Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Am I understanding this correctly, basically a Colo was acquired by Amazon?

It’s pedantic but colo existed for decades before AWS.

It’s the software layer from AWS that made it “The Cloud” (quicker access to hardware & billing by the second, not month)



But to answer your reply further, yes colocating already existed in the northern Virginia area because of Arpanet, the internet exchange, and AOL all being in the area pre 2000’s.

DuPont had been building in Datacenter Alley for a number of years already, but the buildings were way smaller; and the systems less complex. ACC1, 2 and 3 are all still there in operation today and have been retrofitted a number of times since 2000. Today, those tiny DC’s are apart of the bigger network in the area; and are just connected together via private fiber loops.

https://maps.apple.com/?ll=39.022237,-77.457433&q=Dropped%20...


> It’s the software layer from AWS that made it “The Cloud”

That's one way of looking at it, but no one would have used that software if OP had done a sloppy job with the electrical system.

I'm sure there was plenty of boilerplate code in that software (and some very innovative code) and plenty of sophisticated work done to create the physical datacenter.


> OP had done a sloppy job with the electrical system.

Everyone always wonders why us-east-1 shits the bed more than others. Now we know why.

/s obviously.


Nope. As I understand it, Amazon doesn’t actually own data centers; similar to how they don’t own warehouses.

My understanding later on in my career shift to computer engineering was that Amazon is renting out the whole colo, and just owns their equipment.

Amazon isn’t maintaining the datacenter infrastructure such as cooling and power, but instead it’s covered in their bill.


> Amazon doesn’t actually own data centers; similar to how they don’t own warehouses.

Are you certain they don't own at least a fraction of the facilities they use? Amazon has very good credit (AA or AA-), which in a lot of cases probably means they have access to cheaper money than their landlord does. When you factor in the landlord's profit margin, it just doesn't make sense for Amazon to rent rather than to issue bonds and buy.

I imagine that they do rent as well, since it lets them respond more quickly to demand / business needs, but it would just be really weird for them not to own any of their own critical infrastructure.

Edit: Looks like it's a mix of leased and owned, on both counts

https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/amazon-web-servic...

https://therealdeal.com/national/2023/02/07/amazon-slams-bra...


So then who owns the warehouses that have Amazon logos on them, exclusively used by Amazon with Amazon employees working inside them?


https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/06/13/prologis-amazon-warehous...

Prologis controls roughly 1 billion square feet of warehouses and distribution centers used by companies including Amazon, Home Depot and FedEx.

Probably there are others as well that rent warehouses to Anazon.

Having a sign with the name of a business on a building does not mean that the business owns the building itself.

Many companies rent offices for example, and put their logo on the building where they are renting offices.


A building I worked in had multiple tenants. My (now former) employer leased five of the six floors, but the big sign on the building advertised a company that had half of the first floor at most. Obviously they were willing to pay more money for advertising rights.


Does this explain the proliferation of "Salesforce Towers" around the world? I have not been convinced they actually need that much office space.


Isn’t this though wrongly taking credit.

This is like saying “I sell cardboard boxes to Amazon, who uses my cardboard boxes to ship packages” … and then claim you built the logistics and online behemoth of Amazon.com

I’m not trying to be a hater. But this story sounds more like you were a supplier to something Amazon built, not something you built.


> Isn’t this though wrongly taking credit.

No, because it says "without really knowing it" right in the first sentence.


But they did “know it”.

When you’re building data centers, you are fully aware you are building “The Cloud” (even before that term was coined), because that’s literally the business you’re in … regardless of who you’re customer (AWS) is or not.


Is there a reason you're so intent on being a killjoy? Is there really an important point being made here? Don't worry, they do not falsely believe that they invented and built AWS.

This story is basically akin to someone who works at a restaurant saying that one day a celebrity came in and ordered a hamburger, and a photo was taken with the hamburger that ended up becoming famous, and them saying that they made that hamburger. It's just an interesting "I was a small part of something that became big" story. But thank god we have you here to make sure that that person doesn't go around telling people they built AWS.


I mean, that’s kinda what AWS is doing right now with its customers’ successes with gen ai, no?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: