Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Amazon.com Website Down For Over 1 Hour

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the there-goes-the-bottom-line dept.

CorporalKlinger writes "CNET News is reporting that Amazon's US website, Amazon.com, has been unreachable since 10:30 AM PDT today. As of posting, visiting www.amazon.com produces an 'Http/1.1 Service Unavailable' message. According to CNET, "Based on last quarter's revenue of $4.13 billion, a full-scale global outage would cost Amazon more than $31,000 per minute on average." Some of Amazon's international websites still appear to be working, and some pages on the US Amazon.com site load if accessed using HTTPS instead of HTTP."

5 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Re:How is this news? by felipekk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because this represents 31k USD every minute.

  2. Re:How is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because this represents 31k USD every minute. That assumes that everyone who would have bought something doesn't just try again when the site's back up. Nevermind that the number quoted is talking about a global outage -- this is just a partial outage.
  3. Re:How is this news? by mixmatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly, except that not everyone that would have purchased their products in those 60 minutes will buy elsewhere. They hour they came back online they could make 1.9 x typical USD per minute. That and the fact that this is not really a holiday season of any sort, so sales are likely nowhere near the peak rates they reach around Christmas, New Years, etc...

  4. $31,000 per minute! by DirePickle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    would cost Amazon more than $31,000 per minute on average.
    Because obviously if someone tries to buy something and Amazon is broken for an hour, they're just going to not-buy it or buy it from a competitor. Because you definitely can't wait an extra hour to place an order when it'll take 2-10 days for the product to get shipped to you anyway.
  5. Re:This will surely help by DrHanser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Digg sends far more traffic to a site than Slashdot does (obviously it wasn't always this way). And digg's traffic isn't particularly noteworthy to a site of any reasonable size. (Say, Ars Technica, nevermind amazon.)

    Yahoo Buzz, on the other hand, sends *huge* amounts of traffic, noticeable to sites like, again, Ars but again no disruptions of service*. But I doubt that amazon would even hiccup. If you think slashdot would even be a blip on amazon's radar, you have some serious delusions about 1) slashdot's size 2) amazon's size or 3) both.

    * According to one of the devs.

    --
    What is humor if not pain tempered by time?