On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Georg Ragaller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, that was nearly my train of thoughts, that this one could be attractive > because of its (current) generous provision of resources. Although I think > that the current free quota is not only sufficient for small apps only, and > that will even hold after the upcoming changes to the quotas ( > http://code.google.com/intl/en-EN/appengine/docs/quotas.html#Free_Changes ) > in my opinion. But everything is relative, even 'small' is :-). I think Google is fairly smart in this aspect. Let the 'little guy' get going without 'thinking' and by the time he 'makes it', we charge him through the nose... One needs to study the numbers carefully and make sure that the revenue stream can match the billed prices as bandwidth, storage and CPU time rises. Will also need to study if Qi4j is actually compatible with App Engine at all, since there are restrictions on which JDK classes that can be used. Time for an experiment I think. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
