Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm trying to work out what hosting to get for a small pop up site to take registrations from an EDM campaign. We will send the emails out from mailchimp or similar, and then the site will need to show a couple of info pages and a registration form. Ill proccess the form with cakephp to save to the db and email the registrant.
The email will go out to around 10,000 recipients - so i guess worse case scenario is they all open it at once and click to go to the site, if unlikely.
Is VPS required for this, or will cloud hosting do it? How do people go about estimating that?
Is VPS required for this, or will cloud hosting do it?
In general cloud hosting means a VPS, and then some. Usually the difference is that cloud providers often provide other services (like maybe a CDN, robust APIs, etc) and provide on-demand usage-based billing. This sounds perfect for you since you can just spin up additional instances (if you have a proxy/load balancer) or resize your instances if you find yourself running out of CPU or RAM.
However, cloud services can be a bit ambiguous at times, so let me break it down further. If you are considering a VPS you probably want to go with a provider that gives you a "cloud" VPN where with on-demand (hourly) billing so you can add/resize your VPNs as needed. My current favorite is Rackspace Cloud Servers, but others (like Amazon EC2) are good too. The main reason I prefer Rackspace is that the instances aren't transient (all data is gone on reboot) like Amazon's, which can complicate system architecture.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I've been thinking of creating an online service that heavily depends on HTTP GET/POST requests and some backend processing. But I'm a little confused on which is the best choice of these: Google App Engine or Google Apps Script?
I know Google App Script deals mainly with the other Google products, but that I don't mind; I can write scripts to handle my requests, do the processing, and make databases out of spreadsheets. Yes it's somewhat tiresome, but Google Business Apps is quite attractive to me since I already use it.
I haven't used a PaaS before to be honest. How would App Engine be any better? technically, pricing-wise, business-wise, security-wise... etc.
It's depend on what you want to do.
If you except a heavy load, AppEngine is scalable and permit to handle many requests per second. It launch more instances automatically.
AppEngine have some free quotas and if you develop your application correctly by using memcache you can stay under these quotas.
Doing service with App Engine is completely different than Apps Script which is juste kind of javascript. You can use Python, Java, PHP or Go on App Engine. And if you want to communicate with other Google's products you need to authenticate which is a little bit more complicated than App Script.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a few ideas for mobile applications, some of which could benefit from some cloud functionality.
For example, an application might allow a user to take photographs with their phone which would generate a list of thumbnails, imagine a to-do list which comprises photographs rather than the traditional text entries.
With the help of the cloud, the user could sync the thumbnails on multiple devices, or perhaps give access to the list to another person using a push notification to their phone, allowing them to then download the thumbnails. There may also be a cloud-based database being used.
It's a simple scenario but it raises some questions for me.
Most mobile apps are currently either free (maybe monetised with ads) or have an initial one-off cost, yet ongoing cloud services cost money. If I developed an app that had 1,000,000 users all storing photos in the cloud and they use the app for the next ten years then the cloud costs could be substantial yet income from app sales may be low after the initial influx of users.
So how do other developers manage ongoing cloud costs?
Are most apps that make use of the cloud subscription based?
Can someone who has already done this type of thing share their experience regarding cloud costs and app monetisation?
Cloud storage is pretty cheap so you could go the Apple way and allow free use up to a certain storage limit and then charge for extra space. Another way is to actually store images offline on a local server and then copy back as required. Since these images are only accessible via your app you can send a message to your online server when it looks like an image is about to be required - pre load from your local server and then delete again after some time period. You may need some extra management code but if you know how many devices are registered and whether they all have a copy of the image then there is no need for the image to be available online.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I know this question was asked early last year, but I'm interested if anything has changed (its mid-April 2011)? I basically want to know if GAE is dying or growing?
Is there a current comparison anywhere of who's using cloud services from Amazon, MS, and Google?
GAE is definitely growing. For computationally light python webapps I would say that there's few to none better services available, primarily because of the on demand charges. With amazon you always have to have an ec2 instance of some form or another running, but with GAE you can go days between visitors and not pay a cent until somebody visits your site. I've had a fairly complex app running primarily doing web scraping of about 3000 pages a day and I've only paid $0.02 so far when I accidentally set up a loop that wasn't exiting properly.
