8 ms·

What's your point? What you said changes nothing for people like tieTYT and me.

themartorana 12y ago
If you want to play with VPS servers, use DO. If you want to virtualize a data-center or series of globally-connected data centers with racks of servers, use AWS. So maybe AWS isn't the right solution for you. You say in another comment that warnings about billing overages aren't enough. AWS can't hold your hand and provide Netflix-capable services at the same time. Amazon chose the latter. I would recommend you not choose AWS until you have the time to dedicate to it.
- oafitupa 12y ago
  How is being able to set up a $ limit "holding my hand"? You guys are defending something that is indefensible. I don't want to "play" with VPS servers, I want to work knowing that I won't go bankrupt just because I'm using at the same time a service that won't let me set up a limit, and a pull payment system (ie. credit cards, as opposed to push systems like Bitcoin).
  - politician 12y ago
    Can you use a pre-paid credit card with Amazon? (Not that that would absolve you of owing the balance - but they might halt your account for lack of payment and prevent further charges from accruing).
    - ivanhoe 12y ago
      AWS charges are monthly so it won't help much (also they don't immediately pull the plug, they send you the email warning first). One just needs to setup the alarms and pay attention when deploying a new code. It sounds far more scary than it really is.
  - mentat 12y ago
    If you don't want to bankrupt yourself then check your usage every day or hour. It's still your responsibility not your vendor's.
    - oafitupa 12y ago
      Like it or not this is a problem many of us have, and are avoiding AWS for that sole reason. You can keep blaming the victim, or you can accept not being able to set up a limit is a usability problem. It's like saying "this website is stupid, it's storing passwords in plaintext", and you answering "hurr, it's the user's responsibility to create and manage cryptographically secure passwords".
      - jalfresi 12y ago
        You're not a victim! Youre inability to control your costs, given the tools, alarms and general common sense doesn't entitle you to some magic off button! Learn to use the tools appropriately and you won't incur unexpected costs. And as an analogy, Aws is more like C; if you are willing to put the time in to learn, you can do some amazing things that are impossible with other providers. But you must take responsibility for them.
        RemoteWorker 12y ago
        How is a simple configurable limite a "magic button"? What extreme technical difficulties do you see in implementing it, that warranted you calling it "magic"?
        tobz 12y ago
        Because it would tear down the entire stack? If you're a real business, depending on servers to be up and data to stick around, then it makes absolutely no sense to have machines shut off and volumes deleted if you hit some arbitrary marker. There's nothing you get for free in AWS (besides the Free tier, and not many people are running their entire, highly profitable business on that) and the only solution to "not spend more than $X per month" is to literally shut down and delete things. I'd love to hear use cases where legitimate businesses, who make money off of the products or services they offer, can literally afford to have their business just stop working. It sounds totally contrived.
  - jamornh 12y ago
    I imagine that they decided not to have $ limit as implementing that would be once you hit the $ limit, they will take your whole stack down completely. This includes anything you've had setup on AWS, which could be hundreds of instances of any of their services... which may or may not be feasible to do instantaneously or safely (without you losing data or breaking something.) Imagine pulling systems down in the wrong order or while writes or reads are being done... you now have no guarantee that your data will be in a good state. It's always best to leave termination of your client's systems up to the client than to pull the plug out from under them... at least I'd like to think that's how they would have reasoned it internally.
  - spdustin 12y ago
    You can have a $ limit. Use a CloudWatch alarm that shuts down your instances if the billing metric exceeds the growth rate you specify for the period you specify.
  - ci5er 12y ago
    It's not "playing": reading is fundamental. Their billing rules are clear. It could be argued that their vocabulary for describing the billing rules takes a bit of figuring out. I have a client that didn't understand either the rules or my instructions and did something silly and ran up a $5000 bill, when he was thinking it would be $100~$200. We called Amazon and they cancelled the bill. Amazon is very easy to work with, if you simply tell them that you are an idiot and fucked up. You're not the only one.
- blibble 12y ago
  you could protect yourself by setting up a limited liability company (cost in the uk is about £14), then your assets aren't at risk if something goes very very wrong... Amazon probably should do a credit check before offering thousands of pounds in credit... (I am not a lawyer and this should not be taken as legal advice)
e40 12y ago
Perhaps you missed this part: (They also almost always help out or completely forgive someone that accidentally ran up a massive bill in a short period of time.)
- oafitupa 12y ago
  I addressed that in other comment: I don't want to have to rely on that. For starters, there is no real data about that, just anecdotes. How do I know they will reimburse non-US customers too? Many companies have that policy: They protect US customers because they can sue them, but people from other countries can only complain on the internet.
  - eropple 12y ago
    Then you can wire up a CloudWatch alarm to burn everything down, just like you want, without Amazon doing a thing. But, and I don't say this lightly, your behavior in this thread makes me think you just want to complain.

