Comment by rguldener | Hacker News Reader

Comment by rguldener | Hacker News Reader

I think this is cool but for me personally it would be so much cooler if it was open-source. Sure I understand they want to make money with it but really this doesn't offer me enough more than my current setup that I would be willing to pay $0.05 - $1.40 per hour. That's up to $33 per day or $1041 per month, (quite) pricey for some background execution and rsync functionality.

My current setup is to use a workhorse server where I set up a samba share for my home folder (so I can edit scripts remotely from my notebook without the git-push-pull dance) and a remote iPython notebook. Both config files are write once and forget and I get 90% of their functionality built in (without the web GUI). Would love to learn about other people's setup though, I am sure mine can be improved.

well the range is really $36 - $1,041 per month. That seems reasonable depending upon what you need.

True, but if you only need a small instance you can also just use your laptop to do the processing and do away with a remote machine altogether. You are right though $30 a month for a good management tool seems much more reasonable, too bad they tie the price to the server performance.

Assuming the upper end of that--for a lab with 10 researchers (forget the students, postdocs, etc. for a second), you could save maybe half the cost by hiring a single IT person to do this. Aside from their sb client, I don't see anything in this that can't be downloaded and installed (either from source or automagically from any of the freely available science-related R, Python, etc. repos).

Neat idea, I just find it difficult to justify a $1000/mo per-machine cost, especially in academia.

You can hire IT people for 12k a year?

you would think a Github like model would work. If the project is open source then its free but if you want to deploy an enterprise-wide or private product then you would pay the server costs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com