I feel like this assessment lacks a lot of nuance. I wouldn't really call "cloud" a "fad" as much as an overused option. > Cloud became the fad, and the buzz w

I feel like this assessment lacks a lot of nuance. I wouldn't really call "cloud" a "fad" as much as an overused option. > Cloud became the fad, and the buzz was that cloud saves money, so everyone goes cloud Cloud services _do_ save money for businesses of the appropriate size (meaning, those that can't or shouldn't be focusing on physical servers and networked hardware). > The same is happening with SaaS. SaaS eliminates the need for in-house IT! Again, SaaS _does_ eliminate the need for in-house IT _for certain classes of businesses_. > It just means you now have a bunch of recurring SaaS costs that you are locked into forever because they have your data and you still need IT people to babysit your massive cloud/SaaS sprawl. The cost of employing someone to babysit a SaaS product is much lower than the cost to employ someone to build and maintain an equivalent in-house SaaS product. If you're fine with vendor lock you're saving money. > Not following fads and buzz is a huge competitive advantage in this industry. Ignoring all nuance and claiming things that are popular are "just fads" is, to me, so much of a competitive disadvantage that it almost certainly outweights any perceived gain.