I say it all the time. Everyone loves the cloud, until they get the bill.

@CloudComputingInsider

6 ай бұрын

Preach! 😀

@TheEVEInspiration

6 ай бұрын

I hate the cloud, expensive for abysmal performance and abysmal flexibility. In the end one has to spend a fortune working around all the limitations and that too is costly.

@damonaniton

6 ай бұрын

@TheEVEInspiration it has a place. Absolutely. It however is not ideal nor meant for any and every scenario like people would have you think. And there in lies the problem

@johnlehew8192

6 ай бұрын

Get a tool like Harness that shows where to reduce costs. That makes a huge difference. Also have to run efficient code, many devs don’t write or think about efficient code and algorithms.

@obsidian_blue

6 ай бұрын

I know of so many enterprises that embark on a Cloud First strategy and a wholesale move to the cloud, with a plan to close their on prem DC’s within a short number of years - to realise cost savings and IT agility. A few years down the line the cfo is asking why the overall IT spend is now greater than before and the reality is that the first 20%-40% or so of workload migration was easy and then it gets increasingly hard. The business is then saddled with the new cloud opex costs plus all the previous on prem costs - its just that the on prem infrastructure is now being under utilised, but still cant be turned off due to the more tricky/complex/archaic applications that remain. A very well thought plan needs to be made BEFORE starting the journey and its rare for a company to find 100% cloud is the optimal To Be state.

I work for a very large company who migrated to the cloud a few years ago. One of the unintended consequences has been to make many hidden costs apparent. For instance many developers used to stay late in the evening to catch up with their work... Suddenly that wasn't possible anymore because the contact said that services would be shut down at 7pm... Anything beyond that and you needed to file up an extension request, for a fee... For management it was a nightmare choosing between the project being late or overrunning the infrastructure budget)... And there was also the mandatory upgrades to the various components used by the applications... There was no budget for going into delivered applications every 6 months and upgrade and retest things. Right now there is a lot of ressentiment the cloud made everything more difficult and slowed down the work that could be done with the existing teams... And as more data started to accumulate in the system storage fees kept increasing and increasing... I could carry on quite a lot with this...

I’m retired. I spent 50 years in IT. All outsourcing deals never save you the money you expected or give you the quality the vendor promises.

@abcxyz7529

6 ай бұрын

But it buys you upfront delivery speed. The typical bet is that moving resources away from areas with ready made solutions will allow speed to market that rakes in enough profits to later switch back to custom in-house solutions. And I'm sure we can agree that many software products don't even last that long. The funny thing is, when the outsource solutions hit a bottleneck, naysayers are always quick to say "I told you so", but conveniently forget that building custom would've delayed the product by 6 months and ensured a competitive disadvantage. I think it's just a natural progression. Outsource to launch, bring on prem to scale.

I’m a long-retired software guy, who ran a bunch of machines in my house. I always thought of “The Cloud” as “Somebody else’s disk drive”

@jeksonelucas

6 ай бұрын

you are not wrong indeed!

@haywardgg

6 ай бұрын

I still think of The Cloud as The Internet, or at least what I used to call the Internet.

@variousplaces

6 ай бұрын

I think the great reset is about to hit the industry and is more likely to see private cloud farms and less renting

@markTheWoodlands

6 ай бұрын

Sure - somebody else's disk drive: In a hardened facility with excellent physical security, backup power supplies and 7X24 tech support.

@GregMontoya1

6 ай бұрын

@@variousplaces, what about staffing to support the private cloud farms? It’s still less expensive to share staffing across multiple cloud customers.

My beef with the "Cloud" was always that when data leaves systems you control it is not yours anymore. Cloud always looked like a compliance and data loss nightmare to me.

