Conversely, when AWS had issues, Amazon.com was not impacted.
Amazon.com != AWS. I'm curious to know when AWS or Amazon.com innovations impact each other, or which one leads. I'd rather it be Amazon.com.
Anyone with an ounce of server knowledge would know it's impossible to keep a website up for 100% of the time, so downtime at Amazon is understandable, but maybe the average Joe Manager is deciding between Rackspace and AWS and happens to visit amazon.com during this downtime. "If Amazon can't even keep their bread-and-butter running, how can I trust them with something like AWS?" he might say.
As far as I know Google has 100% uptime, so it's not impossible. May not be 100% for every geographical location but that's partly because of things Google cannot control nor make redundant.
If they can't keep their own server up, how can you trust them with yours?
An unfair argument, perhaps, but one that impacts them all the same.