However I am coming from a python perspective. The elastic beanstalk on amazon seems to be java focused so it's nothing I have any experience with.
There was a comparison of GAE, Amazon Bean Stalk and CloudBees recently.
It relates to using PaaS for Java applications but you can see if it helps you.
J-Shootout
I myself don't know which is best, but I would keep an eye out for Cloud Foundry VMWare's PaaS solution seems like a really good deal if it can live up to the hype.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
We have a customer who makes use of Salesforce, but they want to develop their own site which will perform a multitude of functions some of which would require integration with Salesforce data and functionality.
In discussions with a Salesforce vendor and our customer, the Salesforce vendor pushed for the customer to do everything in Salesforce itself, as in a portal solution where their entire website is run through Salesforce, or you would switch from some basic HTML pages on your own server to Salesforce pages (Skinned to look like the customer's site).
Surely this recommendation is not in the best interests of the customer?
Doesn't this restrict and limit you to Salesforce technologies and costs?
Long term, if this company decided in the future to expand and build web based functionality that is totally separate from Salesforce what would happen?
Let me know what you think and possibly give me a link or two to motivate what you're saying.
I'm hoping that system/application architects will be the ones to answer, not Salesforce vendors.
Thanks,
Jacques
They may well have been talking about Salesforce Sites. Which do allow you to build a lot of custom functionality, and leverage the power of the Salesforce platform. That said, it does lock you in somewhat. It will likely also limit just what you can do. It really depends just what functionality from Salesforce they want to expose to their customers through the site. It may be a case that a salesforce customer portal (skinned to fit the corporate look and feel) would suffice, and they can leave their existing site alone.
The other option is to build all the functionality on their own site using the SOAP or REST based APIs which Salesforce offer. This has it's pros and cons too. It offers you more flexibility with what you want to do with your site, and you can always switch hosting provider for the site too relatively easily. You could even switch from a PHP to ASP site and still have the same functionality. All of this takes time to develop. It can be used as a way around the expensive salesforce licenses though, and Salesforce just becomes a fancy database for your site in some regards.
Without knowing just how much of the data/functionality within Salesforce the customer wants on their site, And what ultimately they want to get from their website, it is difficult to give a clear answer though.
Also you can check out http://www.magentrix.com, they provide a very flexible and customizable portal for Salesforce.
It's also a cloud-based application, so you are always running the latest version and get tons of new features and tools in each release.
Also the service is offered with a tiered pricing model rather than per user license which makes it more affordable.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm going to deploy my application on one of them,
and have no idea which is better.
Amazon's Cloud services, at this time, are much more general and flexible, while Google App Engine essentially fits some specific classes of applications that can live within its specific limitations (those limitations are being gradually relaxed, as GAE adds features and allows you to pay to exceed certain quotas, but that does not mean GAE will become a completely general-purpose platform the way Amazon's services are).
If your app can live within GAE's limitations, then GAE presents advantages: free up to a certain quota, almost no system configuration / administration overhead, etc. But if you need total flexibility -- for example, if you want to code part of your apps in C or C++, and that's just one of many examples -- then GAE is not suitable, while Amazon (for a price, in both money and sysadm overhead) can accomodate you.
If you've already written your app, and just want to deploy it, I'd have to say AWS is your best bet. AWS is a platform (or rather, EC2 is), and deploying an existing app is easy. App Engine, on the other hand, provides an entire development environment, at a much higher level of abstraction, which has significant advantages when it comes to scaling, but requires you to have written your app to work on it.
Now how about Free Amazon EC2 for a year to do a better comparision. Check this out.
http://www.buzzingup.com/2010/10/amazon-announces-free-cloud-services-for-new-developers/
No one is king in this field because both amazon and google have their own pros and cons. for the finally decision you have to study deep about both or you have to analyze what you required for you apps.
no doubt aws is old in this field and they have lot of good quality stuff but remember google is fast growing in cloud computing.
personally aws is easy to use and training and support is easily available on the other side google is his early stage and bit complex interface for newbie
so you can learn from you requirement