Things Fall Apart: Amazon’s Epic Cloud Failure Reveals Shortsightedness by Some Other Well-Known Tech Companies

(Page 2 of 2)

based in San Francisco, sells ads and paid subscriptions, and is owned by media giant Conde Nast, which reportedly has been talking to investors about buying a stake at a potential $200 million valuation. “They can’t blame it on the money,” Sanchez says.

“People are quick to point fingers at Amazon or whoever their cloud provider is—‘They’re down, and they took us with them.’ You see that on Twitter, if you look, from dozens and dozens of brand-name sites,” Sanchez says. “At the end of the day, that’s true. You’re down because of Amazon. But in reality, your whole business relies on being up. And there’s 100 different ways that they could have avoided having to say, ‘We’re down because of Amazon.'”

Whenever Amazon gets its service back together, it’s a reasonable bet that alternate providers will see some new customers. At the very least, Amazon-dependent companies will probably switch to or add computing power in other areas of Amazon’s network.

But it’s unlikely that Amazon’s position in the cloud-computing sector will weaken in a major way—even companies that were crippled for hours by the outage were pretty deferential, like Palo Alto, CA-based Quora’s error-page message that said “We’d point fingers, but we wouldn’t be where we are today without EC2,” the shorthand for Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud.

As Palo Alto entrepreneur Semil Shah noted on Twitter, “Perhaps the company most vital to Silicon Valley startups isn’t even located here—it’s in Seattle.”

“In a way, it’s kind of amazing that people trust EC2 so much, and EC2’s record of being available for so long without any major failure,” Subramanyan says. “I think it’s actually pretty amazing that these companies have failed to diversify their vendors.”

Single PageCurrently on Page: 1 2 previous page

Trending on Xconomy

By posting a comment, you agree to our terms and conditions.

  • Two things that elevate this incident past a simple outage. One is the number of sites affected. Since so many sites have Amazon ads Web Services, a host of sites were down, many major high traffic sites were down for hours, possibly days. Have you seen any estimates on the amount of potential dollars lost because of the failure? Had to be many millions of dollars in revenue lost.

  • Here’s one you didn’t see and this makes me uneasy in healthcare to see anything that has a tiny pulse getting funded. Is there enough due diligence today with investors or are the start ups disclosing enough information?

    As you can read from the forum here an SOS was put out for help as Amazon was nowhere to be found and hundreds of cardiac home patient were not being monitored. This is a big deal with this kind of failure and Amazon is the secondary problem, but first of all the company had no fail over plan, mistake number one.

    http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2011/04/what-happens-when-cloud-server-goes.html

    Again, this leads me to the 2 questions above as health services will grow and rely on cloud structures and servers, that’s a fact so how did happen here?

    As of yesterday I didn’t see any relief and when a customer puts out an SOS complete with account numbers and so forth, we have problem. I sent it off to the FDA since they just somewhat relaxed their class 1 devices rules, which in essence there are devices bringing in the data to the clouds. We don’t know here who is the ultimate recipient of the information, family, a doctor, medical records, or whatever. This is one to think about seriously.