It's really quite incredible how cloudycloud providers like AWS and Google Cloud have managed to sell themselves as "more resilient due to geographical distribution" (and charge a premium accordingly) when in reality their redundancy model seems to be literally the same as any $5 VPS host with more than one datacenter location
@joepie91 (though AWS has more sensible guarantees on resiliency ; only Microsoft and Google are fucking around AFAIK.)
@raito I don't know about that; every time us-east-1 goes down and takes half the internet with it, the first comment from the peanut gallery is always "should've used multiple availability zones" (translated: should've gotten a VPS in more than one location)
@joepie91 at least if you use $managed shit
On AWS, you most likely get the data
On OVH, Google, MSFT... Well well well :).
@joepie91 yeah but it's true that AWS has proper guarantees on what is a multi AZ or regions compared to MSFT or Google saying a region is something physically separate and in practice, it's the same building but 3 different rooms.
AWS properly enforces sane separation with at least N meters away from each other.
Though, you are right. It does not change that people doesn't know how to do public clouds. :)