3 ms·

I can't see how I am going to get budget for "yeah guys I need half a year to provision 100 servers, 5 sys admins" VS "yeah I need 2 developers and a month, we

by ozim 8y ago

I can't see how I am going to get budget for "yeah guys I need half a year to provision 100 servers, 5 sys admins" VS "yeah I need 2 developers and a month, we can start selling to customer, just make markup adjusted with price for cloud storage". We have to minimize time to market, make money not build servers, but maybe others have other priorities.

bsenftner 8y ago
You're already operating from the cloud services perspective. Try 100 cloud servers is the same as 5 physical servers. Say 100 cloud servers runs your organization X dollar per month, plus the team of engineers to build out and operate there. For 1/4 of one month's cloud expense one can buy 5 servers that are the same hardware the cloud services are trickle renting you. With your month over month savings, you CAN afford those hard to find developers. Many of them are actually unemployed because everyone thinks they need to use the cloud - I've been able to pick them up for spot situations over my head for $15 an hour.
mmt 8y ago
> "yeah guys I need half a year to provision 100 servers, 5 sys admins" It's this kind of gross exaggeration that's keeping AWS so profitable, I suspect. Half a year and 5 sysadmins for only 100 server would do the NYC MTA subway construction team proud. > We have to minimize time to market, make money not build servers This is a false dichotomy, though. Of course you'd start with something where you can have infrastructure on day 1 of product launch. At small enough scale, cloud (or a VPS) is actually cheaper, too. Once you're at "time to market", if you're not re-evaluating, I'd say that's foolish. > make markup adjusted with price I'd expect any business to prefer to keep that markup for themselves as profit, assuming they even have that pricing power in the first place.

3 ms·

I can't see how I am going to get budget for "yeah guys I need half a year to provision 100 servers, 5 sys admins" VS "yeah I need 2 developers and a month, we

by ozim 8y ago

bsenftner 8y ago
You're already operating from the cloud services perspective. Try 100 cloud servers is the same as 5 physical servers. Say 100 cloud servers runs your organization X dollar per month, plus the team of engineers to build out and operate there. For 1/4 of one month's cloud expense one can buy 5 servers that are the same hardware the cloud services are trickle renting you. With your month over month savings, you CAN afford those hard to find developers. Many of them are actually unemployed because everyone thinks they need to use the cloud - I've been able to pick them up for spot situations over my head for $15 an hour.
mmt 8y ago
> "yeah guys I need half a year to provision 100 servers, 5 sys admins" It's this kind of gross exaggeration that's keeping AWS so profitable, I suspect. Half a year and 5 sysadmins for only 100 server would do the NYC MTA subway construction team proud. > We have to minimize time to market, make money not build servers This is a false dichotomy, though. Of course you'd start with something where you can have infrastructure on day 1 of product launch. At small enough scale, cloud (or a VPS) is actually cheaper, too. Once you're at "time to market", if you're not re-evaluating, I'd say that's foolish. > make markup adjusted with price I'd expect any business to prefer to keep that markup for themselves as profit, assuming they even have that pricing power in the first place.