the AWS things you mentioned you don’t need to mess with at all, with the exception of IAM, which doesn’t cost anything at all.

your experience just hasn’t been my experience I guess. The more managed the service you use, the more costs you are going to pay - for a very long time I’ve got by with paying for compute, network, and storage on the barebones services. If you want to pay for convenience you will pay for it.

One area that was a little shitty that has changed a lot is egress costs, but we mostly have shifted to engineering around it. I’ve never minded all that much, and AWS support is so good at enterprise tiers that they’ll literally help you do it.

We're talking about add-on services, and you were comparing to cloud providers and implying it doesn't really matter because vendor lock-in didn't really happen as feared. I made the case that it's the add-on services that create the lock-in.

> I’ve got by with paying for compute, network, and storage on the barebones services.

Yes, as I mentioned, that type of migration isn't difficult, which is akin to migrating to a different model provider, but that's not what we're discussing. You can't hand wave the issue away if you're not even talking about the the topic at hand.

That said, I agree with your suspicions of how it'll shake out in the end, because most businesses behave the same way, and always try and lock-in their customers.

> the AWS things you mentioned you don’t need to mess with at all

not the op, but I suspect they were meaning it's a huge pain migrating to a different cloud provider when all those features mentioned are in use. not that managing them is a mess in AWS.