If you want to play with VPS servers, use DO. If you want to virtualize a data-center or series of globally-connected data centers with racks of servers, use AWS. So maybe AWS isn't the right solution for you. You say in another comment that warnings about billing overages aren't enough. AWS can't hold your hand and provide Netflix-capable services at the same time. Amazon chose the latter. I would recommend you not choose AWS until you have the time to dedicate to it.

oafitupa 12y ago
How is being able to set up a $ limit "holding my hand"? You guys are defending something that is indefensible. I don't want to "play" with VPS servers, I want to work knowing that I won't go bankrupt just because I'm using at the same time a service that won't let me set up a limit, and a pull payment system (ie. credit cards, as opposed to push systems like Bitcoin).
- politician 12y ago
  Can you use a pre-paid credit card with Amazon? (Not that that would absolve you of owing the balance - but they might halt your account for lack of payment and prevent further charges from accruing).
  - ivanhoe 12y ago
    AWS charges are monthly so it won't help much (also they don't immediately pull the plug, they send you the email warning first). One just needs to setup the alarms and pay attention when deploying a new code. It sounds far more scary than it really is.
- mentat 12y ago
  If you don't want to bankrupt yourself then check your usage every day or hour. It's still your responsibility not your vendor's.
  - oafitupa 12y ago
    Like it or not this is a problem many of us have, and are avoiding AWS for that sole reason. You can keep blaming the victim, or you can accept not being able to set up a limit is a usability problem. It's like saying "this website is stupid, it's storing passwords in plaintext", and you answering "hurr, it's the user's responsibility to create and manage cryptographically secure passwords".
    - jalfresi 12y ago
      You're not a victim! Youre inability to control your costs, given the tools, alarms and general common sense doesn't entitle you to some magic off button! Learn to use the tools appropriately and you won't incur unexpected costs. And as an analogy, Aws is more like C; if you are willing to put the time in to learn, you can do some amazing things that are impossible with other providers. But you must take responsibility for them.
      - RemoteWorker 12y ago
        How is a simple configurable limite a "magic button"? What extreme technical difficulties do you see in implementing it, that warranted you calling it "magic"?
        tobz 12y ago
        Because it would tear down the entire stack? If you're a real business, depending on servers to be up and data to stick around, then it makes absolutely no sense to have machines shut off and volumes deleted if you hit some arbitrary marker. There's nothing you get for free in AWS (besides the Free tier, and not many people are running their entire, highly profitable business on that) and the only solution to "not spend more than $X per month" is to literally shut down and delete things. I'd love to hear use cases where legitimate businesses, who make money off of the products or services they offer, can literally afford to have their business just stop working. It sounds totally contrived.
- jamornh 12y ago
  I imagine that they decided not to have $ limit as implementing that would be once you hit the $ limit, they will take your whole stack down completely. This includes anything you've had setup on AWS, which could be hundreds of instances of any of their services... which may or may not be feasible to do instantaneously or safely (without you losing data or breaking something.) Imagine pulling systems down in the wrong order or while writes or reads are being done... you now have no guarantee that your data will be in a good state. It's always best to leave termination of your client's systems up to the client than to pull the plug out from under them... at least I'd like to think that's how they would have reasoned it internally.
- spdustin 12y ago
  You can have a $ limit. Use a CloudWatch alarm that shuts down your instances if the billing metric exceeds the growth rate you specify for the period you specify.
- ci5er 12y ago
  It's not "playing": reading is fundamental. Their billing rules are clear. It could be argued that their vocabulary for describing the billing rules takes a bit of figuring out. I have a client that didn't understand either the rules or my instructions and did something silly and ran up a $5000 bill, when he was thinking it would be $100~$200. We called Amazon and they cancelled the bill. Amazon is very easy to work with, if you simply tell them that you are an idiot and fucked up. You're not the only one.
blibble 12y ago
you could protect yourself by setting up a limited liability company (cost in the uk is about £14), then your assets aren't at risk if something goes very very wrong... Amazon probably should do a credit check before offering thousands of pounds in credit... (I am not a lawyer and this should not be taken as legal advice)

e40 12y ago

Perhaps you missed this part: (They also almost always help out or completely forgive someone that accidentally ran up a massive bill in a short period of time.)

oafitupa 12y ago
I addressed that in other comment: I don't want to have to rely on that. For starters, there is no real data about that, just anecdotes. How do I know they will reimburse non-US customers too? Many companies have that policy: They protect US customers because they can sue them, but people from other countries can only complain on the internet.
- eropple 12y ago
  Then you can wire up a CloudWatch alarm to burn everything down, just like you want, without Amazon doing a thing. But, and I don't say this lightly, your behavior in this thread makes me think you just want to complain.