>>>This week a client's file and SQL Server's mother board fried itself at about 9AM
>>>There were good program/data backups but no server redundancy.
>>>A super network tech colleague had all the client's apps up and running on an Amazon server by 5PM the same day.
>>>Now the client has server redundancy, better performance, and one less box to worry about.
>>>That was really impressive.
>>>Add one to the list of cloud converts.
>>>I've bought my last Windows box.
>>
>>Yep a lot of folks are going that way. All is good as long as your database is under 16tb - and I think that should be good enough for large percentage of businesses. I am curious as to the cost though - I've never been able to get the Amazon website to actually give me a price lol. Not having to deal with the box and setting up redundancy etc etc etc is worth a few bucks for sure - and the piece of mind you get from not worrying about it is worth a few bucks too.
>
>Not sure about the price. It depends on the configuration and the number of users.
>It's a huge technical shift to go from the LAN to the cloud, however.

Really? Doesn't seem like it would be that difficult to me -- change a few connection settings and you're done??? I'd say I'm obviously missing some key parts of the puzzle lol.

>Fortunately, the tech handling the conversion is as good as they come, so it went well, albeit with many bumps in the road.
>It would have been much smoother had he had more time.