Reduce cloud costs, specifically storage and bandwidth
Cloud computing might be tempting when you are just starting a company because you don't need to worry about having your own infrastructure. But as you host more and more storage and demand more and more bandwidth, the current cost per GB models become pricey.
There is a now-popular analogy between cars and the cloud. The current cloud offering is advantageous when you rent a car from city A to city B, but if you are traveling too often, you better buy your own.
All the hype around cloud computing set aside, if the cloud is aiming at the next big thing for businesses, it better be cheaper!! Cheaper for especially large companies.
When is Windows Azure going to cost less? At least, Amazon has a better-looking model in which they reduce per GB costs when the consumption rate is over a specific number. MS should provide a better solution to all-MS .NET developers.
John Wyler
shared this idea
14 comments
-
Azure
commented
The costs for GB have recently come down for Azure as described here with a waterfall/tiered pricing model:
-
JakeB12
commented
Amazon reduced its costs once again. Their bandwidth costs are much more tempting now. Azure still keeps things expensive. When are we going to see special offers for large customers?
-
MarkGre332
commented
@Philip That's great news, but outbound bandwidth is still expensive. :)
-
Philip
commented
-
Anonymous
commented
Windows Azure Core offer sucks. It's an attempt to attract customers for sure, but the price for the offer increases about 50% after 6 months. Plus, once the amount of storage and bandwidth in the offer is consumed, everything is charged at the pay-as-you-go rate. We need cheaper pay-as-you-go rates!!!
-
lost321
commented
@bacigalupo yeah. It's not like Microsoft pays for server OS and SQL database licenses. They can clearly reduce the per hour instance costs if they want. They should know that if they want to beat Amazon, the first rule is prices should be lower than what Amazon currently offers. I don't think a lot of developers would choose PaaS over IaaS when faced with high costs of running a data-driven, popular website.
-
bacigalupo
commented
Server costs are also expensive. Any way for us to buy shared/dedicated reserved instances like on AWS?
-
Greg
commented
lol what if YouTube was hosted on Azure? #megabills
-
Ian Dallas
commented
my great windows azure idea: reduce costs :)
-
veyron831
commented
How is Microsoft hoping to compete with Amazon when their pricing is more expensive? It sucks to be a .NET developer and look to other alternatives.
-
Philip
commented
@Anonymous
Their name is OVH. -
pub5422
commented
PaaS might be more expensive than IaaS, but is the price difference justified in the case of a large enterprise paying mega bills due to their extreme storage and bandwidth demands?
-
Anonymous
commented
@Philip what is the name of that french hosting provider?
-
Philip
commented
There is a large French hosting provider that offers cloud instances with unlimited 100mbit connection for as low as 0.0119 €/hour. I'm not suggesting that you need to offer traffic flatrates too but you could clearly reduce the pricing for traffic.
