AFAIK AWS have never increased prices on any specific product offering.
Your overall point still stands, agree you have to have a plan for the day your vendor decides to put the squeeze on (and that can take many forms).
Your overall point still stands, agree you have to have a plan for the day your vendor decides to put the squeeze on (and that can take many forms).
On the other hand, if they are known to occasionally significantly increase the price of their offering, then I have to factor that risk into my budget (let's face it: most businesses are locked in to their current cloud provider to a significant extent) so the price on the label is misleading.
I much prefer to pay a bit more up front than to have to constantly guesstimate how much financial risk is introduced by my cloud provider's erratic business decisions.
That said margin is why they could do this. Aws as an overall portfolio of services is profitable enough that they can loss lead on many products that operate at a loss for many reasons.
Finally pricing is done with margins enough to later lower prices, mostly done to ensure they don’t end up in a permanent loss leader situation by misjudging margin or some other aspect prior to launch. But at least when Andy Jassy was in charge there never would have been a price increase - ever. We all knew down was the only thing he would consider, and lowing prices was a good way to get promoted.
But I would say that the AWS glacier pricing model is/was… inscrutable to say the least. There’s probably a reason for that! :)
https://mobile.twitter.com/0xdabbad00/status/106819770559422...
I don't think the distinction is that clear: you could just rebrand an existing service and raise the price. "Try our new v2 APIs, guaranteed compatibility with our v1 API and only 10% more expensive!"
I think the reality is somewhere in between, where companies will use new product launches to add stuff for customers and raise prices to protect their margin.
Assuming the assumption that intergenerational go up is true, in general compute only gets cheaper over time, so escalating prices implies increasing margin.
I don't know if I'm reading your comment right, but the average selling price of iPhones has been climbing steadily from the start.
Current generation:
m6i.large: $0.0960
m6a.large: $0.0864
m6g.large: $0.0770
Previous generations:
m5.large: $0.0960
m4.large: $0.1000
m3.large: $0.1330
m1.large: $0.1750https://redmonk.com/rstephens/2021/12/17/iaas-pricing-2021/ Is also great and shows a flatness in price
That's a very important distinction: increasing prices for users who can't go away and increased prices for users which migrate on their own to the new pricing structure. As far as I know, Google does the former which always has a "fader Beigeschmack" (DE; dulm aftertaste?) IMHO.
* = whatever that means :)
How does this impact you? Your AWS account currently has EC2-Classic enabled for EU-WEST-1 Region"..
To be fair, "EC2-Classic is a flat network that we launched with EC2 in the summer of 2006", so I'm not complaining, but thought it was an interesting counterpoint.
They're retiring a product that's been deprecated for half a decade.
No prices are being raised...
edit: I misunderstood, I thought we were still talking about prices.
The person you are replying to gave the counterpoint that AWS is discontinuing a service that the person is currently using.
This seems like a valid counterpoint to me.
But it turns out I don't have any EC2-Classic instances, and was really just a notification I wouldn't be able to create new one.
That's an important note for Glacier, where a significant price increase could lead to a situation of "You can pay punitive rates for retrieval of all the data to migrate it or you can pay us a higher price every month going forward."