The quoted CPU pricing "$0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour" is similar to Amazon EC2 small instance pricing ($0.10/hr), but it's probably not a straight comparison. AppEngine seems to charge by the sip, as might be expected from a compute utility, while web apps will probably require a minimum of 24x7 usage of an EC2 instance. So AppEngine should be less costly on the low-end.
Here's an interview with some AppEngine managers on the announcements tomorrow:
http://readwritetalk.com/2008/05/27/pete-koomen-paul-mcdonal...
$@*!.
Well, looks like Heroku will hang around for a while...
At least with amazon, you have controll of the servers, and can install whatever you want. With Goggle App Engine your are tied to it to the hip.
And Google has been getting eviler lately. For some reason I wouldn't trust my source code with them, while I would trust amazon a little bit more.
There is only one business sector in which I'd be scared to compete with Google and that's search.
I don't think so, Google's hosting is going to bite into MS's market of IIS and Windows Servers just like GMail/Calendar is competing with Outlook/Exchange.
OTOH, I've pretty much gone with Ruby at this point, and since that's not an option, I'll just keep my own server. I do like the control I have, even if it's expensive.
That's a lot of entrants to the web 2.0 market.
