Nobody is forcing you to use the cloud, you can host your apps on your infrastructure. Of course the cloud has its uses, but I think it is way overutilized and many companies could save quite a lot of money if they returned to on premises.
As a software house, running our own infrastructure would be a nightmare in so many ways… Just thinking of all the hardware that needs to be deployed, and how many sites worldwide we’d need just to provide the same level of service we have now, and then being able to scale up massively during peak time but have all that capacity go to waste during low season, then dedicated teams on all sites to handle emergencies 24/7, the massive loses of revenue anytime the services are down…
“Just in-house it” is definitely not the answer, there’s a reason AWS makes so much money.
true epically for smaller companies. Some really big companies like the could because they need to network all their 100 plus buildings. There is also externalizing responsibility and costs. But a doctor’s office as no need for the could. But they all just pay for azure to get ms office.
Honestly I would be surprised if micro or on site cloud solutions becomes a real things for smaller sites.
Running on prem is certainly possible, but requires a dedicated sysadmin team for anything serious. It is very important to be able to have availability guarantees and some expert you can count on to solve your problem with a phone call.
I mean, often enough even that phone call won’t help.
But you’re right, as long as everything is working normally, working on premises slows you down to do maintenance, updates etc etc. Cloud (of all kinds) takes that work away and you can work faster. And in the VC-driven daily and eternal grind, moving faster is the only thing that matters.
Nobody is forcing you to use the cloud, you can host your apps on your infrastructure. Of course the cloud has its uses, but I think it is way overutilized and many companies could save quite a lot of money if they returned to on premises.
As a software house, running our own infrastructure would be a nightmare in so many ways… Just thinking of all the hardware that needs to be deployed, and how many sites worldwide we’d need just to provide the same level of service we have now, and then being able to scale up massively during peak time but have all that capacity go to waste during low season, then dedicated teams on all sites to handle emergencies 24/7, the massive loses of revenue anytime the services are down…
“Just in-house it” is definitely not the answer, there’s a reason AWS makes so much money.
true epically for smaller companies. Some really big companies like the could because they need to network all their 100 plus buildings. There is also externalizing responsibility and costs. But a doctor’s office as no need for the could. But they all just pay for azure to get ms office.
Honestly I would be surprised if micro or on site cloud solutions becomes a real things for smaller sites.
Running on prem is certainly possible, but requires a dedicated sysadmin team for anything serious. It is very important to be able to have availability guarantees and some expert you can count on to solve your problem with a phone call.
I mean, often enough even that phone call won’t help.
But you’re right, as long as everything is working normally, working on premises slows you down to do maintenance, updates etc etc. Cloud (of all kinds) takes that work away and you can work faster. And in the VC-driven daily and eternal grind, moving faster is the only thing that matters.