usage from MacStadium.
- 0x44 6y ago> how does it not make more sense to go with MacStadium? If you're already in AWS, your deployment infrastructure and tooling is already configured and tuned for AWS. Deploying a Mac EC2 instance is just adding another target. Whereas deploying to another provider is an unknown amount of work to integrate with their API (if they even have one). The wall-time cost of people's time and effort vastly outweighs the marginal savings you'd get by going with a low-cost provider.
- Technically 6y agoPresumably if you're making a mac app (or ios app), you're not targeting EC2 at all. Even if you have a server component to your mac app, the deployment infrastructure is completely unrelated to the client pipeline—it's tough to see how you could integrate any AWS benefits into this pipeline. If you're just writing a server, there's no need to deploy to a mac, and indeed it would be extremely expensive. Where exactly would this shared infrastructure come into play? The single use case that makes sense to me is an infrequently-used CI server for a cross-platform app—something already offered at better rates from CI providers.
- inopinatus 6y agoI will spend more time trying (with no great chance of succcess) to obtain authorisation to establish an additional commercial relationship, and corporate billing/card approval, and the time burned on this instantly exceeds any amount of money they could possibly save me.