[tgeek]

"AWS costs almost twice more than analogous DO servers, but AWS has way more features."

When you us AWS you are paying for more than just a cheap VPS, which essentially is all DO is. It's comparing fast food to a fancy steak house. You can get meat at both, but at one side its microwaved. Not to say DO isn't great, it gets the job done and provides a valued service, but your money gets you what your money gets you.

[vidarh]

When you use AWS you pay extra for the fancy steak. But you pay steak prices even if what you buy from them is a cheap burger.

It's really hard to find scenarios where AWS isn't ridiculously overpriced.

Consider that Digital Ocean is also an expensive alternative, but I deploy caching proxies for some clients who for various reasons insist on using AWS on DO because you can save lots by deploying droplets on DO to cache rather than pay AWS bandwidth costs for all your traffic, for example (you serve more than 1-2TB a month out of AWS you can start saving money that way).

[drakonka]

Not everyone needs or wants a fancy steak, which I guess is why the OP is asking specifically about DO even while acknowledging that "AWS has way more features".