Talk:Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud
|WikiProject Computing / Software||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
Summary of Issues with this Wiki Article
I would like to clean up this page over the next few months. I'm going to start by summarizing the issues raised on this page and then propose what the cleanup could look like with the hope that those more familiar with Wiki contribution guidelines can help guide my effort. Help welcome with summarizing the issues
- Commercial article
- Unstable functionality
- Encyclopaedia or Adverticement
- As before:
- I'm not going to get into a revert war with you. There are a many of people on the Internet claiming to be the originators of EC2. The truth is that there is no one person that you can claim credit to it as it was a culmination of effort from several people. Over time, some of this misconception will get rectified. A few days ago, Amazon released a 10 year anniversary video for EC2. While it doesn't reproduce the list that you reverted, it stars several of the initial team members mentioned in the edit you reverted reminiscing about the very beginning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gk_I_0eMDA. Enjoy. Cheers. Scaramang (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- There are two problems with this addition: firstly WP:UNDUE and secondly WP:UNSOURCED.
- There is only one name, the name in the original version, which is linked. The others are nothing more than names. Even without judging the extent of their contributions, adding the bare names adds nothing usefully encyclopedically useful to the article. If you could tell me that, "Fred built on his PhD work at U.Fulchester which had first formulated the basis for OpenStack as IaaS and IasCode." then that would be a context which told me something about what their contribution had been, and how it was important to the topic here. As it is though, it's just names. I don't know these people.
- Then there is WP:UNSOURCED. Which, quite simply, we just don't get to mess with. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
EC2 seems like a commercial trading name or trademark, etc. I believe this is a pretty basic commercial article. It is probably a weakness of Wikipedia that it makes it too easy to create a new article. Now Wikipedia is established, the rate of arrival of concepts new to Wikipedia has dropped off quite markedly. Maybe it is time for a slightly more restrictive policy regarding who can create what kind of new articles why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjalexand (talk • contribs) 14:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Just pointing on that this remark on Wikipedia policy has nothing to do with the content of the article.Wtsao (talk) 22:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Today's massive outage, which affected a number of social websites, is not mentioned. Indeed, the introduction gives a concrete reason why this service is claimed to be reliable. An encyclopedia is not the place for biased coverage of a flawed commercial service. At least let some time go by, then write a balanced article. -- David_Spector 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:06, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Unstable, spotty database connectivity
Wow, I never thought I'd live to see 10-20% rate of FAILURE on database connectivity. What are they running on, pentium II's and scavenged parts?
Encyclopaedia or Advertisement ?
I think it would be helpful to have some history on EC2. When was EC2 launched? I'm trying to compare various "cloud" technologies, particularly when they were launched.
I think whoever put in the $73/mo price is on something. I ran a test using Amazon's calculator and got $23/mo for a single, continuously running "small" Linux instance with 1Gb data in and 2Gb out, but I'm not confident enough in what I entered in that to change the Wiki page... StaticSan (talk) 23:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- Right you are, for Reserved Instances. You pay a non-refundable fee for an instance that's tied to a Region and Availability Zone, then pay a reduced rate for however much you use it, see the Reserved Instances on the Pricing page for those rates. $325/year, $500/3 years and $0.03/hour ($0.04/hour in Europe) for a small Linux/UNIX instance, for a total of $50/month or $37/month.
- So you could set up your system with an On-Demand Instance and see if it's going to get used enough, and then reserve one for $23/month less. Not as Elastic, but could be a good deal, especially if you have a reliable baseline you serve with 1-20 (the normal limit) Reserved Instances and then surge with On-Demand Instances as needed. Hga (talk) 12:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that the savings is directly related to how often the instance is used. If you use your instance about 1/4 of the time you end up breaking even with on-demand prices, of you use it less than that then you actually pay more. If you use it every hour of the 3 years then you pay less than half. I am not sure that applying direct mathematics to a primary source's information is original research, what do other people think? Chillum 14:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
It would be helpful for those of us who are non-tecchies if this page could link to a reliable definition of what an instance is. This term seems fundamental to understanding the EC2. I've looked at the current entries for the term on Wikipedia, there are several, and none explain wtf it means in terms that an ordinary person, who is not an IT specialist, can understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudfa (talk • contribs) 10:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC) The closest that I can find with a quick Google search is here: , which I shall add, but I am sure someone else can do better. Sudfa —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudfa (talk • contribs) 11:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
PSN hack made through Amazon EC2
What is this supposed to mean: "Charges are applied on demand so the credit need not be used in the first month."? It's in the "free tier" section. 184.108.40.206 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:28, 7 February 2012 (UTC).