Why not try AppEngine Patch, you get the best of both gae and django.
-- www.MobiTheWeb.com Let's share the best mobile web experience. On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Bennomatic <readyass...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I could make a pretty good guess as to why it happened. Google's > major income is from advertising, and while they're not going broke > any time soon, the amount of money coming in from their advertising > has dropped significantly, and so things they could have done as loss > leaders to get more advertising dollars now are weighing more on the > budget, so they needed to lower the payment bar on this service. > > I'm sure they set the initial quotas with best intentions, but > crunching some numbers, found that it was not going to be profitable. > However, as with Gmail service, where the disk space available just > keeps growing and growing, I'd be willing to bet that as AppEngine > matures, we might see some new features and/or changes in quotas to > make it even more appealing than it was in the pre-quota-change days. > > That having been said, there may be other reasons for the change. > when they set the initial quotas, they did it based on a light- > processing app getting, IIRC, 5 million hits per month. That number > hasn't changed. It could very well be that when they set the quotas, > they were thinking of the 5 million hits per month and it turns out > that with proper accounting in place, what they were offering was > enough for 50 or 500 million. > > I understand your frustration. I do. And they certainly could have > handled this better so that it wouldn't feel like a bait-and-switch. > But at the end of the day, the amount of free service they are > offering is pretty substantial and for every case like yours I'd bet > there are hundreds of people who are going to be able to start a > business and get it profitable before they have to pay a dime. > > If this is for a non-profit organization, it still isn't the end of > the world. I'm sure that the organization has grant writers who could > get a $1,000/year grant to pay for the hosting without a problem, if > it's going to help them do their good works. Good luck; I hope that > the optimizations aren't too difficult, and that you can find some way > to stay under those quotas. Keep the community posted! > > On Feb 24, 6:12 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
