> I super doubt these limitations are there because of any EC2 requirements.
I think you are misreading me, but to be fair, I was being vague about timelines.
my main thrust is that S3 is dominant because EC2 was/is lacking. S3 is optimised for uptime and consistency, which means that its brilliant at mostly static file hosting. It will work for more dynamic state type stuff, its just not really designed for it (see https://xeiaso.net/blog/anything-message-queue/)
making your own object store that is fast, durable and available and has another feature is really really hard to do at scale. Its far easier to put up with s3 than make your own.
I think you are misreading me, but to be fair, I was being vague about timelines.
my main thrust is that S3 is dominant because EC2 was/is lacking. S3 is optimised for uptime and consistency, which means that its brilliant at mostly static file hosting. It will work for more dynamic state type stuff, its just not really designed for it (see https://xeiaso.net/blog/anything-message-queue/)
making your own object store that is fast, durable and available and has another feature is really really hard to do at scale. Its far easier to put up with s3 than make your own.