now look at spot instance comparisons
Or reserved capacity instances.
AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
21–30 of 168 posts
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#22Didn't even mention the difference in data costs, or S3 plus transfer, because then we'll be going into 2-orders-of-magnitude differences ...
Not to mention what happens when you pay per megabyte and someone ddos-es you. Cloud brought back almost all hosting antipatterns, and means denial-of-service attacks really should be renamed denial-of-wallet attacks. And leaving a single S3 bucket, a single Serverless function, a single ... available (not even open) makes you vulnerable if someone knows of figures out the URL.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#23I do like watching these comparisons however it reminds me of a conversation I had recently with my 10 year old. Son: Why does the croissant cost €2.80 here while it's only €0.45 in Lidl? Who would buy that? Me: You're not paying for the croissant, you're paying for the staff to give it to you, for the warm café, for the tables to be cleaned and for the seat to sit on.
The people cleaning and keeping the café warm are your Ops team. AWS is just an extremely expensive Lidl. EDIT: autocorrect typo, coffee to café
He means the location, not the fluid. My coffee better be hot, not warm.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#24S3 is also 10x more expensive than this single consumer grade second hand hard drive I have. Managed NAT gateways are also 10000x more expensive than my router. This is a boring argument that has been done to death.
As a CTO of a number of small startups, I am still struggling to understand what exactly AWS and other cloud providers give you to justify the markup.
And yes we’ve been heavy users of both AWS and Google Cloud for years, mainly because of the credits they initially provided, but also used VMs, dedicated servers and other services from Hetzner and OVH extensively.
In my experience, in terms of availability and security there’s not much difference in practice. There are tons of good tools nowadays to treat a physical server or a cluster of them as a cloud or a PaaS, it’s not really more work or responsibility, often it is actually simpler depending on the setup you choose. Most workloads do not require flexible compute capability and it’s also easy and fast to get it from these cheaper providers when you need to.
I feel like the industry has collectively accepted that Cloud prices are a cost of doing business and unquestionable, “nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM”. Thinking about costs from first principles is an important part of being an engineer.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#25I'm migrating my last AWS services to dedicated servers with Gitops.
In principle, AWS give you a few benefits that are worth paying for. In practice, I have seen all of them to be massive issues.
Price and performance are obviously bad. More annoying than that, their systems have arbitrary limitations that you may not be aware of because they're considered 'corner cases' -- e.g. my small use-case bumped against DNS limitation and the streaming of replies was not supported.
Then, you have a fairly steep learning curve with their products and their configuration DSLs.
There are Gitops solution that give you all the benefits that are promised by it, without any of the downsides or compromises. You just have to bite the bullet and learn kubernetes. It may be a bit more of a learning curve, but in my experience I would say not by much. And you have much more flexibility in the precise tech stack that you choose, so you can reduce it by using stuff you're already know well.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#26Pricing in AWS is heavily dependent on whether you reserve the instance and for how long.
In my experience, if you reserve a bare metal instance for 3 years (which is the biggest discount), it costs 2 times the price of buying it outright.
I'm surprised to hear about the numbers from the video being way different, but then, it's a video, so I didn't watch it and can't tell if he did use the correct pricing.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#27I do like watching these comparisons however it reminds me of a conversation I had recently with my 10 year old. Son: Why does the croissant cost €2.80 here while it's only €0.45 in Lidl? Who would buy that? Me: You're not paying for the croissant, you're paying for the staff to give it to you, for the warm café, for the tables to be cleaned and for the seat to sit on.
Good example.
I also like the "why does a bottle of water cost $5 after security at airports" example.
You have no choice. You’re locked in and can’t get out.
Maybe that’s the better analogy?
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#28I hate these comparisons because it's not apples to apples. The entire point of AWS is so you don't have to get a dedicated server. It's infra as a service.
I don’t understand your complaint. The point of having a private chef is so you don’t have to cook food by yourself. It’s still extremely useful to know if the private chef is cheaper or more expensive than cooking by yourself and by how much, so you can make a decision more aware of the trade offs involved.
it's not interesting as a standalone question indeed. The question is, what do you enable by having a private chef?
Is it the fact that you don't want to spend the time cooking? or is it cooking plus shopping plus cleaning up after?
Or is it counting the time to take cooking lessons? and including the cost of taking the bus to those cooking lessons?
Does the private chef even use your house, or their own kitchen? Or can you get a smaller house without a kitchen alltogether? Especially at the rate of kitchen improvement, where kitchens don't last 20 years anymore, you're gonna need a new kitchen every 5 years. (granted the analogy is starting to fail here, but you get my point)
Big companies have been terrible at managing costs and attributing value. At least with cloud the costs are somewhat clear. Also, finding staff that is skilled is a considerable expense for businesses with a more than a few pieces of code, and takes time, you can't just get them on a whim and get rid of them.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with this discussion is that a lot of people on these threads work as overpaid assistants to the one private chef, but also have never cooked at home. Translating: A lot of people work with AWS, are making bank, and are terrified of their skill set being made obsolete. They also have no idea what it means to use a dedicated server. That’s why we get the same tired arguments and assumptions (such as the be…
> such as the belief that bare-metal means “server room here in the office” I remember the day I discovered some companies, and not just tech ones (Walmart, UPS, Toyota,…) actually own, operate, and use their own datacenters. And there companies out there specialized in planning and building datacenters for them. I mean, it’s kind of obvious. But it made me realize at how small a scale I both thought and operated.
Walmart does not want to use AWS because they are in direct competition.
I worked for a company that was attempting to sell software to walmart.
Re: AWS is 10x slower than a dedicated server for the same price [video]
#30I do like watching these comparisons however it reminds me of a conversation I had recently with my 10 year old. Son: Why does the croissant cost €2.80 here while it's only €0.45 in Lidl? Who would buy that? Me: You're not paying for the croissant, you're paying for the staff to give it to you, for the warm café, for the tables to be cleaned and for the seat to sit on.
More often than not, I’d rather avoid the self-focused staff who rarely give it to you with hygiene in mind and at this time of the year in the northern hemisphere are likely to be sick, the mediocre coffee (price surge in coffee beans), and the dirty tables at a café, and the uncomfortable seating. And it’s rather 5€ for the croissant alone, in many places these days. Lidl’s croissants aren’t very good but they’re only marginally less good than what you can hope for at a café. McDonald’s croissants in Italy are quite ok by the way.