Cloud At A Cost – Hosting For Suckers

Re:Cloud At A Cost – Hosting For Suckers by dpweb on Saturday July 12, 2014 @10:15AM (#8024586)

There's valid uses for the $1/mo. server, I can have five boxes for the price of one. Spread out amongst different providers, that's called redundancy. I don't get that hosting everything w/AWS. Customer service? What's that? I have ssh I don't need customer service, only if the box goes down. My $1 servers been up for months, and if one drops, I have four others. I've had great experience paying $1/mo and never contacting the provider for anything.

"Don't use $1 servers" is FUD and probably will be showing up "news stories" from Amazon soon about how terrible and evil these low cost provider are..

Let me address the security issue quickly too. Look, anything - you put on a server not owned by you, is not your data anymore. That's what people need to understand about the cloud. I don't care if its Bob's hosting, or AWS or Dropbox or Onedrive. Anything you don't want others to read should be encrypted before it leaves your PC, period.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cloud At A Cost – Hosting For Suckers by rahimnathwani on Saturday July 12, 2014 @11:36AM (#8024803)

I don't think the parent comment was saying that $1/month attracts _only_ pathological customers.

Like you, I have a bunch of $1/month servers used for different things (mostly VPN, as I live in a country where many web sites are blocked), and have had mostly good experiences. I have also had bad experiences (providers going out of business without warning, servers down for a week with no email response etc.). You are right - always have backups and a backup plan.

[ Parent | on HN ]