Amazon has once more cut the cost of its cloudy offerings to smack down its competition and continue on its path to fluffy domination. A post from Amazon Web Services (AWS) "evangelist" Jeff Barr on the AWS blog claimed that Amazon had managed to lower its costs and would be passing on those savings to its customers. Exactly …
I haven't seen much competition on this level ... Rackspace? Maybe Azure, at a stretch? I suppose that's the effect they're hoping for, though: other companies to look at their prices, crunch the numbers and go "nope, we can't beat those, next business plan please".
I've very happy with my Linode and Joyent virtual machines for regular hosting, although spinning up an EC2 machine or ten to test something quickly or handle a flash crowd might be nice.
It's CloudFront and S3 that I really like, though. If my site suddenly gets Slashdotted (it did make Digg once) it's just a crazy-looking spike on the graph and an extra few $ on the month's bill - not downtime or a service suspension. Likewise the image storage I do for another web application: I don't need gigabytes of space lying unused 'just in case' - I just stick it in S3.
Now, if they could just bring their SimpleDB pricing structure to RDS: full-blown SQL, but pay-as-you-go instead of fixed machine sizes... I seem to remember there is a company doing something similar on top of EC2 themselves already, somewhere?
Credit where it's due
Amazon's press releases may be couched in the usual saccharin coated language but, credit where it's due, they do keep making their cloud stuff cheaper.
I use S3 as my backup storage. I've got around 80GB backed up there and it's currently costing me around US$12 a month. When I first started using the service, a couple of years ago, I was paying around US$18 a month and was only using about 40-50GB.
Given that Amazon don't seem overly bothered with collecting data on me, or dictating what I do with my storage space either, it's all good, as far as I'm concerned.
Big thumbs up [so far!] for Amazon.