Thinking about this, they're probably gonna introduce "insecure but cheap" instances for customers that don't mind the chance of data leaks and takeovers...
It's another situation like what happened with WEP WiFi encryption ten years ago.
Imagine buying a car that says, "Save $5000 for a less safe version without airbags." Yes, I know Airbags are DOT requirement, just trying to make a point.
Edit: I think people are missing my point. I am not saying they don't sell cheaper models that are less safe. My point is that they don't ACTIVELY market them as such. Point me to an advertisement that says "Save $5000 for a less safe car!". This is in the spirit of what the GP was talking about whether cloud providers can market as "Less secure but cheaper HT option".
Suppose you have $5k, you need a car in order to feed your family, and that only the following two options are available: You can buy the safe car for $10k or a less safe car for $5k.
In that situation, less safety can be a reasonable choice.
Indeed, there was a long period of time in which Volvos were demonstrably more safe than other lower-cost vehicles, yet people bought the lower-cost vehicles.
In the cloud-offering world, instead of marketing servers as "less-secure", they can simply offer "more-secure" options that run on non-HT hardware. HIPAA-compliant cloud-buyers will have to upgrade, and then the cloud vendors can slowly lower the prices on both, making the less-secure option lower cost than the present day.
Is there a hyperthreading joke here somewhere?
∞ Known to cause cancer in the state of California
• This statement not evaluated by the FDA
º Might spontaneously catch fire and explode in minor accidents