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

121–130 of 206 posts

Re: Introducing S2

#121

Post by nextworddev »

shikhar wrote: post #116
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.

Thanks. You are right about those points. One thing to probably consider is whether serverless provides enough cost savings for most streaming ingest use cases which need static provisioning since ingest volumes are unpredictable. A better messaging would be that your serverless model can handle bursts well. (for context: used to sell KDA and KDS at AWS as part of AI solutions)

Re: Introducing S2

#122

Post by [deleted] »

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...

[deleted]

Re: Introducing S2

#123

Post by bigstrat2003 »

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.

For what it's worth, there's zero chance I would do business with a company whose business plan is "we'll work it out". It gives one every reason to believe that in a couple years time you guys will either be out of business (because you didn't figure out the numbers to make a profit) or will pull the rug from under customers in the form of surprise price hikes. Obviously you have to do what you think is right, but I think that this approach is going to scare off a lot of customers for you.

Re: Introducing S2

#124

Post by jffry »

volemo wrote: post #114
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.

Too late, name's taken for something else: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/s4.html

Re: Introducing S2

#125

Post by CobrastanJorji »

jffry wrote: post #124
volemo wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Too late, name's taken for something else: https://incubator.apache.org/projects/s4.html

And don't forget the other S4: http://www.supersimplestorageservice.com/

It's like S3, except better because, by focusing on being a write-only data store, they can manage much more throughput and efficiency, plus your data is far more secure at rest than it is in S3.

Re: Introducing S2

#126

Post by shikhar »

nsxwolf wrote: post #72
do_not_redeem wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should have gone with S4 tbh. The suits love bigger numbers. Super Simple Stream Store.

How do you store a stream? Don’t they just spray around the internet here and there, and if you don’t catch them in the moment, they’re just gone?

(Founder) I thought you were joking but coming back it could well be serious :)

When we say stream, we really mean The Log that Jay Kreps has a famous blog about https://engineering.linkedin.com/distributed-systems/log-wha...

We say stream because we would rather not be confused with "logs" as in application logs, but rather associate with the world of streaming data where this primitive is very relevant. We don't mean stream as in a TCP stream or live stream.

You can, however stream Star Wars on S2 ;-) https://s2.dev/docs/quickstart#get-started-with-the-cli

Re: Introducing S2

#127

Post by skeeter2020 »

volemo wrote: post #114
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.

S3++ ? T4?

My company is a Fivetran client, and they named that company after a (bad) joke, but it's worth a fortune.

Re: Introducing S2

#128

Post by rsync »

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...

What could possibly be better than being sued by Amazon for some nitpicky naming Issue ?

That’s the kind of David vs. Goliath publicity one could only dream of …

Re: Introducing S2

#129

Post by throwaway519 »

_1tem wrote: post #54

This is a really good idea, beautiful API, and something that I would like to use for my projects. However I have zero confidence that this startup would last very long in its current form. If it's successful, AWS will build a better and cheaper in-house version. It's just as likely to fail to get traction. If this had been released instead as a Papertrail-like end-user product with dashboards, etc. instead of a "clo…

Amazon don't compete for price sensitive product offerings.

If anything, they normlise an expectation with a budget aware base.

Re: Introducing S2

#130

Post by shikhar »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #123
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.

For what it's worth, there's zero chance I would do business with a company whose business plan is "we'll work it out". It gives one every reason to believe that in a couple years time you guys will either be out of business (because you didn't figure out the numbers to make a profit) or will pull the rug from under customers in the form of surprise price hikes. Obviously you have to do what you think is right, but I…

(Founder) We are not charging during preview. If anything, I wanted to be transparent about our planned pricing. Our mission is to make streams a cloud storage primitive, and I worked backwards from there in terms of our costs and expected costs looking ahead once we can scale a bit - based on concrete data points about what kind of discounts can be unlocked. I realized it was premature based on the comments here, so the price for internet egress has been updated. Thank you for your feedback.
Post reply on HN