Hacker News Reader

Comment by datascienced | Hacker News Reader

The “problem” I have is Digital Ocean gives me a bunch of conveniences like CDN, CI, HA, Git Deploys for $5 a month. Thats where I start. Running my own metal is a later problem not a now one. By the time $1m AWS bill vs. big fat box is the choice, I’m not reading blog posts to decide. I am running tests.

View on HN

$40 a month on a dedicated box will cover you for your first million users.

No you aren't running tests because you will be locked in to aws and your cloud computing bills will eventually bankrupt you.

$40 a month and $400 of my time a month, that is the issue. At some point the lines meet and it is worth the time to save a $10000 DO bill for hight traffic I am sure. But that is a later problem.

It's a later problem you can't solve! You cheaped out in the short term and will face ludicrous long term costs.

And not just you, it's a core part of cloud computing's monetization model.

Additionally, if anything goes wrong with your Digital Ocean account, Digital Ocean will not help you. So you are running a high risk.

DO runs your app pretty much as is with few modifications. Think npx next init; git commit; git push; so it ain’t hard to migrate. You end up doing the same stuff you would have done on day 1.

So in essence, you want to use cloud providers UNTIL you need to scale? Isn’t that the opposite way round? Doesn’t it make it sound ridiculous, seeing as though the cloud providers were meant to help you scale?

Hard to answer in absolutes. Depends on use case.

That does not in any way negate my point. Where you start depends on cost/benefit. Personally, I'm liable to start in AWS, actually. That doesn't mean I'll use every high-dollar service they offer, though.

At a second glance yes probably it aligns with your point, or at least is anecdotal for it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com