Cloud Computing Comes In For Some Nasty Weather

from the outages-weren't-in-the-forecast... dept

I’ve definitely been a fan of Amazon’s web services offerings. By providing cheap, scalable and robust processing power and storage (and, as of recently, a simple database), Amazon has started to singlehandedly change the economics of doing certain things online. It’s become quite common for startups to build their platform entirely on Amazon’s systems — and given the stability of Amazon itself, it always seemed like a good idea, especially following some high profile outages at popular data centers. However, this morning, that “robust” part got called into question as Amazon’s S3 service had a major outage, taking down a variety of startups and services (and, apparently, plenty of images on various websites). While some are suggesting this shows the weakness of “cloud computing,” it’s not necessarily all that different than those earlier outages where you had a data center go down. Given this and the recent Blackberry outage, we’re again learning that robustness isn’t just nice to have — for many services it’s really a need to have, and we’re not quite there yet.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: amazon

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Cloud Computing Comes In For Some Nasty Weather”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Mike (profile) says:

Re: I am so glad...

Someone recently looked sniffy at me when I said we’re using Rackspace instead of Amazon. Now who’s going to look sniffy back?

Heh. Well, didn’t rackspace just have a major outage too?

Not sure you can say that one is necessarily better than the other, which I think is kind of the point. We still haven’t figured out a way to really guarantee uptime.

Freedom says:

File under 'get a life'

Some ideas to consider….

– Not a matter of IF it will fail, but WHEN. When it does fail, chance are that it will be at the worse time.

– Even planes with two engines crash. So while redundancy sounds great, it doesn’t mean that you won’t have problems. In fact, sometimes the increased complexity of redundant systems will increase the chance of failure along with the time necessary to fix it (assuming specialized parts are needed).

– I’m probably being a bit naive here, but does this really matter? For instance, when we work with client that has a server, workstation or Internet outage and they can’t work for 1/2 day or heaven forbid a full day, after they come to terms of their system being down it allows them to refocus and catch up on stuff that they had been putting off because of being a slave to the PC/info stream. Sometimes outages are really small opportunities to re-focus and take a step back to see the forest. (I know, I should work in the PR departments for Amazon and BlackBerry – LOL!).


Joel Coehoorn says:

> “we’re again learning that robustness isn’t just nice to have — for many services it’s really a need to have”

I disagree. In fact, I go the complete opposite direction. This proves that robustness isn’t as important as we thought after all. The businesses that went down this morning will still be here tomorrow. If any aren’t, it’s probably not the outage that killed them, or at most it was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It turns out most businesses can survive the occasional outage. Sure, it cost them some money, but it’s not the end of the world.

Sara says:

I was familiar with cloud computing but never paid attention to it. Now this is the second time in two days, i’ve seen it come up.

the other was from a site called Metue that had some ideas on how it factors in to the microsoft yhoo deal (article is here:

Twice in two days , now I’m thinking I need to do some reading and pay a ton more attention to what the cloud stuff is. Time to scan the past articles here

Bill Sorenson (user link) says:

It can work...

One thing that does work is using a company that has enough infrastructure so that downtime is extremely rare. In reality, small businesses have so much downtime with local servers, PCs, etc. that moving the applications to the cloud makes total sense.

We’ve been doing “cloud computing” via Terminal server desktops for 8 years with our customers rarely having issues. By building and controling the environment, having great redundancy, and providing great service, it works. Doesn’t have to be all web apps, that’s for sure. And, if you pick the right service, you have someone on the other end of the phone that can help. Gotta love that., it does work.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...