Michael J McCafferty wrote:
<nice comparison snipped>
My point of this is not to say we are cheaper and all shall forsake AWS
and buy from us. My point is that if price is your only criteria, and it
is almost always not, then it is not a forgone conclusion that AWS is
the cheapest.
This has changed, apparently. Thanks for the comparison.
When I last looked at bandwidth (admittedly, probably better than a year
ago), AWS was stomping over everybody and I had to commit to 250Mb/s to
even get close to AWS.
Nice to see that a little competition seems to be bringing bandwidth
down to something reasonable. I also note that the hyperbole
surrounding Virtual Private Servers is levelling out. I don't see the
10TB bandwidth quotes that I used to. Funny that.
We aren't even the cheapest on bandwidth. But, it sure is
handy that with a dynamic environment, you can pay only for what you
use.
That's true. I do wish some of the hosting companies were a little more
flexible in this regard. Amazon clearly touched a nerve with this.
Buried in their last quarter report is the fact that AWS now uses more
bandwidth than the rest of Amazon's operations combined.
That's really amazing when you think about it.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
