Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing S2

s2.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 206 posts

Re: Introducing S2

#111

Post by animex »

IANAL,but naming your product S2 and mentioning in the intro that AWS S3 is the tech you are enhancing is probably looking for a branding/copyright claim from Amazon. Same vertical & definitely will cause consumer confusion. I'm sure you've done the research about whether a trademark has been registered.

https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98324800&caseSearchType=U...

Re: Introducing S2

#113

Post by shikhar »

evantbyrne wrote: post #106
shikhar wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Founder) We are happy for S2 API to have alternate implementations, we are considering an in-memory emulator to open source ourselves. It is not a very complicated API. If you would prefer to stick with the Kafka API but benefit from features like S2's storage classes or having a very large number of topics/partitions or high throughput per partition, we are planning an open source Kafka compatibility layer that can…

First-class kafka compatibility could go a long way to making it a justifiable tech choice. When orgs go heavy on event streaming, that code gets _everywhere_, so a vendor off-ramp is needed.

(Founder) That makes sense. We would eventually host the Kafka layer too - and will be able to avoid a hop by inlining our edge service logic in there.

Re: Introducing S2

#114

Post by volemo »

animex wrote: post #111

IANAL,but naming your product S2 and mentioning in the intro that AWS S3 is the tech you are enhancing is probably looking for a branding/copyright claim from Amazon. Same vertical & definitely will cause consumer confusion. I'm sure you've done the research about whether a trademark has been registered. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98324800&caseSearchType=U...

TBF, building something with the goal of enhancing S3 I would call it S4.

Re: Introducing S2

#115

Post by MrDOS »

kdmtctl wrote: post #82
HideousKojima wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could even make the s look kind of like a lightning bolt to emphasize how fast it is

Quite dangerous. Will look almost like the Schutzstaffel runic insignia. I'd better avoid this resemblance.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Re: Introducing S2

#116

Post by shikhar »

nextworddev wrote: post #107

This is cool but I think it overlaps too much with something like Kinesis Data Streams from AWS which has been around for a long time. It’s good that AWS has some competition though

(Founder) We plan to be multi-cloud over time. Kinesis has pretty low ordered throughput limit (i.e. at the level of a stream shard) of 1 MBps, if you need higher. S2 will be cheaper and faster than Kinesis with the Express storage class. S2 is also a more serverless pricing model - closer to S3 - than paying for stream shard hours.

Re: Introducing S2

#117

Post by JoshTriplett »

shikhar wrote: post #22
solatic wrote: post #20

Help me understand - you build on top of AWS, which charges $0.09/GB for egress to the Internet, yet you're charging $0.05/GB for egress to the Internet? Sounds like you're subsidizing egress from AWS? Or do you have access to non-public egress pricing?

(Founder) We are not charging in preview. At the scale where it matters, we will work it out. Definitely some assumptions in here.

Do you plan to charge differently for bandwidth depending on whether the customer is in AWS or not? Would be nice if you pass on the cost savings.

Re: Introducing S2

#118

Post by shikhar »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #117
shikhar wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Founder) We are not charging in preview. At the scale where it matters, we will work it out. Definitely some assumptions in here.

Do you plan to charge differently for bandwidth depending on whether the customer is in AWS or not? Would be nice if you pass on the cost savings.

(Founder) Yes, we will charge less for private connectivity. Pricing is transparent https://s2.dev/pricing - free during preview.

Re: Introducing S2

#120

Post by kevingadd »

animex wrote: post #111

IANAL,but naming your product S2 and mentioning in the intro that AWS S3 is the tech you are enhancing is probably looking for a branding/copyright claim from Amazon. Same vertical & definitely will cause consumer confusion. I'm sure you've done the research about whether a trademark has been registered. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98324800&caseSearchType=U...

I'm not sure whether they consulted a bad trademark lawyer or didn't consult one at all, but it wouldn't have cost that much to do so. I say this having just recently started the process of filing a trademark - the cost is about the same as buying i.e. 's4.dev' according to the domain registry's website.

Having to rebrand your product after launching is a lot more painful than doing it before launching.

Post reply on HN