Can we not call every "cloud provider" an alternative to AWS? Number of services in provider's offer should be taken into consideration, along with how established/stable the provider is.
It may be an alternative to AWS in the future but now it's an immature offer corresponding to few percent of service AWS has.
It may be an alternative to AWS in the future but now it's an immature offer corresponding to few percent of service AWS has.
edit: Also, it's not "LIDL cloud", it's just the same holding. Makes for a less clickbaity title, but yeah...