As I understand it, the site had no usage quota, it was the end user (ultimately the browser making the map API request). The end user had a limit but as this was in the hundreds or thousands (can't recall) it was not real concern for your average end user.
Is this what's changing? The site is now accountable for request quota?
My understanding is that the site was always responsible for the usage quota. The calls made (even on the client side) technically is made by the website, so the limit applies to the website.
If requests come from the end user and not the site (as you mention), very few people would hit that limit and it would not be a concern.
That is correct. It used to be unlimited, with requests rate limited per IP/visitor to prevent abuse. It will now be 25,000 free loads per day per site, and $4 per 1000 loads after that.
Weird. Is Google "really" interested in (aggressively) monetizing their mapping API (like MSFT, that has each department responsible for their own profitability)?
Or, is this a longer term business strategy? Put up public pricing that allows them to go back to partners and say "here's the new price -- yes it's high, but it's the same for everyone"?
I'd say it's not so much a play to monetize their mapping API so much as it is a way to not have everyone in the world sitting on their shoulders for free. Free is the operative word there. Free is a funny thing. It creates artificial demand. I'll give an example.
I used to do independent consulting, and in the course of consulting, recommended Google Apps for email hosting, even if the client wasn't going to use Google Docs or any of the other Google Apps services. It was the best free option for email hosting around. But the fact that it was free created some problems.
Most of the clients I transitioned did so at a time when mail hosts put limits on the number of mailboxes you could set up. A strange concept in today's world, but that was the status quo at the time. Clients would provide mailboxes for users and for general purpose correspondence, but they were reasonable. Once they figured out that mailboxes were free and unlimited on Google Apps (once upon a time), they'd go crazy. Soon, mailbox counts ballooned to 50 or 100 mailboxes for organizations with 15 users or less.
By making their APIs free, Google creates artificial demand, which raises their costs. It's wise to implement reasonable limits.
My surprise at the announcement has also partly/mostly to do with the actual pricing, which kicks in pretty fast (25k free map loads daily). It seems like a lot of small-to-medium, non-profit sites would fit into that. One example amongst many, many others: http://www.housingmaps.com/
10 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 30.1 ms ] threadAs I understand it, the site had no usage quota, it was the end user (ultimately the browser making the map API request). The end user had a limit but as this was in the hundreds or thousands (can't recall) it was not real concern for your average end user.
Is this what's changing? The site is now accountable for request quota?
Or, is this a longer term business strategy? Put up public pricing that allows them to go back to partners and say "here's the new price -- yes it's high, but it's the same for everyone"?
I used to do independent consulting, and in the course of consulting, recommended Google Apps for email hosting, even if the client wasn't going to use Google Docs or any of the other Google Apps services. It was the best free option for email hosting around. But the fact that it was free created some problems.
Most of the clients I transitioned did so at a time when mail hosts put limits on the number of mailboxes you could set up. A strange concept in today's world, but that was the status quo at the time. Clients would provide mailboxes for users and for general purpose correspondence, but they were reasonable. Once they figured out that mailboxes were free and unlimited on Google Apps (once upon a time), they'd go crazy. Soon, mailbox counts ballooned to 50 or 100 mailboxes for organizations with 15 users or less.
By making their APIs free, Google creates artificial demand, which raises their costs. It's wise to implement reasonable limits.
My surprise at the announcement has also partly/mostly to do with the actual pricing, which kicks in pretty fast (25k free map loads daily). It seems like a lot of small-to-medium, non-profit sites would fit into that. One example amongst many, many others: http://www.housingmaps.com/