[dilyevsky]

Kinda funny they decided paying a ton of money to aws was ok but paying for nginx plus was not

[Spivak]

I kinda get that honestly. It’s why I’ll spend $20 without even thinking for take out but not spend $2 for an app. It’s because the cost off the software is way way more than the money. It’s a commitment to actually use it and integrate it, deal with their sales team, talk to purchasing, handle licensing, and introducing friction to replacing it or using tools that don’t integrate well because “well we already pay for it.” Licensing also complicates deployments substantially when you’re doing lots of autoscaling.

And on top of that Nginx Plus is also expensive as hell.

[rowanG077]

The buy in into AWS is much, much larger then using a piece of software though.

[dilyevsky]

Don’t you have to integrate cloud? This whole post is about having to put a bunch of workaround bc the cloud can’t scale apparently

[ClumsyPilot]

"It’s why I’ll spend $20 without even thinking for take out but not spend $2 for an app."

I pay for apps, its not a healthy attotude

[spullara]

The difference people see, as far as I can tell, is that AWS is charging you cost+ and pure software companies need to charge for value or die.

[dilyevsky]

Maybe for barebones compute they’re cost+ but I don’t think that’s really true for other services. For example traffic should cost effectively zero to them but they charge a huge premium. Some other managed services also appear to use value based pricing

[andrenotgiant]

ClubHouse runs on AWS?

[dilyevsky]

Hm actually might be google based on what their traffic is going to (i only looked just now). Ok now it makes more sense why support wasn’t able to figure this out =)