Amazon Elastic Transcoder vs. OVHcloud Public Cloud

It is well suited in a large setting where people use different file formats and various apps to record and transfer their audio or video files across devices. In such scenarios, the transcoder would of real help to eliminate the hassle of converting the files into desired formats for viewing or doing some other analysis.

The transcoder would not be of much use if all the files have the same format and does not need any conversion from their source file formats. It would prove costly and not useful if it's just an additional step that is of no particular use

Incentivized

For demo uploads or for production uploads of companies from different sectors looking for a "general computing" cloud solution, I think that OVH can be a good provider. However, for more delicate or advanced loads or for specific solutions of, for example, AI, OVH has a wide margin for improvement.

Incentivized

• Works at scale, you can can transcode a high number of videos at the same time.
• Supports a good number of formats.
• Good integration with AWS S3 and other AWS Services.

Incentivized

• Price
• Quality hardware
• Quality network
• Administrative tools
• Range of products

Incentivized

• Amazon Elastic Transcoder requires a fair amount of setup.

Incentivized

• Technical support
• Account support
• Billing support

Incentivized

Support for Amazon Elastic Transcoder is the same as any other service within AWS. If you are familiar with AWS, it is easy to start using Elastic Transcoder

Incentivized

Amazon Elastic Transcoder is in a league of its own when compared to other alternatives in the market. The most noticeable competitor would be either Microsoft or Adobe or Google. When I had a chance to compare Azure products and Amazon products, the difference is obvious and the experience provided by both the products are very different in terms of user experience and interaction with the application. The cost and availability also were taken into consideration when choosing between the two shortlisted choices. So we went with Amazon's product as it is widely used and has support and maintenance which is basically better than the competition.

Incentivized

Most notably OVHcloud [Public Cloud] has dedicated servers which are a different breed of product than Linode's flagship VPS servers, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that OVHcloud [Public Cloud] can provide a fully-dedicated server at a lower price point than Linode's virtual server. Even worse than that is that with a dedicated server from [OVHcloud Public Cloud] there is zero chance of "cpu theft" (aka, noisy neighbor) which is a very real problem at Linode (we would require multiple migrations every year for servers hosted at Linode that were experiencing cpu theft). In addition to the improvement in quality for network/hardware at OVHcloud [Public Cloud] with their dedicated server offering, their VPS servers are also highly competitive against Linode's VPS servers - in the 2 years we've used OVHcloud [Public Cloud] VPS's we've had zero downtime associated with OVH actions such as host-node reboots or cpu theft or host node upgrades, a stark difference compared to Linode which regularly experiences those types of downtimes and many more on a very regular basis.

Incentivized

• Less time for integration with this service if you are already in AWS stack
• No real time transcoding is a negative

Incentivized

• Cost of virtual servers was reduced by 20% versus other VPS/Cloud providers.
• Cost of dedicated servers was reduced by 50% versus other dedicated server providers.
• Network speeds decreased considerably versus other providers.
• Network quotas improved considerably versus other providers (unlimited at OVH).
• Uptime has improved considerably which has improved client reputation.

Incentivized