A company is building a three-tier application on AWS: a static website for the presentation tier, a containerized application for the logic tier, and a relational database for storage. The company wants to simplify deployment and reduce operational costs. Which solution meets these requirements?

The correct solution leverages Amazon S3 for static website hosting, which is highly scalable, cost-effective, and requires no server management. For the containerized logic tier, Amazon ECS with AWS Fargate simplifies deployment and reduces operational costs because Fargate is a serverless compute engine, eliminating the need to provision or manage EC2 instances. A managed Amazon RDS cluster provides a fully managed relational database, reducing administrative overhead. Incorrect options: Using Amazon CloudFront to host static content is incorrect; CloudFront is a Content Delivery Network (CDN) that delivers content, typically from S3, not hosts it. ECS with EC2 requires managing EC2 instances, increasing operational overhead compared to Fargate. While Amazon EKS with Fargate is a viable container solution, ECS is generally considered simpler for many use cases, aligning better with the "simplify deployment" requirement. Amazon EC2 Reserved Instances are for compute, not for hosting static content. EKS with EC2 also involves managing EC2 instances, which doesn't simplify deployment or reduce operational costs as much as Fargate.