<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: S3 in Business: 1 &#8211; Introduction</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cardbox.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/s3-in-business-1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cardbox.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/s3-in-business-1/</link>
	<description>Designing, building, selling and supporting a leading End User Database</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 01:20:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Off you go&#8230; into the purple yonder! &#187; Amazon&#8217;s S3 and EC2 services</title>
		<link>http://cardbox.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/s3-in-business-1/#comment-531</link>
		<dc:creator>Off you go&#8230; into the purple yonder! &#187; Amazon&#8217;s S3 and EC2 services</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Oct 2006 21:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://cardbox.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/s3-in-business-1/#comment-531</guid>
		<description>[...] Amazon Web Services is offering two relatively new services: ubiquitous storage via S3 and &#8216;elastic&#8217; computing via EC2. The Cardbox folks have an in-depth analysis of S3 online, and Smugmug uses an S3 backend.This is very interesting. If it wasn&#8217;t for all the problems with the S3 contract, I would consider using this. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Amazon Web Services is offering two relatively new services: ubiquitous storage via S3 and &#8216;elastic&#8217; computing via EC2. The Cardbox folks have an in-depth analysis of S3 online, and Smugmug uses an S3 backend.This is very interesting. If it wasn&#8217;t for all the problems with the S3 contract, I would consider using this. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon</title>
		<link>http://cardbox.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/s3-in-business-1/#comment-412</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://cardbox.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/s3-in-business-1/#comment-412</guid>
		<description>&quot;Too good to be true? ..It makes data storage really, really dull and boring.&quot;

It would be a lot more dull an boring, and a lot easier for the people that do the backups if S3 supported rsync.

Without rsync support, I have a barrier to entry: I have to find something reliable (mature and tested) that will perform proper incremental backups.

Without rsync support I can&#039;t use other backup programs built on top of it, such as duplicity, which encrypts the data before sending it to the remote server.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Too good to be true? ..It makes data storage really, really dull and boring.&#8221;</p>
<p>It would be a lot more dull an boring, and a lot easier for the people that do the backups if S3 supported rsync.</p>
<p>Without rsync support, I have a barrier to entry: I have to find something reliable (mature and tested) that will perform proper incremental backups.</p>
<p>Without rsync support I can&#8217;t use other backup programs built on top of it, such as duplicity, which encrypts the data before sending it to the remote server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
