New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Where do high end gets talked about?
kedihacker
Member
in Meta
I mean high end as in enterprise systems like Aws gcp azure or ovh private or public cloud?
Thanked by 1nghialele
Comments
Zoom meets or something
/s
Some sales guy somehow knows your CEO, and after they go for a round of golf or something, your manager informs you that you're using AWS from now on.
Wish that was a joke, but seen that multiple times
In bordellos people tend to share information and experiences while having a drink. Also in pubs people tend to talk about high end investments while they dream about becoming rich.
I wouldn't say AWS is high end, its just hyped, overpriced shit.
r/Azure, r/AWS, r/GoogleCloud
And Teams meetings
What? AWS is as high end as it gets, and is extremely scalable. You can say it's overpriced.
How much do they charge per GB traffic again? please remind me.
fk wrong thread
Just because it's overpriced doesn't mean it's not high end?
And apparently they found enough customers who are willing to pay for it (for what ever reason)
AWS, GCP, Azure etc can ”overcharge” mainly for four reasons:
1. Lots of managed products that fit well together
2. They hyperscale, you can build a small app on it, but you can also grow and become the most used website on it
3. Legalities, certifications etc
4. Great well-connected network
Anyone saying it’s overpriced and comparing to non-hyperscalers have no idea what they’re taking about
high-end can be anything, which providers use top of the line hardware?
Came here to say this, but OP said it much better! 👍
weekly status meetings at your company probably
i see many people complain AWS's price, but i never see anyone complain their products
guess there is a reason
Please explain how AWS is not high-end.
For me, its just a glorified vps, which lets you go bankrupt tomorrow.
There are a tons of clouds, way cheaper with API that allow you to scale if you need to.
So It doesn't look high end to me, more like high cost, I just don't see the value.
http://hostsolutions.ro/
Corp's both do and dont care about cost, as someone who raises purchase orders the amount of senseless money I spend on suppliers because they're in our system when I know I can hop in a car and get the item for a fraction the price (and quicker) is insane.
I can absolutely see the alure of AWS and the full suite of their services to a corporation and it being a single bill, not splitting it all up.
I saw they do things like cloud conferences a lot, not a pro but I think they hangout there.
from my almost 10 years of experience on aws ec2 and its lowend lightsail, aws is extremely stable. ip reputation is clean, means that i can use its port for email out. all of the major area reachable. for the service kinds and scalability, i don’t use them, cannot comment, but the user interface is daunting. at the same price level, the benchmark of aws ls vps is far lower than the reliable let providers here, except comparable network speed. i read somewhere that aws network quality is one of the best.
For large corporations, they have zero tolerance about downtime. They care about quality more. They care little about the price. If they can save one to two IT staff with a typical salary of usd $200k, plus some server hardware expenses, that is about $1 million, for a mid level corporation. They then spend this $1 million on AWS, much better than hosting an in house IT department. Will they consider LET providers, probably never.
Well they pay for reliability(not a random dude with bus factor of one), breadth of services(security logging and services), more talent pool that can easily sort with certs and cover your ass insurance.
While this might be true, uptime-wise it is much more advisable to build on a lot of small shoulders instead of one big one. With that I'm on 100% uptime since 4,5 years now but yes you'll have to have or have to invest in the in-house quality to do that.
Another reason (and also problem) may be compliance - you get all the certifications etc. with the big ones - so you'll just have have to close both eyes to not see e.g. the cloud act problems for European clients that would render all those compliance certificates useless....
The cost is only worth it if you make extensive benefit of everything the platform offers. AWS is too high end but let’s take Vultr for example. They are still quite expensive compared to LET providers (and less resourceful), but they offer features such as hourly billing and web API access. Other than a small handful of providers here, almost nobody here offers hourly billing and instant automatic deployment of servers.
If all you’re doing is hosting a static blog site on Vultr then you’re getting ripped off for sure. But if you’re constantly deploying and destroying servers to meet real-time demand, making use of scalability features, or need servers in exotic locations, then suddenly Vultr becomes more appealing than most LET providers.
Similar story is likely true with those big cloud providers, except now add in compliance, certifications, insurance, and other things that most of us don’t care about for non-commercial or small scale projects. It ultimately all depends on the end use case, on top of corporate nonsense such as suppliers being on their vendor system even if they are much more expensive than other vendors (as @Umcookies put it best).
That’s how I see it anyway.
Aside from scalability and access to a host of other products like S3 buckets in the same ecosystem, a large number of us here I assume are just looking for a traditional VPS with as high specs as you can fetch for an amount, and without the need for robust data redundancy for whatever business losing millions due to a 20 minute downtime
And to me, a powerful network, international connectivity and hardware specs (CPU, RAM, NVMe) define high end. I don't see that AWS/GCP/DigitalOcean/Vultr have any reason to be a sensible choice over some of the smaller LE providers out here that prioritise these things for our demographic.
I can say that if you are willing to pay good money for a large ass provider, Azure actually provides fairly recent hardware and a powerful network that routes almost all traffic through their premium backbone -- providing good throughput and low latency to international ISPs that would have otherwise sucked with the other providers cheaping out using low cost Tier 1 carriers that "just works".
Don't assume AWS is actually high end. They just sell similar servers for extremely unreasonably high prices for no benefit to you
Necropost.
How you haven't seen people complaining about AWS products is the real mystery.
because people are not stupid, they are not going to pay a shitty product high price, they just move to cheaper provider