Be Careful When Comparing AWS Costs… (Truth Squad)
Jeff Barr writes:
Earlier today, GigaOM published a cost comparison of self-hosting vs. hosting on AWS. I wanted to bring to your attention a few quick issues that we saw with this analysis:
….
[and concludes]
We did our own calculations taking in to account only the first four issues listed above and came up with a monthly cost for AWS of $56,043 (vs. the \$70,854 quoted in the article). Obviously each workload differs based on the nature of what resources are utilized most.
These analyses are always tricky to do and you always need to make apples-to-apples cost comparisons and the benefits associated with each approach. We’re always happy to work with those wanting to get in to the details of these analyses; we continue to focus on lowering infrastructure costs and we’re far from being done.
Although I applaud Jeff’s efforts to insure we have accurate cost information for AWS, that isn’t why I am following up on his post.
Jeff is following a “truth squad” approach. A “truth squad” knows the correct information and uses it in great detail to correct errors made by others.
To anyone not on the “truth squad” the explanation offered is jargon riddled to the point of being completely opaque. All I really know is that Jeff disagrees with GigaOM. OK, but that’s not real helpful.
More than a few of my topic map posts, past, present and no doubt future, follow a similar approach. With about as much success.
I have a suggestion for myself and Jeff, one that I won’t follow all the time but will try.
If you can’t explain AWS pricing (or topic maps) on the back of a regulation size business card, either you don’t have a clear idea and/or you are explaining it poorly.
Remember that part of Einstein’s theory of relativity can be expressed as: e = mc2.
Within lies a vast amount of detail but it can be expressed very simply.
Something for AWS pricing experts and topic map writers to consider.