4 ms·

Indeed. AWS too. I feel like the cloud hosting companies have lost the plot. "They can provide better uptime than us" is the entire rationale that a lot of sma

by ryandvm 10mo ago

Indeed. AWS too. I feel like the cloud hosting companies have lost the plot. "They can provide better uptime than us" is the entire rationale that a lot of small companies have when choosing to run everything in the cloud. If they cost more AND they're less reliable, what exactly is the reason to not self host?

XCSme 10mo ago
Plus, when you self-host, you can likely fix the issue yourself in a couple of hours max, instead of waiting indefinitely for a fix or support that might never come.
- bombcar 10mo ago
  These global cloud outages aren’t the real issue; they affect everyone and get fixed. What is killer is when there is a KNOWN issue that affects YOU but basically only you so why bother fixing it!
  - XCSme 10mo ago
    I mean, I still prefer to have the ability to fix it myself, because I know I can probably do it in 1h max. I know this doesn't apply to most people, especially those outside of HN though.
    - al_borland 10mo ago
      Even if resolution times are equal, there is some comfort in being able to see the problem and make progress on it to feel like you're actively doing something. I work in a large enterprise and we have a team dedicated to managing critical incidents and getting everyone together for a resolution. When a 3rd party vendor is the reason for the outage, those calls are really awkward. It's a bunch of people sitting around pressing F5, all frantically trying to make it look like they are actively helping, when no one is actually doing anything, because they can't. I equate it to driving. I'd rather be moving at a normal speed on side streets than sitting in traffic on the expressway, even if the expressway is technically faster.
      - XCSme 10mo ago
        Today a client is having some issue with Zoom because of some artificial rate limits they impose. Their support is not responding, the account can't be used, courses can not be held and there's not much we can do. We already started looking into moving away from Zoom, I suggested self-hosting http://jitsi.org http://jitsi.org Based on their docs, self-hosting is well supported, and probably a $50-$100 server is more than enough, so a lot cheaper than Zoom.
        al_borland 10mo ago
        It's interesting to see Comcast is using that. I would have expected them to go with the mainstream vendors.
        carl_dr 10mo ago
        Artifical limits because they are on the free plan?
        XCSme 10mo ago
        Artifical limits, because they have 40 paid licenses that they can not use, because of a non-disclosed assignment limit that is NOT mentioned in the pricing page nor in the ToS. A lot of people are angry about this, and I think it's borderline illegal: https://devforum.zoom.us/t/you-have-exceeded-the-limit-of-license-assignment-for-your-account-buy-more-licenses-to-increase-the-limit/85900/118 https://devforum.zoom.us/t/you-have-exceeded-the-limit-of-li... You pay for something, and you can't use it.
        bombcar 10mo ago
        This is why we never changed the licenses, we just made long-running identical ID meetings that everyone can join. But we’re moving away as it’s only going to get worse.
        XCSme 10mo ago
    - mewpmewp2 10mo ago
      Are you always available to react within 1h?
toomuchtodo 10mo ago
> If they cost more AND they're less reliable, what exactly is the reason to not self host? Shifting liability. You're paying someone else for it to be their problem, and if everyone does it, no one will take flak for continuing to do so. What is the average tenure of a CIO or decision maker electing to move to or remain at a cloud provider? This is why you get picked to talk on stage at cloud provider conferences. (have been in the meetings where these decisions are made)
chippiewill 10mo ago
Capex vs Opex and scale-out. For a start-up it's much easier to just pay the Cloud tax than it is to hire people with the appropriate skill sets to manage hardware or to front the cost. Larger companies on the other hand? Yeah, I don't see the reason to not self host.

by ryandvm 10mo ago

XCSme 10mo ago

Plus, when you self-host, you can likely fix the issue yourself in a couple of hours max, instead of waiting indefinitely for a fix or support that might never come.

bombcar 10mo ago
These global cloud outages aren’t the real issue; they affect everyone and get fixed. What is killer is when there is a KNOWN issue that affects YOU but basically only you so why bother fixing it!
- XCSme 10mo ago
  I mean, I still prefer to have the ability to fix it myself, because I know I can probably do it in 1h max. I know this doesn't apply to most people, especially those outside of HN though.
  - al_borland 10mo ago
    Even if resolution times are equal, there is some comfort in being able to see the problem and make progress on it to feel like you're actively doing something. I work in a large enterprise and we have a team dedicated to managing critical incidents and getting everyone together for a resolution. When a 3rd party vendor is the reason for the outage, those calls are really awkward. It's a bunch of people sitting around pressing F5, all frantically trying to make it look like they are actively helping, when no one is actually doing anything, because they can't. I equate it to driving. I'd rather be moving at a normal speed on side streets than sitting in traffic on the expressway, even if the expressway is technically faster.
    - XCSme 10mo ago
      Today a client is having some issue with Zoom because of some artificial rate limits they impose. Their support is not responding, the account can't be used, courses can not be held and there's not much we can do. We already started looking into moving away from Zoom, I suggested self-hosting http://jitsi.org http://jitsi.org Based on their docs, self-hosting is well supported, and probably a $50-$100 server is more than enough, so a lot cheaper than Zoom.
      - al_borland 10mo ago
        It's interesting to see Comcast is using that. I would have expected them to go with the mainstream vendors.
      - carl_dr 10mo ago
        Artifical limits because they are on the free plan?
        XCSme 10mo ago
        Artifical limits, because they have 40 paid licenses that they can not use, because of a non-disclosed assignment limit that is NOT mentioned in the pricing page nor in the ToS. A lot of people are angry about this, and I think it's borderline illegal: https://devforum.zoom.us/t/you-have-exceeded-the-limit-of-license-assignment-for-your-account-buy-more-licenses-to-increase-the-limit/85900/118 https://devforum.zoom.us/t/you-have-exceeded-the-limit-of-li... You pay for something, and you can't use it.
        bombcar 10mo ago
        This is why we never changed the licenses, we just made long-running identical ID meetings that everyone can join. But we’re moving away as it’s only going to get worse.
        XCSme 10mo ago
  - mewpmewp2 10mo ago
    Are you always available to react within 1h?

toomuchtodo 10mo ago

> If they cost more AND they're less reliable, what exactly is the reason to not self host? Shifting liability. You're paying someone else for it to be their problem, and if everyone does it, no one will take flak for continuing to do so. What is the average tenure of a CIO or decision maker electing to move to or remain at a cloud provider? This is why you get picked to talk on stage at cloud provider conferences. (have been in the meetings where these decisions are made)

chippiewill 10mo ago

Capex vs Opex and scale-out. For a start-up it's much easier to just pay the Cloud tax than it is to hire people with the appropriate skill sets to manage hardware or to front the cost. Larger companies on the other hand? Yeah, I don't see the reason to not self host.