[wvh]

I work for a consultancy company that helps companies building and securing infrastructure. We have a lot of customers running Kubernetes at low-cost providers (like Hetzner), more local middle-tier and top-three (AWS, GCP, Azure). We also have some governmental, financial and medical companies that can not or will not run in public clouds, so they usually host on-prem.

If Hetzner has an issue or glitch once a month, the middle-tier providers have one every 2-3 months, and a place like AWS maybe every 5-6 months. However, prices also follow that observation, so you have to carefully consider on a case-by-case basis whether adding some extra machines and backup and failure scenarios is a better deal.

The major benefit by using basic hosting services is that their pricing is a lot more predictable; you pay for machines and scale as you go. Once you get hooked into all the extra services a provider like AWS provides, you might get some unexpectedly high bills and moving away might be a lot harder. For smaller companies, don't make short-sighted decisions that threaten your ability to survive long-term by choosing the easy solution or "free credits" scheme early on.

There is no right answer here, just trade-offs.