41–50 of 59 posts
Nothing gets more techy than servers. Why I would hire a tech company that uses pre 2000 design and static pages from 2006 to sell me on their modern tech solution is beyond me.
I would like to see a blog post describing how it has worked for the company, with a link to the CEO page. But this seems like a great idea!
The short answer is that we've made a (philosophical) decision to stay right in our highly technical niche and not gussy up our site, or product, with all of the things you might expect to see. This resonates very well with the people that find us and will eventually use us, but the people that make decisions and pay us are not impressed with what they see. So if we're not going to put up the PDF whitepapers and the…
This makes _my_ job easier, thank you.
Towards the bottom it reads:
>Depending on the size, this could be as low as 7 cents per GB, per month - which is cheaper than Amazon S3.
However, after looking at both the pricing and signup page, it appears as though the lowest you can get is $0.08 per GB, and that's only if you buy 10TB of space. That's also for a SINGLE off-site location. This is the equivalent of "Reduced Redundancy Storage" at Amazon, which starts at $0.076 per GB. However, if you want to compare apples to apples, you would compare it to the 10TB pricing.
10TB Single off-site @ rsync - $9,500/yr
10TB Single off-site @ AWSs3 - $8,011/yr
10TB Multiple off-site @ rsync - $16,625/yr
10TB Multiple off-site @ AWSs3 - $10,009/yr
Every time rsync posts something on HN or Reddit, its always filled with FUD.
Imho, you should call it the CIO page instead, but perhaps that varies depending what kinds of businesses you're targeting. In most medium and large enterprises, the CIO will have budget authority to make these kinds of decisions independently and the CEO will never be involved at all, unless the topic of backups & DR arise in a board or audit meeting.
Better that a CIO gets a "CEO page" than a CEO gets a "CIO page" :) Ironically, I'm the CEO here and I wouldn't want to see any of these ...
So the concept of this is to create a misleading page such that the CEO of a company would be tricked into signing off on an otherwise overpriced service? Towards the bottom it reads: >Depending on the size, this could be as low as 7 cents per GB, per month - which is cheaper than Amazon S3. However, after looking at both the pricing and signup page, it appears as though the lowest you can get is $0.08 per GB, and th…
So the concept of this is to create a misleading page such that the CEO of a company would be tricked into signing off on an otherwise overpriced service? Towards the bottom it reads: >Depending on the size, this could be as low as 7 cents per GB, per month - which is cheaper than Amazon S3. However, after looking at both the pricing and signup page, it appears as though the lowest you can get is $0.08 per GB, and th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The short answer is that we've made a (philosophical) decision to stay right in our highly technical niche and not gussy up our site, or product, with all of the things you might expect to see. This resonates very well with the people that find us and will eventually use us, but the people that make decisions and pay us are not impressed with what they see. So if we're not going to put up the PDF whitepapers and the…
So I'm guessing that the technical folks in the company send a link to this page to their CEO in order to convince them of the purchase?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I'm guessing that the technical folks in the company send a link to this page to their CEO in order to convince them of the purchase?
How often would the CEO even be involved? Very small companies excepted, I would think this would be something entirely delegated to the CTO, manager, or whoever is in charge of technology in the organization.
So the concept of this is to create a misleading page such that the CEO of a company would be tricked into signing off on an otherwise overpriced service? Towards the bottom it reads: >Depending on the size, this could be as low as 7 cents per GB, per month - which is cheaper than Amazon S3. However, after looking at both the pricing and signup page, it appears as though the lowest you can get is $0.08 per GB, and th…
So the concept of this is to create a misleading page such that the CEO of a company would be tricked into signing off on an otherwise overpriced service? Towards the bottom it reads: >Depending on the size, this could be as low as 7 cents per GB, per month - which is cheaper than Amazon S3. However, after looking at both the pricing and signup page, it appears as though the lowest you can get is $0.08 per GB, and th…
First, our pricing almost exactly matching S3 is not a secret - it's well understood, and by design.
Second, you'll note that the following features of a 10TB account with us are not included with S3:
- Free integration engineering (as in, a unix engineer on the phone with you)
- 24/7 hotline support - as in, xmas morning phonecalls
- two physical media shipments of any size per year
- We will sign a BAA with you
Ask your contact at Amazon what those would cost next time you talk to them. Oh wait, you've never ever talked to anyone at Amazon and you never will[1]
So you're right - it's not apples to apples.
[1] Except, of course, at AWS summit and so on, where they are very available and helpful.