I'm sorry, but the Amazon SLA is nothing but a slap on the wrist if their service level drops to 'shocking' status. It might be true of a hosting only company that downtime would drive them into unprofitability with an SLA like that, but AWS is just a side business for Amazon. If that, even - if a hosting company got 90% uptime, their customers would leave in droves and not use the 25% credits anyway, which would be exactly the same result that you'd get without an SLA.
The point that Amazon made earlier - that they didn't believe a SLA was important because their internal customers are demanding and hold them to strict accountability - was, I believe, not just a cop out. That guarantees their services far more than some 25% refund for horrible services SLA would. Unless, of course, their internal customers get priority.
The point that Amazon made earlier - that they didn't believe a SLA was important because their internal customers are demanding and hold them to strict accountability - was, I believe, not just a cop out. That guarantees their services far more than some 25% refund for horrible services SLA would. Unless, of course, their internal customers get priority.