http://disqus.com/people/551dc8fafa501c38c253504a8a0ca86a/enTue, 22 Jul 2008 12:16:36 -0000http://technosailor.disqus.com/cloud_computing_does_not_spell_the_end_for_common_sense_it_management/#comment-967072It's been said before, but different services have very different costs associated with them. It's easy for an outsider to simply say there should never be a single point of failure, but it's really a balance of cost, risk, and reward. <br><br>You bag on Smugmug, but take a step back and think about their problem. They have 335 million photos and store the original size in addition to 8 display sizes. Is it worth it for them to pay millions of dollars per year for storage that gets used for a few hours during that year?<br><br>Twitter, quite honestly, has enough outages of their own that keeping S3 as a single point of failure for their images is probably a relatively safe bet.<br><br>Maybe you don't understand the "web world" as well as you think?JonTue, 22 Jul 2008 12:16:36 -0000http://firsttube.disqus.com/a_review_of_online_photo_services/#comment-1515815Great review! Most comparisons I read about these photo sharing sites miss the important details. This one was dead-on.JonWed, 03 Oct 2007 08:09:33 -0000