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

Super Simple Storage Service

supersimplestorageservice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 166 posts

Re: Super Simple Storage Service

#41

Post by KarlKemp »

azornathogron wrote: post #14

I believe they have overestimated the cost of using 3.5" floppies, probably to make themselves look better by comparison. They give the cost as $211,172, but that's the cost to buy a 1 TiB pack of floppies. Their own storage cost is per-month, so to get the equivalent cost for floppies you need to also divide by the expected useful lifetime of a floppy disk. I did a web search for "floppy disk lifetime" and the inter…

What's more, floppies are actually prior art for their business model. At least my AMIGA days were just endless problems with broken floppies.

Re: Super Simple Storage Service

#42

Post by grensley »

TobyTheDog123 wrote: post #5

A really nice touch is the case study they use, which shows a nonexistent MothersInLawPhotos . com ( http://www.supersimplestorageservice.com/MotherInLawPhotos.p... ) with all the images broken

If you click buy now, you get a "this resource can't be read" error.

Re: Super Simple Storage Service

#43

Post by Cupprum »

wesnerm2 wrote: post #37

Fact check: The cost of S3 standard storage per TB is approximately $23 not $153. S3 standard storage, the most expensive kind, is $.021-.023 per GB. S4 costs about the same as S3 Deep Archive storage. Update: The article appears to be a joke. That aside, there are no cost savings against S3 Deep Archive; additionally S3 Deep Archive supports restores unlike the write-only S4.

> S3 Deep Archive supports restores unlike the write-only S4

I bet that a Super service like this may also support restores, but because of security reasons, they would only be internally and not be visible to the end user.

Re: Super Simple Storage Service

#49

Post by ignoramous »

karmasimida wrote: post #45

Super Simple (but not reliable) Storage Service There is a reason why storage is hard and why I only trust big techs to do it

Heh. Reminds me of:

It's hard to remember now, but there was a period of time not long ago when "the cloud" hadn't yet become an overused catchphrase. In those heady days of yore, people used to store things themselves – usually only on one device, and uphill both ways. These were hardscrabble people, living off of whatever meager storage they could scrounge together. They’d zip things, put them on zip drives, and hope for the best. Then one day almost everyone looked up towards the metaphorical sky and made a lot of compromises.

https://signal.org/blog/secure-value-recovery/

Re: Super Simple Storage Service

#50

Post by spiffytech »

wesnerm2 wrote: post #37

Fact check: The cost of S3 standard storage per TB is approximately $23 not $153. S3 standard storage, the most expensive kind, is $.021-.023 per GB. S4 costs about the same as S3 Deep Archive storage. Update: The article appears to be a joke. That aside, there are no cost savings against S3 Deep Archive; additionally S3 Deep Archive supports restores unlike the write-only S4.

The site's domain was registered in 2009, and I guess it hasn't been updated since then. Their 1TB S3 price is in line with S3's 2008 price of $0.15/GB, and many (all?) of S3's advanced pricing tiers wouldn't have debuted yet.
Post reply on HN