My experience is the exact opposite. Keep in mind I work for a Fortune 200 company and we recently spent $120 million expanding our data center capacity just fi

My experience is the exact opposite. Keep in mind I work for a Fortune 200 company and we recently spent $120 million expanding our data center capacity just five years ago - and it's now running out of power capacity (it has 1 MW power service). Also, our lead times for getting new servers is now months. Why? Because all the manufacturers are prioritizing deliveries for the cloud providers. That's a general problem we have. Now for a specific project I have, I took it from on-premise to AWS and am saving over 75% than what it was to host on-premise. The majority of the savings was due to software licensing costs. It's expensive to license software on-premise. The architecture of AWS and using their services makes it so those licenses aren't required. Moreover, we've been able to add features to our product offerings that we realistically would not have been able to add while keeping the hosting on-premise. All while saving 75% over what we were paying previously. My experience has been AWS is faster, cheaper, and better. The business loves it and we're getting more projects. They can't believe how quickly we can deploy new solutions nor how cheap it is for on-going operational costs. Bottom line - I wouldn't recommend hosting on-premise. AWS isn't the only cloud provider in town, but I would use them over doing anything on-premise.