[nettdata]

I think the article's headline is a bit unfair.

I read that and thought that they were/are manipulating the network in some way to slow it down, similar to ISP's that traffic shape torrenting clients to minimize the effect on their networks.

It could very well be that an increase in demand has meant a higher utilization of available hardware, and response times have slowed down as a result.

It could be that they're trying new, higher-density configurations to maximize ROI.

It could very well be that they're prioritizing the higher-paying customers, which seems reasonable (to me, anyway).

Sure, response times have apparently slowed down, regardless, but the headline could sound less "evil" or intentional, I guess.

Still, it'd be interesting to know what's really going on, rather than hear the generic "no over-capacity issues here" mantra from them, or the thundering silence when asked specifically about response times.

[pquerna]

I don't really care if they are doing any of the above, that is certinally their rights as a Business to optimize their infrastructure, but the problem is all about their lack of communication about the latency issues.

[codexon]

It could very well be that they're prioritizing the higher-paying customers, which seems reasonable

It's their right as a business to do that just as it's the customer's right to complain and use rackspace or google instead.

If a 1+ second internal ping for an entire day is reasonable for Amazon, I personally wouldn't be using EC2.