3 ms·

With bare metal, are you not just paying more for staffing to maintain it? Bare metal as cheaper sounds suspicious. Bare metal as essential maybe if you are doi

With bare metal, are you not just paying more for staffing to maintain it? Bare metal as cheaper sounds suspicious. Bare metal as essential maybe if you are doing something like 3D graphics processing or mining or “big data”.

wongarsu 6y ago
You can just rent bare metal (or "root servers", as it was once called). Then it just have to worry about the occasional hardware defect, but at small scales that basically never happens.
dusted 6y ago
Of course bare metal is cheaper, that is literally the reason cloud providers can be profitable.
- quickthrower2 6y ago
  TCO. Total Cost of Ownership. Bare metal + staffing costs should be compared to cloud + its staffing costs.
neurostimulant 6y ago
> With bare metal, are you not just paying more for staffing to maintain it? People always say this as an argument against bare metal servers, but aren't you still have that staffing cost even if you're using a cloud provider? Cloud servers are more reliable than bare metals, but certainly not 100% sla yet. Shit happen regardless of using cloud or bare metal and we'll have to prepare for it regardless whatever type of servers we used. Most issues I had with both cloud and bare metal servers are usually connectivity issues, which addressed by the vendors or data center operators with me doing nothing but refreshing status page rigorously. I never have hardware issues but it's probably because I always retire old servers after 4 years of operation.
- machello13 6y ago
  > People always say this as an argument against bare metal servers, but aren't you still have that staffing cost even if you're using a cloud provider? I think their point is that it may not be cheaper if you account for staffing cost. Also, especially as a lone developer or a small team, it may be worth it to pay for someone else to manage the metal instead of doing it yourself.

wongarsu 6y ago

You can just rent bare metal (or "root servers", as it was once called). Then it just have to worry about the occasional hardware defect, but at small scales that basically never happens.

dusted 6y ago

Of course bare metal is cheaper, that is literally the reason cloud providers can be profitable.

quickthrower2 6y ago
TCO. Total Cost of Ownership. Bare metal + staffing costs should be compared to cloud + its staffing costs.

neurostimulant 6y ago

> With bare metal, are you not just paying more for staffing to maintain it? People always say this as an argument against bare metal servers, but aren't you still have that staffing cost even if you're using a cloud provider? Cloud servers are more reliable than bare metals, but certainly not 100% sla yet. Shit happen regardless of using cloud or bare metal and we'll have to prepare for it regardless whatever type of servers we used. Most issues I had with both cloud and bare metal servers are usually connectivity issues, which addressed by the vendors or data center operators with me doing nothing but refreshing status page rigorously. I never have hardware issues but it's probably because I always retire old servers after 4 years of operation.

machello13 6y ago
> People always say this as an argument against bare metal servers, but aren't you still have that staffing cost even if you're using a cloud provider? I think their point is that it may not be cheaper if you account for staffing cost. Also, especially as a lone developer or a small team, it may be worth it to pay for someone else to manage the metal instead of doing it yourself.