@tracyrreed

6 ай бұрын

I have worked in cybersecurity for 25 years. Around 15 years ago when the cloud was just growing, I thought that nobody would trust their data to the cloud when serious security and compliance were a concern. I even launched a secure hosting company to address the needs of those who wanted help but didn't want to go to the cloud. I was totally wrong. Everyone are doing everything in the cloud. Even the federal government. PCI (*your* credit card data) in the cloud? No problem. HIPAA (*your* personal health information) in the cloud? No problem. The cloud is now trusted for absolutely everything. I didn't hardly get any traction at all with my business and ended up closing it 5 years ago when nobody wanted dedicated security and dedicated hardware and people they could call up on the phone at any time. There are whole companies worth many millions of dollars with many employees who have no physical presence and own no physical assets and have no physical control over any of their own data other than what's on their local laptops. 100% of the company is information and it's all at the mercy of AWS or similar. I don't even understand why their investors or insurers allow them to do that. Now I do cybersecurity...in the cloud. The cloud has sucked the air out of everything else. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Cloud. Have you heard about The Cloud? Look me up on LinkedIn.

@maalikserebryakov

6 ай бұрын

@@tracyrreedtracy is a weird name for a dude

He stretched this out to 10 minutes. Here’s the short version: It costs too damn much.

@carmenlamha9760

6 ай бұрын

Thanks!

@DropBox-jx6yr

6 ай бұрын

@@carmenlamha9760 You're welcome

@CloudComputingInsider

6 ай бұрын

I agree, it could’ve been shorter.

The nail in the coffin for my company was when Dropbox accused us of copyright infringement and piracy, and locked several employees accounts. We’re a video production company that delivers to TV stations and streaming services, the Dropbox content identification flagged our work, and because it’s nearly impossible to speak to a human at Dropbox the issue never got resolved. We ended up switching to our own in house Synology system, and it’s already been more cost effective.

Been in this game 30+ years. Seen centralised (mainframe), decentralised (client/server), centralised (terminal services, web) to decentralised (mobile apps). Runs on our own hardware, runs on other peoples hardware. Standardise,then customise. Public cloud, private cloud. Don’t get caught up in the buzz words. Everything is cyclical. Make use of a technology while it’s cost effective but don’t ever get too comfortable thinking it won’t change back. Once cloud has your data, they going to hike the price. Then we move it back.

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

It's all about keeping the money flowing, the jobs coming, and having shiny new toys arrive every couple of years to play with. Never going to stop.

I have been in the computer arena since late 70's. I can't tell you how many times this has gone back and forth from keeping in house to outsourcing. It will move back in house until it is fashionable or more cost effecient to go out again. Back and forth this will always hapen.

@mattiasfagerlund

6 ай бұрын

Have you tried outsourcing to India? I've heard that hardly ever fails!

@AntMcLeod

6 ай бұрын

The only opinion that has made any sense. Most failed cloud adaption's happen because the leadership that has been running in a cave for 30 years think they know all about cloud. They don't

@Gr8thxAlot

6 ай бұрын

As an engineer, there was great money supporting the cloud. And there will also be great money supporting the move to hybrid environments and cloud exits too. Getting into tech was the best decision I ever made. :-)

@niv8880

6 ай бұрын

@@mattiasfagerlund LOL

@niv8880

6 ай бұрын

Times also change. Kubernetes is a great way to evergreen and AI is advancing at such a rate things will be designed and maintained to a better standard.

The cloud is just someone else's computer

An international division of my company experienced exactly this. The Cloud sales pitch was great, their PowerPoint presentations, superb, and their promises were like Heaven on Earth. Then, once the move was completed, it came the bill. SHOCK! Any additional fees for any simple changes, staggering. Then came the most obvious: now that we got you, you have to follow OUR guidelines for everything. Of course, the MBAs that vouched and signed on everything are long gone, "falling up" due to the "promised cost savings".

@robertpollock8617

6 ай бұрын

Granted these platforms need to be smarter about billing.

Price was never the clouds selling point, dynamic scalability and speed to deploy are its selling points.

@jfbeam

6 ай бұрын

Scale and speed were important to engineers. Price (money) was the key to executives. Not having to buy, maintain, and upgrade (re-buy) hardware is always a plus in their eyes. But mostly being able to get rid of a lot (or all) of the expensive IT professionals is always better. I've seen cloud migrations eliminate entire departments -- put it at amazon, and outsource the management stuff to some other firm.

