Hacker News Reader

Comment by frankjr | Hacker News Reader

> From the typical Amazon EC2 customer’s perspective, this translates to saving over $120MM/year on Amazon EC2 on-demand R5 instance charges.

Does the sales team know about this? /jk

View on HN

Amazon sales and business teams are constantly focused on reducing costs for customers and they celebrate this internally too.

I have seen dozens of big ticket “we saved this customer $xxxK/year” posts on slack and other internal venues, the customer obsession is real.

Even the reduced cost is still ten times what it costs on a traditional provider, though, right?

Wildly depends. How many people would it take to set up, deploy, maintain, secure, back up something like S3, RDS, SQS similarly redundantly based on top of just raw compute?

For some organisations, it will make sense to internalise and DIY everything. For many others, AWS/equivalent enables them to break down internal silos (instead of having to file a ticket to get storage team to provision storage for your new fancy RabbitMQ cluster, multiplied by 10 for networking, security AV bullshit, etc.) and just consume everything as a service. It's much faster, and in some cases even maybe cheaper.

Cf. Dropbox that started on S3, and a decade afterwards, migrated to self-managed datacenters.

If we ignore data egress fees, S3 is a rare exception to the rule that all of AWS is 10 times overpriced.

This assumes they aren't reinvesting the money back to other tangible improvements in the services, though?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com