Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think the point is that the cost should not be the main motivator. I would agree that there needs to be other differentiators in addition to cost, which could provide sufficient moat against other competitors, big or small.



It's possible that there could be non-obvious innovations in how to save money with a low reliability threshold, which Amazon might not be able to effortlessly copy.


It should also be noted that you can get S3 storage for $1/TB/month already if you use the Glacier Deep Archive storage class.


Did that include network IO to retrieve your data?


Nope. That's what actually kills you on Amazon - network costs.


It's... interesting... that Amazon offers reasonably priced bandwidth on Lightsail, but it's against the TOS to use it in connection with other services.


Yeah, I have been proxy accessing my personal S3 that way, but I'm not really willing to bet a business on it.


Not really. Have you ever done the maths on what it costs to recover 1TB in a recovery situation.

Definitely not worth it.


Putting it into normal S3 only costs $2.50 a TB. That's very affordable.

To get out of Amazon entirely, they definitely want to gouge you, but it's not the end of the world. If $24 a year is an acceptable storage price, then Snowball export costing somewhere around $36/TB in bulk isn't too awful. (And if you don't have enough data to fill up a snowball, you can probably smuggle it out through lightsail.)




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: