3 ms·

I see no mention of bandwidth pricing. Some time ago, I evaluated the pricing for someone who was thinking of moving a web server from a traditional private se

by cesarb 5y ago

I see no mention of bandwidth pricing. Some time ago, I evaluated the pricing for someone who was thinking of moving a web server from a traditional private server to AWS. It seemed that the monthly cost would be lower, until I looked at the bandwidth cost. The monthly price of that traditional private server, which included a fixed bandwidth limit, ended up being lower than what it would cost just for the bandwidth on AWS.

partiallypro 5y ago
In some ways AWS locks in its customers with their egress pricing. It can be so expensive to move away because of the egress that it's economically not viable. I don't think that's a mistake. I have a feeling in a number of years this could be reviewed by governments.
uuyi 5y ago
Oh yes egress pricing is horrible. That’s why AWS/S3 looks nice to backup to but that first restore costs big time. One killer no one seems to notice is the bandwidth between availability zones. When you have a proper best practice cross AZ deployment it can be rather expensive. But still cheaper than switches and humans and cages and data centre contracts.
bgro 5y ago
There's so many variables. I was looking into moving my stuff into the cloud to throw out some physical hard drives. I haven't committed to anything yet but I was surprised to see dropbox is somehow cheaper than AWS. Isn't dropbox just an entire extra company that makes a layer slapped on top of AWS?
- xhkkffbf 5y ago
  That used to be the case, but they set up their own server farms a while ago. It was a big project but it allowed them to undercut AWS now. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3044261/dropbox-quits-amazon-aws-s3-itbwcw.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3044261/dropbox-quits-...
lightlyused 5y ago
Lift and shift is never a good thing unless you have plans to decrease your spend in areas like egress.
antifa 5y ago
I'm really suprised you found a VPS that was cheaper before AWS bandwidth kicks in, usually that's only possible with serverless.

by cesarb 5y ago

partiallypro 5y ago

In some ways AWS locks in its customers with their egress pricing. It can be so expensive to move away because of the egress that it's economically not viable. I don't think that's a mistake. I have a feeling in a number of years this could be reviewed by governments.

uuyi 5y ago

Oh yes egress pricing is horrible. That’s why AWS/S3 looks nice to backup to but that first restore costs big time. One killer no one seems to notice is the bandwidth between availability zones. When you have a proper best practice cross AZ deployment it can be rather expensive. But still cheaper than switches and humans and cages and data centre contracts.

bgro 5y ago

There's so many variables. I was looking into moving my stuff into the cloud to throw out some physical hard drives. I haven't committed to anything yet but I was surprised to see dropbox is somehow cheaper than AWS. Isn't dropbox just an entire extra company that makes a layer slapped on top of AWS?

xhkkffbf 5y ago
That used to be the case, but they set up their own server farms a while ago. It was a big project but it allowed them to undercut AWS now. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3044261/dropbox-quits-amazon-aws-s3-itbwcw.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3044261/dropbox-quits-...

lightlyused 5y ago

Lift and shift is never a good thing unless you have plans to decrease your spend in areas like egress.

antifa 5y ago

I'm really suprised you found a VPS that was cheaper before AWS bandwidth kicks in, usually that's only possible with serverless.