So I have been running the numbers for Azure and RackSpace Cloud Servers and found that RackSpace is substantially cheaper, less developer investment (no custom programming), and RackSpace offers RackSpace Cloud Files if you need a substantial storage solution for your site. It almost seems too good to be true, what am I missing?
A:
Amazon?
See: http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/ and http://aws.amazon.com/s3/
Pricing: http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/#pricing and http://aws.amazon.com/s3/#pricing
Bravax
2010-03-02 14:36:52
hmmm, it is cheaper...I will take a look...
emalamisura
2010-03-02 14:45:33
+1
A:
I'm not sure exactly what you're asking here, but one key difference is that Azure has a much larger infrastructure and support for servers in 21 countries, with an additional 21 slated this year, whereas RackSpace Cloud only has servers in the US with the UK slated for later this year.
Other than that, if you're just looking for some cheap scalable hosting then you're probably not missing much by going with something like RackSpace. But Azure is more than that.
There are also a number of additional services available for integration with Azure, such as CRM, SharePoint, SQL Azure, Live. And also a number of development APIs and services, and AppFabric for ineroperability. For developing scalable enterprise applications they aren't really comparable.
Gerald
2010-03-02 14:49:36
I would love for someone to prove that, I have heard that argument numerous times with Windows Azure that it will be substantially more scale-able. But you are also investing substantial development time, tying your app to Azure by utilizing their API. I think ultimately I am going with Amazon, it seems to be the defacto standard for cloud solutions and is tried, and tested. I wanted to make Azure work, but I don't see it happening...
emalamisura
2010-03-02 15:53:55
I don't see how this is something that really needs to be proven, since the size and breadth of the respective infrastructures are facts that are easily checked. I was making a comparison between Azure and RackSpace, not Amazon, since those were the platforms that your question mentioned. Though it is also my understanding that Amazon only has servers in the US and Ireland.I'm also wondering why you're complaining about development time tying your app to Azure, which would be minimal unless you're using the services that the other solutions don't have.
Gerald
2010-03-02 20:37:14
I am mostly just disappointed, I had high hopes for it as a platform but it seems that they have significantly missed the mark...
emalamisura
2010-03-03 01:29:58
Your experience has obviously been the exact opposite of mine then ;) But then I wasn't expecting to develop efficient cloud-based applications that didn't require any special programming, because I don't think that's a reasonable expectation.
Gerald
2010-03-03 19:00:26
A:
I've been using RackSpace cloud rather than Amazon because for small instances RS is less expensive. The service has been rock solid.
Jim Blizard
2010-10-06 18:25:12