New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Google Compute Engine Pricing
http://cloud.google.com/pricing/compute-engine.html
Enterprise class~
and enterprise class price... :-(
Comments
hahahahaha the good old "Cloud"
aka the marketing word to rip off people.
My Rackspace servers / LBs are so much cheaper than this.. Like 4 times cheaper.
$105.85 per month on the lowest tier of Machine, not including transit and such.
I wish we could swing prices like that
We all wish that
Not terribly priced. Everyone knows you pay for brand names, and in some cases you should. The brand name carries an expectation of a certain quality, and if they can live up to their own name, it can be worth it to not have to put it in the hands of someone you don't know if you can trust as much or not. You'd hate to be wrong with mission critical content. It's not very competitive though, unless I'm overlooking something. There are already big names in this market...
Are you insane?
@DanielM Don't act like you haven't seen worse. Look at the resource allotment, it doesn't start as low as other providers.
Considering how much Amazon AWS has taken off(I see it everywhere; it drives everything popular that's not Google or Facebook), i'm surprised it's taken Google this long to come out with a competitive product. And frankly, Google's effort is somewhat lackluster....
Why can't google price match @Damian at 50 cents a month /:
+10000000000
It's pretty much a clone of EC2 pricing.
Yawn.
Google and Microsoft both bet on Platform as a Service. There is a lot of merit to the idea, but it turns out people don't want it. Google App Engine and Azure are just not as popular as Infrastructure as a Service (EC2, your typical VPS provider). Microsoft retooled and now offers IaaS VMs. Now Google is doing the same.
Google is late to the party and it's a "me, too" kind of thing, with very similar pricing. So...who cares?
Google is late to every party except the ones people don't want to attend. Exceptions for maps, search, and android.
Let's just wait and see where they go with it. Google always releases something that's kind of 'meh' then they work on it and make it a quality product.
Really just search. Android is little more than an iOS clone - and iOS, while neat, is more a collection of UI ideas than really amazing engineering or something. Maps is a nice use of a database but hardly revolutionary.
Google really is a one trick pony.
"Always"? They often kill projects. Not saying that's bad - good tech companies should do a lot of experimentation. But when I think of Google, I think "80% done".
@raindog308 I was thinking it, but their fanboys are hardly worth upsetting
A lot of Google's ideas don't take off, but they do get a lot of stuff right. Android, Mail, search, maps, youtube (was a good investment), chrome. It's always better to try and to fail, than the never take anything to market because you're too afraid it will fail.
Android certainly isn't an iOS clone in any way shape or form. Considering how many android phones there are out there (more than iOS phones), I just can't agree with you. I would never purchase an iPhone, and I love my GS II, especially running an AOSP build.
Speaking of good Google ideas. Chrome for iPad. It's beautiful.
How many of those were purchased because they were android and not just because they were cheap with contract?
...I bet the number is more equal on buyers who purchase intentionally.
I don't know? Does that make a difference? That doesn't make android any better or worse. Point is, it's a great product that's not an iOS clone as was said above, it's just ignorant to say that.
Chrome is amazing :P.
Not a difference, I just see it used all the time as a measurement of which OS is better. It's a hard comparison to make when budget android phones have been around far longer than budget iOS phones. There actually is some argument to Android being an iOS clone, not about features but about the guy who started it literally stealing the idea from Apple. But that's a conversation with no good end, more accusations than facts, and a lot of pissed off fanboys.
I never said one was better or not. Just that android is not a clone of iOS. You keep throwing around the fanboy, while coming off as an iOS fanboy. You're right though, we shouldn't go into this, one of our feelings may get hurt.
@Kairus I am an Apple fanboy. I think Google fails at nearly everything they do. I think they love to put their worst foot forward, show up late to every party and jump in the pool yelling "Look what I can do!" which is usually what everyone else has been doing for the last 4 hours so it impresses no one but their friends. Apple on the other hand keeps releasing new things that people think are stupid, then selling the living crap out of them. Everyone thought the iPad was going to be a failure. Google hasn't had a hit since gmail.
Feelings hurt?
One thing I think a lot of people forget when comparing “compute services” like EC2 and traditional VPSes (including LEBs) is that compute services are, in theory at least, tooled with the assumption that you'll use 100% of your resources. When I buy a VPS, I assume I'll be given the boot if I crank away on all CPU available to me 24/7; if I were to buy compute, on the other hand, I'd be miffed if I weren't allowed to do so.
No. I think Apple products are all crap. The iPad is an oversized phone, and it looks horrible. iPhone is way too locked down, and while 2+ years ago I felt it was an okay phone, it hasn't changed, so it's crap now. I would never purchase an apple computer, so their product lineup is crap to me. Google's got a lot of great products/solutions in their search engine, android, chrome/chromium, their contributions to the linux kernel, mail, etc. Can't say that much about Apple
.
I'm also happy Steve Jobs is dead, because he was a douche and useless to society, never did anything innovative. Did I make fun of your god? :O
@Kairus I like closed environments. Every time I see someone bragging about their open source OS, all they do with it is try to theme it to look like iOS and Mac OS and run around asking what the nearest Linux app is to iMovie.
I would say I've still got it but obviously you caught onto me flexing the troll muscle
Watch though, someone else will bite in like 12 hours...
Yup, I love it on my iphone. 10000x better than pooopy safari.
But he is such a great salesman, with his reality distortion field.
Did you see the Google I/O session on it?
Its not like for web hosting etc, its basically a rent-a-supercomputer.
@MrLadoodle -- What use of "SuperComputers" do we have? Apart from wanting to bitmine it up, or F@H.
:S
Discover the cure to cancers.
What I meant was that the iPhone ushered in the age of modern smartphones. Android is more of a derivative of its ideas. Android is not the trailblazer here.
Features, functions, etc. - you can argue which is better, sure. But my point was that Google bought Android and worked on it to make it a modern smartphone. Apple invented the modern smartphone. I'm saying that while Google may (or may not) have improved/perfected, it's an example of Google being "me, too" rather than pioneering.
Much, incidentally, like Microsoft Windows is/was an open hardware "me too" to the closed-hardware Macintosh :-)
I am not an Apple fanboy btw...not a Mac user and hate their software, though I do like/own their iOS devices.