Without understanding the architecture and use case better, at first read, my gut says that isn’t an AWS problem - it sounds like a solutions architecture problem.

There are cheaper ways of building that use case on AWS.

Most AWS sticker shock I’ve seen results from someone who doesn’t really understand cloud trying to build on the cloud. Cost has to be designed in from the start (in addition to security, operational overhead, etc).

In general, I’ve found two types of engineering teams who don’t use the cloud: the mugs and the superstars. And since superstars are few and far between, that means…

Sounds like we need a specialist.

I guess those promises about needing fewer expensive people never materialised.

tbh, aside from the really anaemic use-cases where everything actually manages to scale to zero and has very low load: I have genuinely never seen an AWS project (outside of free credits of course) that works out cheaper than what came before.

That's TCO from PNLs, not a "gut feeling". We have a decade of evidence now.

... you failed at reading comprehension?

My comment was not about using AWS is bad, it has its uses. My comment was about how in this instance it was simply not needed. And I even speculated when it might be needed.

To pick the correct tool for the job, is what, it means to be an Engineer, or a person with common sense. With experience, we can get over childish absolutions of a tool or service, and look at the broader aspects, unless, of course, we are expecting some kind of monetary gains.