|
|
|
|
|
by AnthonyMouse
4191 days ago
|
|
> Buying and running your own server is much more expensive than running an EC2 box for pennies per hour. Is it really? You can get a Pentium III era server essentially for free. Suppose it uses 60 watts (0.06KW). At the national average 12.2c/KWh that's 0.732c/hour. An Amazon micro instance is 1.3c/hour. That's the "I only need one instance" rate; if you need more than one then you can get slightly newer hardware with virtualization support which makes self-hosting even more attractive. > And even if you do end up self-hosting everything, chances are you won't be responding to security issues as quickly as a full-time team of professionals on call. Amazon doesn't maintain your VM. When your VM is vulnerable to Heartbleed or Shellshock you still have to patch it yourself unless you've configured auto updates, which applies the same to self-hosting. What Amazon provides is convenience. If you need about a hundred cores for twelve hours, you can buy a dozen 8-core machines on eBay, use them for twelve hours and then sell them again for about what you paid for them, but that's a huge pain compared with configuring the equivalent on EC2. EC2 isn't necessarily cheaper, it's just a lot easier, especially if you don't already have the requisite experience and don't want to learn. Which is much the same as it has always been with free vs. proprietary software. |
|