6 ms·

This holds back so many projects - how expensive hosting web applications eventually becomes. I'm hoping for more decentralized options to eventually emerge (l

This holds back so many projects - how expensive hosting web applications eventually becomes. I'm hoping for more decentralized options to eventually emerge (like IPFS, etc.), but in the meantime, I'd probably recommend to this guy to perhaps offer a paid app version, or just charge for accounts on his site. Or else try a kickstarter or indiegogo campaign.

strayptr 11y ago
How expensive would an application like this be? I don't know much about this, but I'd like to learn. What's an algorithm for figuring out a pretty good guess of any random application's hosting costs? Also, is there a way to figure out how large the expenses could become over time? Is there some way to relate number of users to cost? There's no upper bound for how much money one could spend, but let's use the midpoint between "extremely frugal" and "money isn't really a concern."
- williamstein 11y ago
  Hosting on GCE costs about $1700/month right now, and at this moment we have $490/month in recurring revenue (we have 56 subscribers to various plans). I've put much work into making SMC more efficient, in order to bring the hosting price down, but there are limits. The reason it costs this much are: (1) there are often about 500 users signed in, every user is using at least one Linux account, and what users do is often very computationally and memory intensive (mathematics, number crunching, etc.), (2) I snapshot and backup all files both to Google Cloud Storage and also copy backups offsite. Doing offsite backups mainly costs bandwidth -- I spent about $20 in the last 3 days on downloading offsite backups of user data (to a USB drive on my desk). (3) In addition to compute nodes, there are database and web servers, which are redundant so that two can go down and things still work; this is very important since teachers often give lectures from SageMathCloud or run computers labs, so downtime is very bad. (4) I also snapshot all the disks images regular, which costs more, but reduces the chances of data loss. I care that users don't lose their data in case of a disaster (hackers or lightning striking Google four times), which just makes things cost more.
  - aaronbrethorst 11y ago
    How important is your tool to your users? teachers often give lectures from SageMathCloud or run computers labs OK, sounds important. I care that users don't lose their data in case of a disaster (hackers or lightning striking Google four times), which just makes things cost more. And it sounds like you care. So, how much do you charge for such an important tool? we have $490/month in recurring revenue (we have 56 subscribers to various plans) $8.75/month. Try tacking on an extra zero to all of your plans. Or, better yet, tack on an extra zero and ALSO let your customers decide whether or not they care about things like backups. I don't want to sound like an asshole, but your business is never going to succeed if you keep going down this path. And to be clear: I want to see you succeed. Here are a few things by patio11 you should go read right now: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2014/04/03/fantasy-tarsnap/ http://www.kalzumeus.com/2014/04/03/fantasy-tarsnap/ https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/saas_pricing https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/saas_pric... http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/08/13/doubling-saas-revenue/ http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/08/13/doubling-saas-revenue/
  - sylvinus 11y ago
    From what you describe, shouldn't pricing be higher if users are costing you so much?
  - vonklaus 11y ago
    What do you mean 56 subscribers, 500 people are using the app concurrently? Are the rest unpaid subscriptions? Or do the subscribers have numerous users?
    - williamstein 11y ago
      At this moment there are 585 people connected to SMC (a bit higher than usual due to Hacker New effect), and most are using it for free. We only introduced a fully automated paid plan about 10 days ago, and many of our sign-ups have been in the last week. Paying customers get enhanced support, the ability to upgrade project quotas, and can ask (it's not yet automated) to have projects moved to members-only servers. The members-only servers have an order of magnitude less users on them. There were also until recently obstructions to charging users due to IP and other issues involving University of Washington (my employer).
mattzito 11y ago
> This holds back so many projects - how expensive hosting web applications eventually becomes. Hosting web applications costs a fraction of what it did 5-10 years ago, both in terms of straight costs as well as operational expenses.
- sanderjd 11y ago
  I think what you said and what the parent comment said are both entirely true.
- curun1r 11y ago
  The interesting thing, to me, is not the overall cost of hosting, but the new ways that we can host. I've got a current project that I'm working on. I have no idea how successful it will be and I'm not interested in putting a ton of my own money at risk to see if it will be successful. But using a model where I have zero of my own servers (Lambda, API Gateway, Static hosting) means my fixed costs are under $20/mo and my variable costs scale with usage. All I need to do is ensure that my per-user monetization is higher than my per-user cost and my application scales up without any effort on my part. In the era of hosted servers, capacity planning and scale out took a ton of my time and energy on projects like this. And while I might end up paying a bit less in the long run if I followed the same methodology today, not having to worry about that kind of stuff and being able to focus solely on the application is really nice.
paulproteus 11y ago
This sort of thing would make a great Sandstorm app, for what it's worth. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10147774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10147774 for more about that.

