30 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
30 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Amazon S3

by Andyf
26 replies
Hi!

Is it easy to sign up for an Amazon S3 account?

Is this service fairly easy to use?


Thanks,

Andyf
#amazon
  • Profile picture of the author rawdev
    Yes and yes to both questions.
    Give it a go
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545082].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author InternetMarketingIQ
    If it was really hard but the only cost effective solution would you skip it?
    Signature
    Internet Marketing IQâ„¢
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545138].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mariochase
    Amazon S3 is a very good alternative to host videos and audio files.

    To save up bandwidth from your server. Is cheaper than normal hosts.

    And it's pretty easy to sign in.. and it's easy to use.

    You can also use EZS3.. ezs3.com. That is a service most GURU use
    to upload files and admin Amazon S3.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545271].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    It's great for serving videos. It's dirt cheap, but not free. I have an account with a ton of videos on it that only cost me a few bucks a month.

    It's not all that easy ... you do need some plugins to deal with the interface. You create what is called a bucket and inside that "bucket" you create folders that you upload your videos or content to. I use Amazon S3 Bucket Explorer to do this. That is not free either. Someone else may know of some free programs that interface with Amazon S3 to upload your content.

    Bucket Explorer is here
    Amazon S3 UI Client Bucket Explorer

    I also purchased a plugin for Wordpress to embed the videos. It's here
    Secure Amazon S3 Video Streaming for WordPress - S3FlowShield
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545277].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Andyf
      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post


      It's not all that easy ... you do need some plugins to deal with the interface. You create what is called a bucket and inside that "bucket" you create folders that you upload your videos or content to. I use Amazon S3 Bucket Explorer to do this. That is not free either. Someone else may know of some free programs that interface with Amazon S3 to upload your content.

      I heard of Cloudberry Explorer freeware...that is some kind of software that a lot of people use I guess. Hopefully someone out there uses Cloudberry and can comment on it.
      Signature
      Fix Your Own Glove!
      Baseball Glove Repair And Restore

      Become A Better Catcher
      Baseball Catcher Training And Drills
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545289].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bina Omar
    Cloudberry is great. One great feature about Cloudberry is that you can give access to your buckets (folders) with someone else who has an S3 account. This comes in handy when you want to outsource the upload and edits of your videos or files.

    Instead of giving someone your secret key etc, you just give their email address access to a particular bucket.

    Here's the link to Cloudberry. Did I mention it's freeware?
    CloudBerry S3 Explorer - FREEWARE
    Signature
    “Haven't Built Recurring Revenue Into Your Business... What Are You Waiting For??"
    Download the "Recurring Revenue Report" and discover 5 key lessons for building ongoing monthly income through membership programs!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545681].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mgkimsal
      "dirt cheap"? Maybe my definition of 'cheap' is different, but almost any hosting plan out there comes with a decent amount of bandwidth and storage. For videos, for example, storing, say 10 gig of files is only going to cost you $1.50 per month. But let's say you then had a lot of people viewing those videos, and you transfer, say, 300 gig. That's another $51 in bandwidth charges. And they will start charing to *upload* some time next year ('incoming' is 'free' until June 2010).

      Remember, this is just storage and bandwidth - you'll still most likely need a regular hosting/server account somewhere as well. It's still more cost effective in many cases to just get a couple of smaller hosting packages and serve up files from those. The only diff would be if you're not sure if files will be requested. Since S3 is 'pay for what you use', you may have really slow months with low charges. If you plan on getting a lot of traffic, there are many other options which would be much cheaper, depending on your needs.

      Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1545790].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
        Originally Posted by mgkimsal View Post

        But let's say you then had a lot of people viewing those videos, and you transfer, say, 300 gig. That's another $51 in bandwidth charges.
        An awful lot of web hosts charge 50 cents a gig over your allowance, and sometimes that allowance is 20 or 30 gigs a month.

        That's over $100 in bandwidth charges.

