Amazon has finally released and put into effect their SLA for S3. I know a lot of my readers will be thrilled about this.

I’ve gotten a few questions about Nirvanix in the past month or so, especially about the fact that they offer an SLA (and that S3 didn’t). I think this probably puts the final nail in Nirvanix’ coffin because:

• Why would you trust Nirvanix, a no-name company, with your precious data?
• Worse, they’re affiliated with MediaMax/Streamload in some way, who have a reputation of poor service. (I’ve even seen reports of data loss at Streamload, though I haven’t bothered to check).
• Just how much is an SLA worth when there’s nothing behind it to back it up?
• They’re more expensive than Amazon. Um, duh.

SLAs don’t mean a lot to us, anyway, as I’ve said before because:

• Everything fails sometimes.
• The SLA payment is rarely comparable to the pain and suffering your customers had to deal with.

But I know it’s very important to lots of people, so I expect there’s cheering and dancing in the streets.

UPDATE: I get SLAs now. Sorry for being dumb.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 8th, 2007 at 6:07 pm and is filed under amazon, datacenter. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.