Taking your cloudfront example, the free tier covers 50GB data out at 2 million requests - so your image would need to be less that 25KB to be under the free tier limit.
Taking a 4MB image, that would equate to around 8TB which is priced at under $1.
Make that 20 million views and you hit $10 - oof!
---
$20 or $200 doesn't matter - how on earth could you have a credit card if you can't afford to pay off $200?
---
AWS is great and people are free to try it out. They should also be aware that things cost money and not to put their credit card down for services without being fully aware of the costs associated.
It's like buying a property for investment then complaining to the real estate agent later down the line for a number of issues the property has that require maintenance down the line.
What's wrong with buyer beware? Why can't people/big companies offer services without people crying foul about 'getting hurt from bill shock'? Where's the personal responsibility and accountability for your own actions and decisions gone?
AWS aren't scheming to scape little bits of money from small time developers. They're interested in catching big fish companies who are looking to choose their platform / service offering in the cloud computing space. If you think these small time developers with 'bill caps so i don't overspend' is at the top of their feature priority list you've got the wrong idea about the business.
> $20 or $200 doesn't matter - how on earth could you have a credit card if you can't afford to pay off $200?
Who cares how they got the card, maybe it's a debit card, maybe it's their parent's or partners. Maybe they've got one that only allows a very low limit of charges.
The point is that there's a whole ton of people for whom $200 isn't a "Oh, well, that's a learning exercise - better be more careful next time".
> What's wrong with buyer beware?
Buyer beware is fine where all parties are fully aware of all repercussions.
However, you'll note that this doesn't apply to certain kinds of transactions, particularly financial transactions.
In some cases, you're either required to go through an expert who can advise you on the downsides and risks, or the seller is required to ensure that the buyer is fully informed of the risks.
It's the same reason we have warning signs on a whole bunch of things about how they could injure themselves.
Without the ability for someone to limit the damage, someone could be up for thousands of dollars in spend without being aware of how they even got there.
> AWS aren't scheming to scape little bits of money from small time developers
It's not even students and other inexperienced people that end up in bill-shock.
I've dealt with well-experienced senior developers who've gone off to an AWS Conference and spent a day or three being lulled by the story about how X is the new hotness, and would solve all the problems we have.
The AWS reps have all confirmed the story that X is the new hotness, and it's perfect for some new solution - and they've got some big name customer who's implemented it and saved millions Vs their legacy on-site solution. The AWS reps also hand out tens of thousands in account credits like they're mentos, with the message "Go play, see if it works for you".
Those senior developers have taken a look at the pricing on the thing, thought they understood it, and then fired up a demo to prove it out. When the billing starts to come in, there's been shock from them that they spent so much in so little time.
The pricing on things is quite opaque with one headline price for something, but doesn't include that you'll also need to consider the pricing for other bits. The billing is often delayed quite signfiicantly, and alerting is only useful as an indicator of how much you've fucked up, rather than a way to prevent it.
So, yeah, with AWS marketing all their solutions as being much lower cost, while at the same time not making it clear on what things do cost, and not making tools that you can prevent major fuckups -- they definitely do need to shoulder some blame.
Taking a 4MB image, that would equate to around 8TB which is priced at under $1.
Make that 20 million views and you hit $10 - oof!
---
$20 or $200 doesn't matter - how on earth could you have a credit card if you can't afford to pay off $200?
---
AWS is great and people are free to try it out. They should also be aware that things cost money and not to put their credit card down for services without being fully aware of the costs associated.
It's like buying a property for investment then complaining to the real estate agent later down the line for a number of issues the property has that require maintenance down the line.
What's wrong with buyer beware? Why can't people/big companies offer services without people crying foul about 'getting hurt from bill shock'? Where's the personal responsibility and accountability for your own actions and decisions gone?
AWS aren't scheming to scape little bits of money from small time developers. They're interested in catching big fish companies who are looking to choose their platform / service offering in the cloud computing space. If you think these small time developers with 'bill caps so i don't overspend' is at the top of their feature priority list you've got the wrong idea about the business.