News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Ask HN: Video streaming is expensive yet YouTube "seems" to do it for free. How?. Parent comment

Re:Ask HN: Video streaming is expensive yet YouTube "seems" ... by Dylan16807 on Sunday May 19, 2024 @10:36PM (#40411612)
> If you want to know a better approximation of their true cost just look at their non-unlimited plans: 20TB/month included for free; 1€/TB (excl VAT) after that.

I will point out that this is still about 50x-80x cheaper than Amazon. Not far off the claim of 100x.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Video streaming is expensive yet YouTube "seems" ... by ec109685 on Monday May 20, 2024 @12:23AM (#40412247)
There are enterprise plans that offer significant savings if your scale is high enough.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Video streaming is expensive yet YouTube "seems" ... by immibis on Sunday May 19, 2024 @11:54PM (#40412121)
Mhm. Save literally 98% of your egress bill by avoiding AWS, GCP and Azure.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Video streaming is expensive yet YouTube "seems" ... by manquer on Monday May 20, 2024 @02:01AM (#40412707)
AWS is particularly bad at this for S3.

Cloudflare and most other Object Storage Providers either fully free egress for all users or at-least for inter-cloud transit so you can then put a free/cheap CDN like Cloudflare in front and not pay all that much for b/w.

AWS refuses to participate. Costs of retrieval of all data plus associated bandwidth is a so high for many people that they stick to S3 including me.

[ Parent | on HN ]