[immibis]

I noticed this with bandwidth. AWS price for bandwidth: $90.00/TB after 0.1TB/month. Price everywhere else (low cost VPSes): $1.50/TB after 1-5TB/month. Price some places (dedicated servers): $0.00/TB up to ~100TB/month, $1.50/TB after.

You pay 60 times the price for the privilege of being on AWS.

Bandwidth is just their most egregious price difference. The servers are more expensive too. The storage is more expensive (except for Glacier). The serverless platforms are mostly more expensive than using a cheap server.

There are only two AWS products that I understand to have good prices: S3 Glacier (and only if you never restore!), and serverless apps (Lambda / API Gateway) if your traffic is low enough to fit in the Always Free tier. For everything else, it appears you get ripped off by using AWS.

[ttfkam]

Which is why most folks use CloudFront like AWS recommends, which is typically free for services to route through. Prices for CloudFront egress are competitive with what you described for other vendors. I don't know anyone paying $90/TB out to internet on AWS.

https://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/pricing/?nc=sn&loc=3

Were you trying to route S3 directly out to the internet?

[immibis]

The Cloudfront pricing page you cited is just as bad, except the free tier for Cloudfront traffic is 1TB/month rather than 0.1TB/month. The pricing is just as bad above that. It says "Free for origin fetches" but upon further research, seems like that just means you won't pay twice by also having to pay for your traffic to get from its origin to Cloudfront.

[ttfkam]

You still haven't cited where you got $90/TB from.

[detaro]

For example EC2 traffic (from US and EU locations, other get more expensive).

[ttfkam]

Okay, I stand corrected. Now my question to you is how are you generating all these terabytes over the internet? And would data transfer costs really be a significant portion of your bill at that scale regardless of cloud provider? Not video transcoding resources, AI capacity, GPU capacity, etc.?

You're talking about the equivalent of completely saturating a gigabit Internet connection for over two hours per terabyte. A high def video stream from Netflix is only about 5 megabits/sec. 4K is 15 megabits.

67+ simultaneous 4K streams for two hours. Or 200+ simultaneous high def streams. Or a metric fuck-ton of web resources.

And you think you're going to find a provider that will allow you to send those kinds of volumes for $10/TB or less AND have relatively few outages AND stick around because their business model is sound?

By all means, point out who these unicorns are. Sign me up!

[immibis]

On Hetzner I have no problem saturating my gigabit connection with static files if I want to.

[hylaride]

Not everybody is serving public http traffic, though.