@carmp3fan, I would not necessarily think so. I am mostly providing services (email, nextcloud etc) for a relatively small group of users, and having block storage in the datacenter would work very smooth in that application - HDD would be perfectly ok for those kind of needs.
I don't disagree on email (somewhat do for Nextcloud considering you can use it directly from S3), but I still don't see it as a big reason for moving to it. I've been using Linode for my own mail server for years and even with my hoarding tendencies for the last 10+ years, I've only accumulated 4.7G, so I run fine on a 1024.
If you'll notice, I didn't say anything about a web server. Mostly because it would likely be cheaper and faster to have the storage intensive photos and videos stored in AWS than on your low-end Linode. That makes assumptions that that is easy to do with whatever software you are using.
I am currently using S3 storage with one of the big providers. S3QL actually works very well in that kind of application, since it uses a (large) local cache that is very quick in delivering the items requested often (recent emails, files added and shared in nextcloud etc). You notice waiting times rarely, mostly when looking for a rarely touched file. I was secretly hoping Linode would provide an s3 backend, but whatever way they do their block storage, I'll buy. Nothing beats having it in the same datacenter. And I rather give my (little) money to Linode anyway
I've not used S3QL, but it looks like something I should. I really wish someone would create something (I'm not capable) that would use both S3 and BackBlaze B2. Kind of like RAID across providers.