Hacker News Reader

Not so much an example of why not to use budget providers, more an example of why you should build highly available infrastructure. I don't believe there is any provider, "budget" or not, that guarantees a servers reliability 100% of the time.

View on HN

I was alluding more to the customer support aspect of it. If a technician spends one hour troubleshooting your network problems, then they've already lost their profit for the month.

This is one thing where I find AWS shines. I'm on the lowest level of paid support, and I've had nothing but excellent service from good technicians who will try to actually replicate your problem, then contact other teams if they fail or there's follow up. Out of a dozen or so tickets, I've only had one where the response wasn't genuinely useful, and that was for an issue that may have been due to internet weather anyway.

Support is one of things that you can get along without... until you need it. Then you really, really wish you had it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com