b.j. Actually yours is exactly my point of view and I think that it's the point of many people.
On Feb 26, 5:34 am, "B.J." <bjp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Agreed. As I said, "Shame on me." > > On Feb 25, 10:27 pm, Josh Cronemeyer <joshuacroneme...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I'm not saying you shouldn't be complainin, because lots of us were > > surprised by the new "official" quota numbers and the new accounting, but I > > will say that you certainly undertook a big risk by investing in a > > technology as new and raw as app engine. Given the limitations and concerns > > in your email I wouldn't have recommended you to set sail with the first > > group of settlers to the far shores of google's nacent cloud computing > > offering. Maybe you should have held off to see if we all got swallowed up > > by sea monsters. Good luck! > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 8:12 PM, B.J. <bjp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I don't know that I have ever whined at an organization like Google > > > for trying to make money. > > > > That's changing with this message. > > > > By my calculations, it could cost me $1000 over the next year to host > > > my app that I had anticipated being hosted under the quotas. It may > > > cost me nothing.... right now our usage is just under the daily CPU > > > limits. If the traffic doesn't grow, no problem But whose goal is it > > > for an app not to get more usage? > > > > My only real gripe is that App Engine caused me to invest a lot of > > > effort in shoe-horning my app into the "Google Way". I did that with > > > the understanding that the trade-off was a certain amount of free > > > hosting. Was that a promise? Of course not. Is Google under any > > > obligation to meet my expectation? No. > > > > However, as I attempt to further optimize the application in an effort > > > to not exceed limits, the future of the application is now in > > > question. This is not a profit deal. I gave away my time in an > > > effort to help an organization. Had I known this change was coming, I > > > probably would have chosen a different solution. Because of the > > > "vendor lock-in" of App Engine, the end result of all this may be > > > simply turning the app off and letting the organization do without. > > > (or find someone else to help them out.) Better that than hit daily > > > free limits or find money out of someone's pocket. > > > > Look $1000/year is not a big deal for world-class hosting. I get it. > > > I also understand that the free quotas are only there to get people > > > "hooked" such as it were. I guess I wish had listened to those who > > > said, "Don't do App Engine. They'll lock you in and change the deal. > > > It's not portable enough." > > > > Shame on me, I guess. > > > > And before people chime in with all the, "You could always move it > > > to...", or "If you had just written it this way... " or "It's a > > > business, of course they're trying to get you to go over the limits.." > > > please.... don't. > > > > This is just a note to let the people at Google know there is a very > > > real cost to changing the deal on people. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