        Amazon really is dirt cheap. I've seen overage charges as high as $37.50 a gig, and when you might find yourself looking at a five-figure hosting bill, $51 doesn't really seem like that big a deal.
        Signature
        "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1546192].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Andyf
        Originally Posted by mgkimsal View Post

        "But let's say you then had a lot of people viewing those videos, and you transfer, say, 300 gig. That's another $51 in bandwidth charges. And they will start charing to *upload* some time next year ('incoming' is 'free' until June 2010).

        Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3)

        Hopefully, if I have that much traffic, $51.00 is meaningless if some of that traffic is converting to sales.
        Signature
        Fix Your Own Glove!
        Baseball Glove Repair And Restore

        Become A Better Catcher
        Baseball Catcher Training And Drills
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1546774].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Coyotex
        Originally Posted by mgkimsal View Post

        "dirt cheap"? Maybe my definition of 'cheap' is different, but almost any hosting plan out there comes with a decent amount of bandwidth and storage. For videos, for example, storing, say 10 gig of files is only going to cost you $1.50 per month. But let's say you then had a lot of people viewing those videos, and you transfer, say, 300 gig. That's another $51 in bandwidth charges. And they will start charing to *upload* some time next year ('incoming' is 'free' until June 2010).
        Are you saying that AS3 charges $51/month based on how many people view your videose? I thought they charged based on how much you have stored. Does this work the same way with audios?

        Can someone please explain this?
        Signature

        CFO
        www.TopFitnessStrategies.com

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1564647].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author boaterscott
          I'm not the most tehnical guy, but I've managed to figure out how to do many things. I had some problems getting S3 up and running, so for about $30 I had the guy who works on my computer get up and running. It was money well spent.

          Also consider getting this program:

          eZs3.com - Making Media Easy by Unleashing the Power of Amazon S3 Hosting

          It builds the "player" for your media. I know many people can do it themselves, but I can't and don't have the time, this program allows you to integrate easily with S3 so you can access your uploaded files, then it builds a player for you that you then just grab the code and paste into your website. It's pretty slick.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1564751].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Andyf
      Originally Posted by Bina Omar View Post

      Cloudberry is great. One great feature about Cloudberry is that you can give access to your buckets (folders) with someone else who has an S3 account. This comes in handy when you want to outsource the upload and edits of your videos or files.

      Instead of giving someone your secret key etc, you just give their email address access to a particular bucket.

      Here's the link to Cloudberry. Did I mention it's freeware?
      CloudBerry S3 Explorer - FREEWARE
      Bina....thanks for the info and link.

      Andyf
      Signature
      Fix Your Own Glove!
      Baseball Glove Repair And Restore

      Become A Better Catcher
      Baseball Catcher Training And Drills
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1546780].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mattiyu
    Great, thanks for the info posted. Was not familiar with amazon s3.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1547008].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author InternetM39482
    It's awesome. I use a mac and S3Hub makes it extremely easy to use.

    And I get almost negligible bills every month.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1564758].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Anonymous Affiliate
    It's a cheap and reliable way to delivering high-bandwidth videos. Their interface sucks so it's not that easy to get it all set up (it takes a bit of research on your end).
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1564890].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Josh Anderson
    I love Amazon s3 but it is not cheap like people keep saying.

    Bandwidth from Amazon can be very expensive compared to many other options.

    The only people who think it is cheap are people who really don't need scalable bandwidth to begin with... ie those who spend just a few bucks each month because they don't use that much bandwidth.

    Simple cdn provides file hosting, bandwidth and cdn at a fraction of the cost of s3.

    There are definite benefits to Amazon and we take advantage of them having integrated Amazon heavily into our content delivery and security application for Nanacast.

    However, I personally do not think it wise to use Amazon for public content. For public content I would recommend either economy hosting where you can get a lot of bandwidth for cheap in economy hosting accounts from companies like Powweb.com and Aplus.net and if you need more than what they offer or you need the power of a cdn network and lots of scalable bandwidth available at all times then consider using a company like Simple cdn.

