|
|
|
|
|
by amluto
1102 days ago
|
|
> - Vendor Lock In. Yeah, it's there. If we have a service that uses data from S3, there's egress costs from S3 to <other provider>, but not with EC2. We've consciously accepted this lock in for the time being. This is where I think the FCC should take action. To the extent that this issue is a mutually agreeable arrangement between you and Amazon, it seems obnoxious but does not seem like it rises to the level where regulators should take action. But it affects third parties too: specifically, it prevents non-AWS-hosted vendors from effectively marketing their services to you. In that regard, I think the FTC should try to put a stop to this. AWS should not be permitted to effectively subsidize its and its partners’ services over outside competitors. (And the US Government should never have accepted cloud deals with excessive egress costs. Part of the bidding process should have been a requirement for networking outside the winning provider to be priced competitively with internal networking) |
|