3 ms·
No surprise an article like this comes from an IT vendor that sells services to people that still own their own hardware. Which brings up the real question. Ca
by krschultz 10y ago
No surprise an article like this comes from an IT vendor that sells services to people that still own their own hardware.
Which brings up the real question. Can you afford to not run on someone else's infrastructure? Yes, Salesforce had an issue. How much would you need to spend on your own company's infrastructure to do better? Is it worth it for your business?
You need to own the gear, hire the internal people, pay for a host of enterprise software that is probably more expensive than services, etc.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago> Can you afford to not run on someone else's infrastructure? Most businesses do, so I would say "Yes". We'll go through this whole decade long period of how wonderful the "cloud" is, and then we can go back through the next phase where everyone is getting paid to move services back locally because of how "easy it is to manage with Docker/Kubernetes/$flavor_of_the_week_cloud_orchestration". I'm old. I've seen this before.
- bduerst 10y agoWhere did you see this before? I think the economies of scale will eventually draw most to using hosted services, even if it's as simple as better bottom line for the IT supply chain. It's a little like managing your own email or website server on site - the overhead ends up being more resource consuming than farming it out, and we haven't really seen people switching back to their own servers.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago> Where did you see this before? Mainframes->commodity off the shelf x86->"cloud" (virtualized) computing.
- bduerst 10y agoI think that's more of a trend in fragmentation. Super Computer -> Personal Computer -> Virtual Computer -> ???
- toomuchtodo 10y agoI agree its fungible; TL;DR is everyone changes gears every decade as to what "The Truth" or "The Way" is.