Is that correct (compare where marked)?
It’s a bundled Object Mount + Storj Object Storage for Global Collaboration.
You may compare with the Object Mount offering: Storj Pricing | Seamlessly scale on the cloud built for media production
However I shared your question with the team.
Yes, but why does it say “End User Licenses” on Production Cloud Global and “Storage Locations” on Production Cloud Regional? And if “Storage Locations” is correct, why does it say “Additional licenses” then below?
It appears as if there’s something that does not fit. And the 300TB just sounds a lot compared to the the other offering. I wonder if that’s correct or if it was meant to be 30TB?
Because for the Global Collaboration it’s offered on a license per user basis.
It is related to the geographic locations.
Additional licenses, except bundled to the package, should be purchased as an addition. For example you have 15 locations and want to add 1 more.
300TB seems correct for me, if you take a look on an Object Mount offering.
Let’s see what the team will respond.
I believe it should be End User Licenses as well. Because at the top it also says this is for US region. So how can it be 15 locations?
It is very much compared to the global offering. Why should anybody choose regional if they get global coverage with 20TB minimum? Even at the higher price of $40 the global version is a lot cheaper because of the lower minimum.
Maybe it’s all intentional but it looks strange with the information available.
Because you will be limited to the number of users, not locations. For example, you have a team, distributed across 15 cities. So, each offering has an own reasons.
Why shouldn’t I just buy 5 additional licenses @$75 each then? This would be still much cheaper than the regional offering.
Still doesn’t make sense to me the way it is displayed on that page.
They are for different purposes and different distribution schemas under the hood.
As far as I understand - Production Cloud Global will distribute pieces across the globe, not necessarily closest to the uploader, Production Cloud Regional will distribute pieces closely to the uploader, so it will work faster for other team members in the same region.
But I will ask a clarification though.
I understand that this is the goal. I guess my main question is if the performance differences are so huge between regional and global to justify the price difference. Basically I though it must be a typo. Like 20TB minimum for global, 30TB minimum for regional.
Ok, but wouldn’t it be close to the uploader anyways due to long tail cancellation. So will the Production Cloud Global actively remove pieces and transfer them to other locations?
It would be great to have more information. At least for me I can say that I have currently no idea what this product offering is meant to be and would not be able to make an informed decision for one offering or the other with the information that is currently available. This includes the question if these settings are per bucket or if it is possible to switch from one model to another in case the requirements are changing.
It could be possible, thus I shared your feedback with the team, but they usually do not work on weekends. So, I would wait for their answers before I may be sure.
I think the satellite will offer nodes differently depending on the client and their chosen tariff plan. However, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that repairers will redistribute the pieces after they’ve been uploaded.
The final goal is to have it on the bucket level, yes. And it would be nice to be able to switch, if possible. However, right now I cannot switch a bucket from Storj Global to Storj Select, so I think it could be not possible to switch between Production Cloud Global and Production Cloud Regional or vice versa, too. But I do not have details of implementation yet, so they maybe implemented differently.
No problem with that.
Maybe a future blog article could dive more into details of all the different aspects of the offerings not limited to the Production Cloud.
1 Like
Thank you for noticing the difference. We updated the website, could you please check?
Looks good now. At least the question regarding license vs. location is clear now.
The minimum seems still huge though, but if it is what it is then be it.
Still extensive information on the offerings would be great like a blog article or something. Something that would explain the differences, use cases and advantages and disadvantages in detail.
I shared this request with the team.
1 Like