@marcus268

6 ай бұрын

yeah and then wait for cloud specific architecture changes for years, or critical functionality not working out of the box, very expensive segmentation etc

@Gr8thxAlot

6 ай бұрын

Well, said, and you are 100% right. I wonder how many cloud exit projects are going to drop their servers in their network or hvac closets and be awaiting a huge outage in the near future. I've seen this so many times pre-cloud.

@ianwilliams7740

6 ай бұрын

Dynamic scale ability can be done with any virtualisation solution in reality and the need for huge swings is edge case anyway

@ianwilliams7740

6 ай бұрын

@@Gr8thxAlotthe notion you can’t have performant or reliable solutions outside of big cloud is ridiculous

I had to shut down my 9 month old manufacturing company after the accounting/inventory / job track / customer software increased it’s monthly price by 1600% and removed half the functionality. Will never build another company that relies on a subscription or cloud based service. It gives too much control over your bottom line to someone else.

@freakinccdevilleiv380

6 ай бұрын

Ouch

Seven years from now, "Why are companies ditching AI? Let's talk about it."

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

AI wouldn't even be a thing if most employees came out of school with even a moderate level of literacy.

I think a lot of companies have this notion that "if its in the cloud then its someone else's responsibility" While that may be true from a contract perspective, at the end of the day its still your data.

There is no "cloud".....it's just someone else's computer....

I think people overlook the fact that large enterprises also get special pricing that smaller businesses don’t have access to. I work for a large American corporation that has a “special relationship” with Microsoft so we get access to steep discounts on azure resources.

@Kane0123

6 ай бұрын

This is absolutely the case.

@Anonymous______________

6 ай бұрын

Those prices better be locked in via contract. Oh wait, contracts expire and vendor lock-in exists. I suspect the expensive part comes when your company decides to exfil their (Microsoft's) data one day.

@niv8880

6 ай бұрын

Basically the value-add for MS is the massive amount of data being AI'd to lead to your companies eventual extinction. Nothing is free in this life.

@greenpedal370

6 ай бұрын

HAH!! And Microsoft own your data

We run 45 plus servers for less than 2.2k a month. 3 environments. 16 gb ram 4 cores 120 gb. Bare linux. Forget msft. Forget amazon. There are many good providers with bare metal

@mikem.s.1183

6 ай бұрын

Amen. I hope such companies thrive. Amen 🙏

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

But that's not sexy. And it doesn't look good on the CV except for the network manager now does it?

I worked for a company that decided to go full cloud. My job was to keep the data center systems running until all work loads were in the cloud. The data center cost $300,000/year. When they fired me after closing the DC cloud was $1 million/month. The place was run by idiots. They could have kept the DC and me for a full year for 2 weeks of cloud payments.

@darekmistrz4364

6 ай бұрын

Worst part is that they will not move back, and sometimes once some "Cloud Architect" starts changing everything it will be impossible to move back to on-prem because of vendor lock-in

@thermalreboot

6 ай бұрын

@@darekmistrz4364 That's not true, software and data can always be moved. I've been doing it for 30 years. Further, the hot application today may not even exist in a decade.

cloud was never about the cost of hardware, it's about ease and cost of maintenance, ease and cost of scaling and deployment. If you think AWS is all about offering 'hard'ware you're missing the point

@PiDsPagePrototypes

6 ай бұрын

But it's not. It's about the service provider getting unfettered access to thier competitors data by offering a service to store that data.

@gsmollin2

6 ай бұрын

I always encrypt cloud data, which makes it inconvenient.

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

If you think Amazon isn't scraping every last byte of information from the customers they're providing hosting to I've got a bridge to sell you.

@Simbosan

6 ай бұрын

@@chuckschillingvideos WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

I am CTO. I think the tech industry ditching the cloud is a natural event since these cloud guys have been exploiting us for many, many years. Cloud offers its service as a painkiller to any IT leaders, but in the end, it becomes a nightmare to anyone holding IT titles. The (hidden) costs, the (surprising) updates, and the new pricing. I thought someday.... the industry would realize this, and it happened now. Just need one brave (and popular) person to say it out loud. I am glad someone did.

