3 ms·

> Text-to-Speech API Better & 8x Cheaper than AWS Having "Better" on the title of your landing page probably isn't the best idea. This is such a subjective ter

by _gabe_ 4y ago

> Text-to-Speech API Better & 8x Cheaper than AWS Having "Better" on the title of your landing page probably isn't the best idea. This is such a subjective territory that it's very difficult to say that one voice sounds better than another unless you have a blind poll with at least a few hundred people claiming they preferred your product over AWS. It doesn't matter if you can argue its better, it only matters if you can show that the vast majority of your target demographic prefers your product over AWS, which I couldn't find any evidence of.

freedomben 4y ago
I respectfully disagree. I think it's great to have on the landing page. "Better" is a pretty clearly subjective term so I immediately know it's somebody's opinion. The fact that you can directly compare them also makes it so you can decide for yourself within seconds. The "8x cheaper than AWS" feels deceptive though. The pricing is not apples to apples so it's only 8x cheaper at the most favorable point in the graph (when spending $1,000 a month and using exactly the number of characters offered). For me that's outrageously more expensive than AWS. It's more like 8x more expensive than AWS rather than 8x cheaper, which is such a dramatic swing I wondered if I was misreading the pricing somehow. My usage on Polly last month was about $75 but the month before was $5 and this month will be closer to $20. It's a real shame because after hearing the output I was ready to move everything over. I should have looked at pricing before getting excited, but I took the 8x claim at face value. I use a lot of AWS Polly neural and have listened to a hundred or so hours of Polly output (building an MVP/prototype). The cost of AWS is high (for me as an independent dev) but I've tried several other services and none have been as good at making natural speech (the kind one could tolerate for an audiobook for example). If this was cheaper or if I could buy a small time license and run it on my own hardware (which takes the heavy costs away from Unreal) I would totally do that. Alternatively, I'd be willing to pay close to AWS pricing for a pay as you go, with a one-at-a-time rate-limit in place (to avoid the scaling/provisioning challenges on the ops side). I know it's not likely to happen, but just wanted to throw it out there.

by _gabe_ 4y ago

freedomben 4y ago

I respectfully disagree. I think it's great to have on the landing page. "Better" is a pretty clearly subjective term so I immediately know it's somebody's opinion. The fact that you can directly compare them also makes it so you can decide for yourself within seconds. The "8x cheaper than AWS" feels deceptive though. The pricing is not apples to apples so it's only 8x cheaper at the most favorable point in the graph (when spending $1,000 a month and using exactly the number of characters offered). For me that's outrageously more expensive than AWS. It's more like 8x more expensive than AWS rather than 8x cheaper, which is such a dramatic swing I wondered if I was misreading the pricing somehow. My usage on Polly last month was about $75 but the month before was $5 and this month will be closer to $20. It's a real shame because after hearing the output I was ready to move everything over. I should have looked at pricing before getting excited, but I took the 8x claim at face value. I use a lot of AWS Polly neural and have listened to a hundred or so hours of Polly output (building an MVP/prototype). The cost of AWS is high (for me as an independent dev) but I've tried several other services and none have been as good at making natural speech (the kind one could tolerate for an audiobook for example). If this was cheaper or if I could buy a small time license and run it on my own hardware (which takes the heavy costs away from Unreal) I would totally do that. Alternatively, I'd be willing to pay close to AWS pricing for a pay as you go, with a one-at-a-time rate-limit in place (to avoid the scaling/provisioning challenges on the ops side). I know it's not likely to happen, but just wanted to throw it out there.