ridruejo

55 ms·

601.
by ridruejo 15y ago
I simply do not see how competing cloud vendors can keep up with this. Most of them are still struggling to provide anything beyond a simple API to start/stop machines.
602.
by ridruejo 15y ago
It is available for all customers, just not yet translated
603.
by ridruejo 15y ago
I know what fierarul means, he is the one that did not understand my comment. As an aside, I find it kind of funny that people would feel "irritated" by a move like this. The end goal of this for Amazon is to eventually get more customers i
604.
by ridruejo 15y ago
If you already qualified for the free tier, meaning that you are already enjoying it because you signed within the last year, then it still applies to you. So it also applies to existing customers (who qualify for the free tier)
605.
by ridruejo 15y ago
At $0.10 / Gb, it is cheaper to pay the extra storage than go through the trouble of installing from scratch
606.
by ridruejo 15y ago
If you already qualified for the free tier, you will still be able to have access to it, so it is not only for new customers but also for existing customers that qualified
607.
by ridruejo 15y ago
I am surprised nobody so far has mentioned AWS as a hosting provider. You can start with their free micro instance plan for one year ( http://aws.amazon.com/free ) and resize the server as needed. Having the ability to take a snapshot of th
608.
Django Stack(bitnami.org)
2 points by ridruejo 15y ago|0 comments
609.
Stratfor CEO response to hacking incident(stratfor.com)
2 points by ridruejo 15y ago|0 comments
610.
by ridruejo 15y ago
You can resize the machines or take snapshots from the AWS console, no need to use the API. Some people prefer to simplify it further and use something like BitNami to manage it, but there are options to the API. Our infrastructure runs on
611.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Those providers do, in turn, run on top of AWS so in a way you are still running on Amazon's platform. At one point that layer will be standardized as well (and at the speed AWS is going, sooner than later...)
612.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Yes, I was referring to 'traditional' hosting. The VMWare vcloud offering is actually quite interesting in the ease with which you can migrate from on premise to public vcloud providers. Still way more expensive that just going the Amazon r
613.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Though it may seem silly, it is not always about cost and performance. In many cases, EC2 allows you much more flexibility than a traditional dedicated server. One example, for EBS-based servers it is possible to clone the entire server wit
614.
by ridruejo 15y ago
If you are doing PHP or Ruby development on Mac you may be interested in BitNami stacks http://bitnami.org/stacks (disclaimer I am one of the BitNami developers) They allow you to have local, self-contained, pre-configured development an
615.
New AWS feature: monitor your estimated charges with Cloudwatch(blog.bitnami.org)
4 points by ridruejo 15y ago|0 comments
616.
by ridruejo 15y ago
His point was that it is a gamble as part of a greater strategy
617.
by ridruejo 15y ago
The lessons they learned look very similar to the Y-Combinator selection criteria
618.
Steve Blank: The startup team(steveblank.com)
3 points by ridruejo 15y ago|0 comments
619.
by ridruejo 15y ago
The problem tends to be not only compiling PHP itself but the myriad of dependencies for modules, so I assume the project also simplifies the process of downloading and installing those. This is similar to what the BitNami LAMPStack install
620.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Forget the virus kill switch, what I found fascinating from the article were his accomplishments. Usually a lot of great things come out of the intersection of deep knowledge from two different fields (say, medicine and software). If you co
621.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Yes, that is also an issue for us, we provide a large number of downloads (virtual machines, installers) that go into the TB and it would be quite expensive to move that over to EC2. One nice feature of Amazon, if you can afford it, is the
622.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Thanks for sharing the experience. In your particular case it seems the right decision to move to a dedicated provider. The reasoning was similar to GitHub's ( https://github.com/blog/493-github-is-moving-to-rackspace ) Cloud environments
623.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Sorry, that's nonsense. Each one of the systems is going to have a different schema and constraints for users, posts, comments, votes, that most likely will not have a one-to-one mapping.
624.
by ridruejo 15y ago
The problem is that you need to move the content, user accounts, ratings, etc. from one system to another. The existing system has to had an API to export that information in a format that the new system can understand. If you have that, th
625.
by ridruejo 15y ago
OSQA is based on Django, which makes it somewhat harder to deploy. I know because we package it as a BitNami stack http://bitnami.org/stack/osqa and also use it for our Q/A site http://answers.bitnami.org Without actually having test
626.
Ask HN: Third-party applications that run on Heroku
1 points by ridruejo 15y ago|0 comments
627.
by ridruejo 15y ago
You pay a fixed price for the reservation and then per-usage fees. Usage fees will drop as Amazon reduces them, but the reservation is a one-time deal
628.
by ridruejo 15y ago
In addition to reserved instances, there are a couple of other ways you can achieve cost-savings for common situations. If you need to run background tasks (like video encoding, reports, etc) you can try running spot instances at a fraction
629.
by ridruejo 15y ago
Well, if we are talking about bigger instances, then it is not "budget VPS" anymore either :) Still, depending on your needs (and specially if you combine with reserved instances, which can drive the cost 50%) it can be quite cost-effecti
630.
by ridruejo 15y ago
You still get 15GB for free in the free tier, which should be ok for many use cases

More ›