Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? It is still up, and working just as it used to.
That won't last. https://www.heroku.com/blog/an-update-on-heroku/
Uhoh. I don't know what that means, but I unfortunately detect double-speak.
I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
171–180 of 684 posts
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't know in advance how much bandwidth will you use, how much traffic will you have, what auto-scaling rule will it trigger, etc. It's not obfuscation, it's billing based on your usage. And as with everything in life, there are tradeoffs.
Sure, but providing estimated costs based on reasonable pricing buckets alongside the options to add the new machine is something that every other vendor manages to do..
...and AWS does it too. I can go right into an account and see an estimated cost per hour, and even pre-pay at a fixed discount for longer terms if I want to. They tell me right there what it will cost. They do this for everything that is reasonably a "fixed cost", like CPU time.
They cannot predict what my bandwidth consumption will be, or other such variable costs. For those, they tell you rates.
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have a problem with their business model, then. License changes to a formerly open source project are costly. The community reacts very strongly when license terms change after they've come to depend on a product, and they should. Why do we apply this standard to MongoDB but not to Apache, Linux, Postgres, or MariaDB? One purpose of an open source license is to allow many providers to provide the service. As I'v…
agreed. i’m no aws apologist but if you’re going to try to monetize open source and then complain when someone else does it more efficiently/effectively, it really feels disingenuous. “we were going to do that, but they got there first. it’s not fair.” i’m only familiar with the postgres side, but it seems like a more nuanced view of this debate would be to discuss aws monetizing open source relative to their upstrea…
Honestly, this is so divorced from reality that I'm curious if you've ever actually spoken to a CFO before.
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#174> If you're using AWS Lambda then you have to work to keep convincing yourself this is better than your own web servers. Keep convincing yourself that using AWS Lambda is not a horrible mistake. lol ok. I have ~50 lambdas running in my personal aws account. Some of them are webservers running behind an api gateway or using a lambda function url to expose them to the internet. Some are running on a schedule, some are…
> The cost to run these for me is less than the cost of the cheapest vps (my total requests per month stay under the free tier limit).
I don't think this is a valid argument. Free-tier VPS do exist also.
On the other hand, if you don't trust unattended-upgrades [0], and prefer to spend time poking package manager manually (while at the same time considering that time an expense) - sure, that's a strong argument in favour of using lambda.
[0] https://ubuntu.com/server/docs/how-to/software/automatic-upd...
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#175Years ago, I joined a company, took over a dev team and was asked to launch the product in 3 months. They were using AWS, so I logged in the account to add a few more machines. Right there, in front of my eyes, were the signs of an adversarial, abusive relationship. The UI to fire up a new machine did not show me the price. I had to look up the price in another table that did not have the specs. I had to have the two…
So this project had a three month timeline and provisioning the cloud resources maybe took an extra hour or two because of crosschecking? I actually prefer the dedicated calculator pages and product pages because it gives you more insight into how things are billed. I think this is a strange thing to get hung up on, IMHO, especially as a lead / manager of developers.
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#176Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there's plenty of room for people to object to the "had to change licenses" framing. They chose to change licenses, same as they chose the original license. That original license probably helped them with goodwill and to gain a community; when those benefits no longer exceeded the downsides of using that license, they changed licenses to one that suited them better. Naturally, this change costs them some amou…
I don't see this as an issue with the company. They were happy to release their code as OSS, as long as that allowed them to make enough money to develop the software. It was a win/win, and them AWS came and took advantage of that. If you leave some apples at the side of the road, with a sign "$1 per apple" or whatever, and people largely pay enough for you to continue to pick apples, that's great. If someone starts…
In this allegory, did AWS take all the apples in the crate while paying them $1 for every apple, thus becoming the bad guy?
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#178Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't know in advance how much bandwidth will you use, how much traffic will you have, what auto-scaling rule will it trigger, etc. It's not obfuscation, it's billing based on your usage. And as with everything in life, there are tradeoffs.
Price simulators are fine. They also know the distribution of use. They can do cost plus pricing (many cloud providers do). You're defending deliberately obfuscated pricing when it need not be obfuscated.
> Price simulators are fine.
Yes, as long as you do not have seasonal traffic, auto-scaling, spot instances, burstable instances, saving plans, reserved instances, floor/custom pricing, etc. These are tools to optimize your spendings and spend less if you know what you are doing.
> defending deliberately obfuscated pricing
A bit contradictory that price simulators are fine, but then the pricing is deliberately obfuscated. Then which one?
Re: I returned to AWS and was reminded why I left
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they can charge me for it then they can calculate it and show it to me. Anything else is obfuscation.
They don't know in advance how much bandwidth will you use, how much traffic will you have, what auto-scaling rule will it trigger, etc. It's not obfuscation, it's billing based on your usage. And as with everything in life, there are tradeoffs.
Give me a slider for bandwidth used or a formula where the variables are abstracted away. If a computer can tell me how much I owe, a computer can be made to show how it came to it’s conclusion.