Are there any Unforseen Difficulties with Offloading Image Storage to Amazon CloudFront using C#?

I'm contemplating the use of Amazon's CloudFront service to offload my web applications image/file storage from my web host.

Users of my app can upload images, the image is named and the path is stored in a database. I'm thinking of just having the app upload the image to CloudFront and then change the path to use the CloudFront service. Shouldn't be too hard...

I've read of other developers using CloudFront for static images and haven't seen too much about using it for the primary storage of images that can be uploaded/deleted at any time.

My app is ASP.NET MVC based, using C#. Has anyone used C# to setup an upload to CloudFront, from the user's uploaded file?

Anyone recommend against this? The pricing looks affordable and the speed looks fantastic. The only thing that comes to mind would be in devel开发者_运维百科oping it, are there any technical difficulties in developing this that I'm unaware of?

Should just be a simple file upload as long as my web app has write permissions, am I correct?

Thanks in advance!

As with all newer technologies, do expect a tat of technical difficulty somewhere along the road but from what I read, it seems relatively safe. For sake of disclosure, and balance, I should mention a 7 month study by the University of New South Wales in Australia found some notable inconsistencies in the bandwidth/responsiveness within individual cloud hosting providers.
Another concern is the possible hikes in pricing of "cloud" services. Providers are, at the moment, all in the process of getting market share; will they eventually try more realistic prices...

Another remark, however, is that it seems that your are keeping a traditionally hosted application and merely putting the file server in the cloud. This strikes me a bit as odd, since file serving is a cheap, easily scalable resource in the single-server type configuration (except of course if you plan on a home run and have your application see traffic like that of Google ;-) ). Could it be that the traditional hosting provider has hiked his per-Megabyte rate ?