9 ms·
This is a business decision Wasting 10s or 100s or 1000s of 1000s of hours of time across an organization is stupid just for the sake of "avoiding the behemoth
by warrenm 5y ago
This is a business decision
Wasting 10s or 100s or 1000s of 1000s of hours of time across an organization is stupid just for the sake of "avoiding the behemoths that dominate the market"
- em-bee 5y agosleeping better at night because the fate of my business does not depend on the whims of these companies is also a business decision
- warrenm 5y agoAs a business owner, do you want to be concerned about one company's potential whims? Or 50?
- em-bee 5y agoi prefer 50 because the likelihood of them failing or denying service all at once is lower. much lower. this goes beyond email, but it would be insane to put put everything my business depends on into the hands of a single company.
- warrenm 5y agoThat's not a rational business decision The fewer the points of failure, the better Your choice of 50 unrelated, unintegrated vendors introduces 50 single points of failure to business That's incredibly stupid - unless you truly have no choice It introduces a huge amount of unnecessary risk to the company, and immense overhead in additional personnel (product admins, contract management, vulnerability monitoring, end user time/training, etc) It's why multicloud is mostly not a thing: outside of a few niche cases, running cloud workloads across multiple providers is more expensive than running it all in one. Sure GCP might have something that's cheaper than AWS, and AWS than Azure, and Azure than GCP - but now you have to manage data going into and out of three providers instead of one, three separate contracts, three sets of credential groups, etc