If you have been watching the discussion at any one of the familiar spots about Amazon’s new S3 web service you will see a lot of talk about comparing the new S3 service with standard hosting compaines.
How S3 differs
The core of S3 is the Object database, your not just storing bits, your storing bits and meta data. It’s like exposing the underlying layer of a filesystem with a platfom agnostic API. That’s a lot differnt then putting a file up on to your web host’s hardrive.
The killer app(s)
So what is S3’s killer app? I duno for sure. But I think a lot could be done in 2 areas.
- Platform portability is a no-brainer.
- You can have the user expose certain files to the public(like photos or movies) or the user can could choose whether or not to share the file via BitTorrent.
- The cost for a standard full 250 gb drive would be $37.50 a month there would be an initial transfer fee of $50.00 all subsequent backups would be differential so you cost for the transfer would only be based off what has changed or what has been added.
- The benefits are outstanding. You get reliable distributed storage for your entire drive for only $37.50 a month. And that’s if you actually use all 250gb of your drive. I would bet the price will probably get better.
– Bloging apps & casting
- There are a lot of different casting applications out there today Podcasting, Photocasting etc.. Most bloging systems don’t offer much storage for media beyond images. For instance this WordPress blog only allows me to upload images. If I want to do a podcast, photocast or just upload code for people to view then I have to find other server to store it.
- Apps like WordPress, Blogspot, TypePad and Live Journal could create a plug-ins that would allow users to use there A3 accounts. A user could then store and link to what ever files they wanted to.