    I use Amazon for premium content because of their great security features and API. We will also be using the Amazon EC2 cloud solution because they now offer mysql and on demand scaling for web based applications.

    But for raw public file hosting for stuff like sales letter videos etc I'd recommend checking out the economy options or Simple cdn as you will save a lot of cash if you have significant bandwidth...

    1500 gigabytes of bandwidth in a month in the form of 3000 downloads of a 500 mb file will cost you:

    Aplus.net $10.00
    Powweb.com: $4.00
    Simple cdn: $59.25
    Amazon s3: $255.15
    Signature
    Nanacast Review
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1565037].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Andyf
      Originally Posted by Josh Anderson View Post


      But for raw public file hosting for stuff like sales letter videos etc I'd recommend checking out the economy options or Simple cdn as you will save a lot of cash if you have significant bandwidth...

      1500 gigabytes of bandwidth in a month in the form of 3000 downloads of a 500 mb file will cost you:

      Aplus.net $10.00
      Powweb.com: $4.00
      Simple cdn: $59.25
      Amazon s3: $255.15

      Holy crap!!! More options to look at!

      Thanks for the info Josh. I didn't know of any of these other options. Hopefully other people out there have and can comment on those options vs Amazon S3 also.

      Andyf
      Signature
      Fix Your Own Glove!
      Baseball Glove Repair And Restore

      Become A Better Catcher
      Baseball Catcher Training And Drills
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1565271].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Andyf
    I think the other thing (important too) to look at is download speed or traffic handling. There are a lot of hosting options now that have "unlimited bandwidth", but supposedly if you have a lot of people trying to access your video (or whatever) all at once, things slow down and people can't load the video right away or it gets annoying to watch...things like that.

    I hear Amazon S3 is really good with having the ability to handle a lot of traffic, hits, requests...many people trying to watch your videos.

    Don't know, though...just what I've read as I'm trying to figure this out.

    Andyf
    Signature
    Fix Your Own Glove!
    Baseball Glove Repair And Restore

    Become A Better Catcher
    Baseball Catcher Training And Drills
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1565287].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Josh Anderson
      Right and those are questions you should ask the host you are considering directly.

      For example aplus.net provides 100mbs (last time I checked). Powweb is load balanced and collocated...

      If you are interested in CDN hosting to increase delivery speeds then here is a comparison of the only three services I would consider for consumer level (amazon cloud front, Rackspace/mosso, and Simple cdn) -

      Comparing CDN Performance

      Now it is important to note that page is a comparison of CDN which does NOT include Amazon s3 because s3 is not a CDN.

      In fact Amazon s3 can be one of the slowest as illustrated on this page:

      http://ryankearney.com/2009/12/compa...n-performance/

      That is why Amazon offers Cloud front which is their CDN. So if speed is your main concern... if you are using it for direct response video for example you need to look at CDNs.

      Originally Posted by Andyf View Post

      I think the other thing (important too) to look at is download speed or traffic handling. There are a lot of hosting options now that have "unlimited bandwidth", but supposedly if you have a lot of people trying to access your video (or whatever) all at once, things slow down and people can't load the video right away or it gets annoying to watch...things like that.

      I hear Amazon S3 is really good with having the ability to handle a lot of traffic, hits, requests...many people trying to watch your videos.

      Don't know, though...just what I've read as I'm trying to figure this out.

      Andyf
      Signature
      Nanacast Review
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1566683].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
    Amazon is great for certain things, but if you host a lot of videos, and you get a lot of traffic, Josh is 100% correct - it WILL get expensive.

    I have also noticed that for streaming videos - especially if it gets a lot of views, sometimes the streaming is horrible, slow, etc. Technically speaking, S3 is not meant to be a source for streaming videos. It works well in many situations, but evaluate what it is you want to do and choose accordingly.

