This is great, but I’m disappointed Backblaze B2 isn’t included. That seems like an oversight unless someone can point out how B2 doesn’t hold its own with these options in a glaring way. There are tradeoffs, but B2 seems to be very competitive overall.<p>B2 is cheaper than every option here for both storage ($0.005/GB) and egress ($0.01/GB).[1] Their transaction pricing is also cheaper.[2] Despite being cheaper, it’s still hot storage, so you can immediately download buckets, in whole or in part. I’ve personally used it to backup (and restore) terabytes of data for over a year. I doubt it has an SLA like GCP or AWS, but DigitalOcean doesn’t either, yet it’s listed here. I find the B2 API documentation to be very readable as well.[3]<p>I’ve used AWS S3, Glacier and GCP Nearline, Coldline. I can’t think of a specific thing that has disappointed me about B2, and the reliability has been excellent. The nature of my work is that I have very large datasets, and B2 becomes extremely competitive when you’re backing up tens of terabytes or more.<p>_________________________________<p>1. <a href="https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage-pricing.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage-pricing.html</a><p>2. <a href="https://www.backblaze.com/b2/b2-transactions-price.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.backblaze.com/b2/b2-transactions-price.html</a><p>3. <a href="https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/" rel="nofollow">https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/</a>
Shameless Plug :)<p>I wrote recently a series of articles comparing most of those providers and explaining how to use them with JavaScript:<p>- Amazon S3: <a href="https://medium.com/@javidgon/amazon-s3-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-it-with-javascript-701fffc89154" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@javidgon/amazon-s3-pros-cons-and-how-to-...</a><p>- Google Cloud Storage: <a href="https://medium.com/@javidgon/google-cloud-storage-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-it-with-javascript-ea9ce60a94c0" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@javidgon/google-cloud-storage-pros-cons-...</a><p>- Microsoft Azure Blob Storage: <a href="https://medium.com/@javidgon/microsoft-azure-blob-storage-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-it-with-javascript-ca5aaf5d5ffd" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@javidgon/microsoft-azure-blob-storage-pr...</a><p>- Backblaze B2: <a href="https://itnext.io/backblaze-b2-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-it-with-javascript-8c2d2a9a69d9" rel="nofollow">https://itnext.io/backblaze-b2-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-it-w...</a><p>- DigitalOcean Spaces: <a href="https://medium.com/dailyjs/digital-ocean-spaces-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-it-with-javascript-1802559ce2bd" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/dailyjs/digital-ocean-spaces-pros-cons-an...</a><p>- Wasabi Hot Storage: <a href="https://medium.com/@javidgon/wasabi-pros-cons-and-how-to-use-with-javascript-fa528c3779a2" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@javidgon/wasabi-pros-cons-and-how-to-use...</a>
I was really excited about DO spaces. I compared every major Object Storage (OVH,B2,Wasabi,S3,Azure). DO spaces came out much ahead. I did dozens of hours of research. I was a customer (and I still am). But I am less excited now.<p>Basically, there are loads of issues with rejected requests because of rate limiting (returns a lot of 503 "slow down" responses). Basically, I don't recall ever receiving this from S3. You can check the forums to see more in-depth discussion.<p>The good part: This is a solvable problem, and I hope they relax these limits very soon.<p>Another great anecdote: their API is 99% compatible with S3. In fact, the official recommendation is to use the AWS SDKs on the server, which I am doing!
(*) for a particular use case.<p>The example is 200GB storage with 2000GB data transfer (out) every month. That's a LOT of data going out every month, so I am guessing the scenario is if you are hosting a photo library and lots of people are downloading every month.<p>If however you are just using the service as an online storage to hold <100GB of data as backup (i.e. mainly only transfer in), then S3 turns out way cheaper than DO.<p>Not knocking either service - I actually use both, for different use cases.
Cool site, but noticing an error: This compares AWS S3 single region pricing ($0.024/gb) to GCP GCS multi-region pricing ($0.026/gb) rather than GCP GCS single region pricing ($0.020/gb). Hopefully the creator/author will correct the discrepancy... Disclosure: I'm a pricing dweeb at Google Cloud
The bandwidth egress charges on AWS (and GCP/Azure) are way too high. It almost seems cartel like.<p>Bandwidth costs have dropped by a huge factor over the past few years; but none of this has been passed on.<p>I really hope backblaze and/or DO manage to cause the big three some hurt on this and get them to reduce prices significantly; 7c/GB is really high these days.
