I would agree with that. Small story: Working on the retail side of Amazon, one day I got pissed that if I wanted to use PostgreSQL that I had to set up my own EC2 server and EBS infrastructure and maintain it, whereas if I wanted a MySQL instance I could just use RDS. I had a few legitimate usecases at the time that required PostGIS, so I was annoyed about it and I vented on a few mailing lists about the lack of PostgreSQL in RDS.<p>In a move that I would have <i>never</i> seen in the retail side, a product manager at RDS emailed me and set up a meeting with me and a director and VP. He invited me to make my case for having PostgreSQL as an RDS option. For about an hour I explained why the existing options didn&#x27;t fit my use case, how there was a burgeoning market that was waiting for it due to Oracle&#x27;s mismanagement of MySQL, and how there were several teams within Amazon that preferred the strictness and standards compliance of PostgreSQL but chose MySQL due to not having to manage it. They thanked me, and less than a year later there was a public announcement of a PostgreSQL offering in RDS.<p>I don&#x27;t think I can take full credit for them launching it...they already had public forum threads of people asking for it and tons of +1 responses. But they actually listened to me, and they took into account my expressed desires to have several extensions available as well. That sort of bottoms up communication doesn&#x27;t happen on the other side of Amazon.