strayptr 11y ago

How expensive would an application like this be? I don't know much about this, but I'd like to learn. What's an algorithm for figuring out a pretty good guess of any random application's hosting costs? Also, is there a way to figure out how large the expenses could become over time? Is there some way to relate number of users to cost? There's no upper bound for how much money one could spend, but let's use the midpoint between "extremely frugal" and "money isn't really a concern."

williamstein 11y ago
Hosting on GCE costs about $1700/month right now, and at this moment we have $490/month in recurring revenue (we have 56 subscribers to various plans). I've put much work into making SMC more efficient, in order to bring the hosting price down, but there are limits. The reason it costs this much are: (1) there are often about 500 users signed in, every user is using at least one Linux account, and what users do is often very computationally and memory intensive (mathematics, number crunching, etc.), (2) I snapshot and backup all files both to Google Cloud Storage and also copy backups offsite. Doing offsite backups mainly costs bandwidth -- I spent about $20 in the last 3 days on downloading offsite backups of user data (to a USB drive on my desk). (3) In addition to compute nodes, there are database and web servers, which are redundant so that two can go down and things still work; this is very important since teachers often give lectures from SageMathCloud or run computers labs, so downtime is very bad. (4) I also snapshot all the disks images regular, which costs more, but reduces the chances of data loss. I care that users don't lose their data in case of a disaster (hackers or lightning striking Google four times), which just makes things cost more.
- aaronbrethorst 11y ago
  How important is your tool to your users? teachers often give lectures from SageMathCloud or run computers labs OK, sounds important. I care that users don't lose their data in case of a disaster (hackers or lightning striking Google four times), which just makes things cost more. And it sounds like you care. So, how much do you charge for such an important tool? we have $490/month in recurring revenue (we have 56 subscribers to various plans) $8.75/month. Try tacking on an extra zero to all of your plans. Or, better yet, tack on an extra zero and ALSO let your customers decide whether or not they care about things like backups. I don't want to sound like an asshole, but your business is never going to succeed if you keep going down this path. And to be clear: I want to see you succeed. Here are a few things by patio11 you should go read right now: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2014/04/03/fantasy-tarsnap/ http://www.kalzumeus.com/2014/04/03/fantasy-tarsnap/ https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/saas_pricing https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/saas_pric... http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/08/13/doubling-saas-revenue/ http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/08/13/doubling-saas-revenue/
- sylvinus 11y ago
  From what you describe, shouldn't pricing be higher if users are costing you so much?
- vonklaus 11y ago
  What do you mean 56 subscribers, 500 people are using the app concurrently? Are the rest unpaid subscriptions? Or do the subscribers have numerous users?
  - williamstein 11y ago
    At this moment there are 585 people connected to SMC (a bit higher than usual due to Hacker New effect), and most are using it for free. We only introduced a fully automated paid plan about 10 days ago, and many of our sign-ups have been in the last week. Paying customers get enhanced support, the ability to upgrade project quotas, and can ask (it's not yet automated) to have projects moved to members-only servers. The members-only servers have an order of magnitude less users on them. There were also until recently obstructions to charging users due to IP and other issues involving University of Washington (my employer).

mattzito 11y ago

> This holds back so many projects - how expensive hosting web applications eventually becomes. Hosting web applications costs a fraction of what it did 5-10 years ago, both in terms of straight costs as well as operational expenses.

sanderjd 11y ago
I think what you said and what the parent comment said are both entirely true.
curun1r 11y ago
The interesting thing, to me, is not the overall cost of hosting, but the new ways that we can host. I've got a current project that I'm working on. I have no idea how successful it will be and I'm not interested in putting a ton of my own money at risk to see if it will be successful. But using a model where I have zero of my own servers (Lambda, API Gateway, Static hosting) means my fixed costs are under $20/mo and my variable costs scale with usage. All I need to do is ensure that my per-user monetization is higher than my per-user cost and my application scales up without any effort on my part. In the era of hosted servers, capacity planning and scale out took a ton of my time and energy on projects like this. And while I might end up paying a bit less in the long run if I followed the same methodology today, not having to worry about that kind of stuff and being able to focus solely on the application is really nice.

paulproteus 11y ago

This sort of thing would make a great Sandstorm app, for what it's worth. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10147774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10147774 for more about that.