>> Otherwise what you have is a budget that is lower than the possible implications of temporary downtime. That doesn't make sense in the real world. > Maybe "

>> Otherwise what you have is a budget that is lower than the possible implications of temporary downtime. That doesn't make sense in the real world. > Maybe "the real world" isn't the best wording, though, and choosing "enterprise settings" or anything along those lines would be more suitable. This is the point - for-profit corporations, by definition, don't want to waste money, and if "high reliability" isn't required (or they don't know about it), they don't waste money. Most of the time, they don't waste the money. However, if "being cheap" would means billions in lost income (and they know about it), they really want to have reliable, redundant infrastructure and systems around.