@Greg, Can you provide more clarity on this Instance Hours thing? App engine was attractive because the pricing was for actual CPU consumed as against paying for idle time. And the way GAE forces everything like deferred tasks, queues, cron jobs, etc., into new web requests made sense only as long as it was CPU based billing. Imagine someone doing things this way on instance based platforms like EC2.
Can someone please clarify how the Instance based billing will impact apps based on single threaded python runtime? $9 upfront payment also sounds absurd, just to have ability to exceed free quota. Can't that be made as SLA + SSL + whatever_extra_some_apps_want fees for those who want it? I can understand reducing free quota limits and maybe increasing prices to achieve your 2x-4x increases. It's hard to accept tiered pricing and instance hour based pricing. Thanks, Vinuth. On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Vanni.T <vanni.tot...@gmail.com> wrote: > Lol, de Witte... an even better way is to observe almost all users > disabling billing for their applications in the next months. And then stop > uploading new apps... and then disabling and finally deleting them. > > Be fast changing your mind, Google. B E F A S T. > > Vanni > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
