TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Is Amazon a tyrant or a saint?

3 点作者 cardmagic大约 13 年前
Saint:<p>* Inventing IaaS APIs<p>* Tirelessly innovating new APIs for resources like DynamoDB<p>* Pioneering resource-based hourly pricing<p>* Consistent API design<p>* A huge number of services<p>Tyrant:<p>* EBS sucks and they can't seem to ever fix it<p>* Beanstalk is a terrible excuse for a PaaS<p>* Completely locked into the AWS ecosystem<p>* Every new service you try locks you down even more<p>* Servers can and do go down without notice<p>* Can't run AWS on premise<p>How do you feel about AWS? Best thing since sliced bread? Best of all evils? If there was something better, you'd move in a heart beat?

3 条评论

SlipperySlope大约 13 年前
Timesharing is an idea from the 1960's that has been re-imagined by Amazon as they enforced service-oriented architecture on all their enterprise systems in a Draconian manner.<p>On balance, Amazon is a saint. Despite its faults it has dramatically solved development, deployment and scalability problems faced by thousands and thousands of startups.<p>How many startups could get going if they needed to spend $50 K on colocation, servers and bandwidth? That's what happened back in the Dot-Com boom.
wmf大约 13 年前
What is Amazon supposed to do about the lock-in? Not innovate? Give their code to their competitors?<p>Also, I don't think you can blame them for hardware failures.
bmelton大约 13 年前
There's a LOT of space between saint and tyrant, and I'd guess that Amazon falls into that space (as almost everybody does).<p>Regarding your 'Tyrant' arguments: * EBS sucks and they can't seem to ever fix it<p>Maybe durable, reliable, cheap and flexible storage isn't that easy to do?<p>* Beanstalk is a terrible excuse for a PaaS<p>Haven't used it, so I can't really comment.<p>* Completely locked into the AWS ecosystem<p>How so? I mean, they have a few proprietaryish services, but at least from my usage, I haven't found anything that I couldn't replace with something else. SNS? Email. EC2? Dedicated server. Elastic Block? Disks. I haven't used Dynamo, but I got the sense that it was just another NoSQL store?<p>* Servers can and do go down without notice<p>EC2 instances are designed to be ephemeral. If you're worried that they are going down, you've probably built your app incorrectly. It isn't meant to be used in lieu of a dedicated server, and it shouldn't be used as such. That's not how their compute units are meant to be used.<p>* Can't run AWS on premise<p>They're selling compute time. I mean, sure, they <i>could</i> open source their stuff, but most of their infrastructure is based on open source utilities that you could replace easily. Do we call Dropbox a tyrant for not releasing their source? No. The 'ease of use' is their entire business model.<p>As to actually answering the question, I like Amazon. I use some of their services where it makes sense to, but I don't think they're the greatest thing ever. They certainly have a good set of utilities, but it doesn't fit every use case.<p>For small utilization / commodity web needs you've got your typical web hosts. Dreamhost, ASmallOrange, etc.<p>For slightly larger needs you've got VPSes. Linode, Slicehost, etc.<p>Slightly larger than that and you're in single dedicated server territory.<p>For data intensive or computation expensive needs, you've got Amazon.<p>Bigger than that, and you're on big hardware from (dating myself here) Sun or IBM (and possibly using S3 for storage, because it's bad ass.)