3 ms·
I don't think you can draw that conclusion. Hosting in house has it's own issues and problems. I'd argue it's much easier to maintain a high degree of uptime wi
by abrookewood 6y ago
I don't think you can draw that conclusion. Hosting in house has it's own issues and problems. I'd argue it's much easier to maintain a high degree of uptime with outsourced hosting and I've done both.
- doublerabbit 6y agoI would disagree on the basis of my own experiences. I have my own colocated servers with clients. The "cloud" (which lets face is just a buzz word for servers in a datacentre) is a convoluted maze. You can take so many paths but they all end up to the same dead end. However pushing my cynicism aside, I would be happy wager it would be far cheaper, efficient and more cost-effective to run in-house then it would be to use the cloud. I have 4u colocation, 2u in two different datacentres. It's overkill. I host eight servers. I don't need it, but I will always be a preacher of colocation for the fact of that nothing in the world feels better then running your own code, on your own hardware on your own infrastructure on your own spec of internet dust. It's like making your own loaf of bread for the first time. That's not to say there are not reasons on why you should use the cloud but in this scenario if your corporate with consumers it should always be your own kit, because how else do you provide a quality service?
- joana035 6y agoIt just drives me nuts to know that with the same price you can get a 12CPU+128GB of memory on Hetzner, on AWS you get 4CPU+8GB memory. I will not even mention the bandwidth costs :)