Blog Post

PaaS not cheap enough? AppFog has a deal for you!

Stay on Top of Enterprise Technology Trends

Get updates impacting your industry from our GigaOm Research Community
Join the Community!

Developers love PaaSes but no one likes to spend money. So AppFog, which offers a multi-language, multi-cloud PaaS built atop a Cloud Foundry foundation,  is cutting its list price in half to lure more developers to the platform.

The new option, available from AppFog’s site, costs $50 per user for 500MB to 4GB of database storage and 50GB of data transfer. In July, Portland, Ore.-based AppFog launched its ambitious cross-cloud PaaS effort including a free  version for up to 2GB of RAM. Additional monthly plans with more memory started at $100 for 4G, $380 for 16GB and $720 for 32GB. The free version is still available.

Each MySQL and PostgreSQL database instance comes with 500MB of storage; each Redis and RabbitMQ instance comes with 10MB of RAM and 6 concurrent connections; free custom domains and the fastest servers from whichever cloud infrastructure the developer selects.

AppFog CEO Lucas Carlson said he made the move in response to developers who want more storage and other resources.  “When developers told me that our plans were not quite right for their needs I knew i had to make it better,” Carlson said via email.

The problem with PaaS is that while developers love the freedom to design and develop on that infrastructure, many companies still don’t want to deploy on an outside platform. Another issue is VMware’s decision to spin off Cloud Foundry to a new corporate entity. That has sparked concern about how open the Cloud Foundry development process will be going forward. VMware and parent company EMC have said they won’t discuss details of its spinoff plans until early next year, leaving Cloud Foundry-dependent PaaSes in a bit of a quandary.

2 Responses to “PaaS not cheap enough? AppFog has a deal for you!”

  1. Personally, I think cost is the secondary issue.
    If a certain platform can save me a lot of time and effort – I would go for it.
    The bigger issue is the lack of flexibility. I want to be able to control everything (just if needed) – to choose versions, to use whatever network protocols I wish, to even install something kernel level if I need to (not common, but not that far-fetched). For this – we need something in the middle between IaaS and PaaS – keeping the ease of use of PaaS, while not killing the flexibility of IaaS (*only if needed*).

    You can take a look at – our take on this is to let our users create customizable and cloud-agnostic blueprints (which support customization in the deepest levels possible, while also allowing duplicating applications).