    Amazon also offers CloudFront (Not the same as EC2) - this is supposed to offer better content delivery as well as streaming - BUT - it is an ADD-ON cost. It works WITH their other services, like S3, so for example, you would need S3 to store your media and then CloudFront for better streaming - 2 charges. I am testing this now so I am not sure how well it will improve things for the money.

    I know from the work I have done with Mike F - putting the sales videos on S3 is done ONLY to keep the load off the server - especially during a launch. It's not for cost - I have seen the bills .

    I have a few sites where I have a few gigs of files that I deliver to my customers. For this S3 is awesome, and so far, my largest bill was about $48 and my monthly average is about $15 (not high traffic sites).

    Weigh your options.

    Mike
    Signature

    Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1566720].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Josh Anderson
      Hey Mike,

      Is serving a file through Cloud Front really a double charge? If so do you know the total cost for serving a gig after the combination of charges?

      I thought it was still only $.17 out per gig total but I was a little confused as to whether it was two charges.. one for s3 hosting and another for cloud front. It seems like it would be the lesser though as Amazon is trying to be competitive on cost.

      Rackspace/mosso is $.22 per gig on their CDN and SimpleCDN is only $.039 which makes it really appealing for anyone on a budget needing to do volume.

      Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post

      Amazon is great for certain things, but if you host a lot of videos, and you get a lot of traffic, Josh is 100% correct - it WILL get expensive.

      I have also noticed that for streaming videos - especially if it gets a lot of views, sometimes the streaming is horrible, slow, etc. Technically speaking, S3 is not meant to be a source for streaming videos. It works well in many situations, but evaluate what it is you want to do and choose accordingly.

      Amazon also offers CloudFront (Not the same as EC2) - this is supposed to offer better content delivery as well as streaming - BUT - it is an ADD-ON cost. It works WITH their other services, like S3, so for example, you would need S3 to store your media and then CloudFront for better streaming - 2 charges. I am testing this now so I am not sure how well it will improve things for the money.

      I know from the work I have done with Mike F - putting the sales videos on S3 is done ONLY to keep the load off the server - especially during a launch. It's not for cost - I have seen the bills .

      I have a few sites where I have a few gigs of files that I deliver to my customers. For this S3 is awesome, and so far, my largest bill was about $48 and my monthly average is about $15 (not high traffic sites).

      Weigh your options.

      Mike
      Signature
      Nanacast Review
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1566772].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
    Josh,

    It's a bit confusing to figure out what you pay for - and if you pay twice. Here's what is on their site:

    Paying for What You Use

    Amazon CloudFront is designed so you don't have to pay any upfront fees or commit to how much content you'll deliver through the network. Like other Amazon Web Services, you pay as you go, and only for what you use:
    • Storage in the origin server You pay normal Amazon S3 storage charges to store objects in your bucket; the charges appear in the Amazon S3 portion of your AWS statement.
    • Copying objects to edge locations When Amazon CloudFront receives a request for an object it doesn't already have at an edge location, it makes a standard GET request back to Amazon S3. You incur the normal Amazon S3 charges for GET requests and for data transfer out; the charges appear in the Amazon S3 portion of your AWS statement. Amazon CloudFront copies an object to an edge location only if there is demand for that object at that edge location.
    • Serving objects from edge locations You incur Amazon CloudFront charges for GET requests and data transfer out. The data transfer charge is lower than the corresponding Amazon S3 charges for data transfer The Amazon CloudFront charges appear in the Amazon CloudFront portion of your AWS statement.
    Your monthly bill from AWS separates your usage and dollar amounts by AWS service, so you'll see some charges for Amazon S3 and some charges for Amazon CloudFront. Your use of Amazon S3 related to your use of Amazon CloudFront is combined with any other Amazon S3 usage you may have for the month.
    I only just started trying this out, so I don't have much data...but from what I am reading, I don't think you actually get charged twice - but simply by the different services.

    At this point, I have a lot of files on my S3, but maybe looking at some alternatives is not a bad idea

    Mike
    Signature

    Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1570046].message }}

Trending Topics