I work for a company that has to provision hosted products for customers across all the clouds and the one that has been impressing me the most lately is Azure. The load balancers are also the gateways (sound network topology), so there is no need for elastic IPs, NAT Gateways, or proxy protocol. The other thing I like about Azure is they have storage classes that automatically cross region replicate. The automatic storage encryption is a bit of an issue, but I know they were working on it, last I checked.<p>You can’t beat the offerings of AWS, but there are definitely some compliance scenarios that are easier to fulfill on Azure.<p>We rarely get customer requests for Google Cloud. Seems like it’s mostly Azure and AWS (at least at the enterprise level).
Can we include Wasabi[1] in the comparison? They seem to have a really compelling offering when it comes to Object Storage and their pricing.<p>1. <a href="https://wasabi.com/" rel="nofollow">https://wasabi.com/</a>
This uses the pricing for multi-regional GCS, which is geo-redundant across two or more locations separated by at least 100 miles.<p>Regional GCS is the storage class equivalent to standard S3 and is $0.02/GB.
This is a rather simplistic comparison. These object storage services have several tiers and features that you need to take into account like zone vs regional replication, strong-consistency listings, bandwidth and access depending on where your compute is, integrations like notifications and functions, etc.<p>That being said, the clouds are great if your compute is co-located in the same place because the transfer fees are waived. Otherwise DO or B2 are probably better options for less usage or more neutral network locations and egress.
What is the durability objects stored with DO? S3 offers 11x9s of durability.<p>Likewise what is the replication story? Can you get event notifications when objects are uploaded/deleted? Is there versioning? Static website hosting? Lifecycle management?
Sia [1] could be even cheaper, coming out at $1.10 for a TB [2]. Although this price might not be forever, and I'm still not sure about the reliability.<p>In theory it should be more reliable, as it's decentralised and your data gets split among multiple servers around the world. The question remains what if the Sia network itself stops being profitable and people all exit at the same time. Although the same could be said for Amazon?<p>Sia will actually soon be adding a backend to Minio too [3].<p>The only thing that has stopped me using Sia is you have to have the blockchain running on the machine.<p>1. <a href="https://sia.tech" rel="nofollow">https://sia.tech</a><p>2. <a href="https://siastats.info/storage_pricing" rel="nofollow">https://siastats.info/storage_pricing</a><p>3. <a href="https://blog.sia.tech/introducing-s3-style-file-sharing-for-sia-through-the-new-minio-integration-bb880af2366a" rel="nofollow">https://blog.sia.tech/introducing-s3-style-file-sharing-for-...</a>
The main cost seems to be bandwidth (speeds). If you've ever tried Spaces, you know it's a real slog uploading and downloading (even with good client-side speeds). DropBox has similar specs to Spaces, and does it for only $10. OneDrive has the same thing with $7 for 1TB. And there's another Chinese company, Tencent, that gives you 10TB for free (except it's slow and it's all in Chinese).<p>The problem I have with this article (very brief table), is that the author is comparing two "enterprise" solutions to a consumer solution. With "enterprise" solutions, you get guaranteed uptime and speeds. With Spaces, and the rest I've mentioned, you don't get any of that. Only that your data will still be there as long as you pay out.
Is there any open source S3 compatible software? I know Riak Cloud Storage (<a href="http://docs.basho.com/riak/cs/2.1.1/" rel="nofollow">http://docs.basho.com/riak/cs/2.1.1/</a>), but I think it’s not maintained anymore.
One of the neat features of Microsoft’s storage service is that you can append to existing files.<p>It surprised me that this isn’t standard on other services.<p><a href="https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/storageservices/understanding-block-blobs--append-blobs--and-page-blobs" rel="nofollow">https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/storageservices/un...</a>
Wasabi storage has unlimited egress now. So spaces with its rate limiting doesn’t seem that much of a big deal.<p>Storage is something that won’t make much money in a few years I believe. I think the Egress overcharging maybe finally seeing decent competition.<p><a href="https://wasabi.com/pricing/" rel="nofollow">https://wasabi.com/pricing/</a>
NodeChef's object storage is very attractive option especially with no data transfer charges. Available in two regions. <a href="https://nodechef.com/s3-compatible-object-storage" rel="nofollow">https://nodechef.com/s3-compatible-object-storage</a>
Azure storage is available in way more than 10 regions FYI: <a href="https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/global-infrastructure/services/" rel="nofollow">https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/global-infrastructure/serv...</a>
You can negotiate lower S3 prices if you're a heavy user. I assume the other companies will as well. By heavy I mean exceeding the lowest price tiers significantly.