@niv8880

6 ай бұрын

To the cloud.. from the cloud... it's paid my mortgage for the last 10 years

“The reason might not be what you think” Money? It’s money isn’t it

It's the software cost that hasn't gotten better. More software providers are only offering subscription models rather than ownership/installs. As the owner of a small business, I find this the most onerous.

@andreas7944

6 ай бұрын

As a software vendor, you need a static flow of income. You can actually develop better software with this model, since you don't need hughe selling points each year in order to survive. However, there are companies that completly lost their mind. Atlassian with confluence and jira for example.

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

The ship of software "ownership" has long ago sailed. Even back in the day, what you thought you were buying (ownership) was really just a restricted license to use which could be snatched from you if the software vendor chose to do so. It nothing else, they could knock you out by shutting down support and waiting for the inevitable vulnerabilities that were going to wind up in the world to force you onto a new software acquisition or lease.

Cloud is a glittering generalization used to bamboozle gullible suits into buying external IT support vs internal IT support. It ALWAYS costs more, with worse performance. AKA: Outsourcing. Outsourcing never works except on the smallest scale where you don't need permanent support anyways.

@GreggyMcfly

6 ай бұрын

The only problem is that once the scale grows, you, as the business owner, are screwed. I am seeing this happen at my work in real-time.

renting isn't cheaper than owning in the long run? ...who woulda thought

Migrating all your precious company data to the cloud is like exporting your sovereignty to a foreign land, which is filled with exhorbitant high priests/priestesses changing the rules whenever it suits them, and with an underlying motive to extract as much value out of your business as possible.

Many customers now will not allow thier data off premises for security reasons.

I've been working for a cloud company. Subscription business means everything to them and customers once on the cloud with all their crucial operations get even more dependant to their software providers than they've ever been before. Well, once the customer relations manager discovers that, expansion and price hikes are next. On premise is the only way to keep relative independence and control of cost. Hire developers and let them build custom enterprise apps. Better than paying ludicrous fees to sap and co.

You forgot the most important part of the business case... It's the justification for some vice president to get his next bonus.

@hammerfist8763

6 ай бұрын

Just ignorant leadership decisions made by completely unqualified people who don't do their homework.

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

So happy others see this too. The "cloud" is just another ticket punching tool to get folks moving up the ladder before they have to deal with the fallout their shitty decisions cause.

The cloud is just someone else's computer. One that you don't control.

@WmTyndale

6 ай бұрын

If you get hacked the same will be the case and U will pay Big Bucks to get your data back.

@niv8880

6 ай бұрын

@@WmTyndale That can happen on-prem too. Wannacry 2017, for example.

So, people started seeing behind the hype and counting Money! And it turned out that most of the "cloud" is piece of shit overpriced service with hidden charges on top of that.... Well done people 👍

When I started my own business back in 2009, my solution was installed on client's servers, I specked the servers for them, bought them, brought them, installed them, installed my software solution (that I wrote), maintained them. From then I really got comfortable with the idea of doing things that way. In 2013, when I got a client that wanted me to figure out how to host a solution for their needs (that I was building with a few people I hired), I specked the servers, bought them, installed them at a colo, put our solutions on them, maintained them. So when in 2015 I came out with my own product it was the same thing, bought the machines that I specked, put them into a colo. Now have a better colo and a couple of racks of my servers there, but we do use a few cloud servers with Azure for a few strategic reasons, but we know why.

Reminds me of one or more Dilbert cartoons from the 90's. In the first panel, the first manager is fired because his "centralized" operation isn't efficient. In the second panel, the new manager "solves" the efficiency issue by "decentralizing" operations. In the third panel, the manager who decentralized operations is fired and a third manager "solves" the efficiency issue by "centralizing" operations again. Doesn't matter whether you're shuffling people, organizations, or computing, shifting between "centralization" (in-house IT and servers) and "decentralization" (the awesome, amazing "cloud") isn't all there is to handling, processing, and getting value from information. And having managers around who look at sales presentations, slick websites and the "next shiny object" isn't a great way to run any kind of organization.

@StringerNews1

6 ай бұрын

That reminds me of one place I worked, where IT management got the latest Cisco gear, but never configured it to do what justified the extra expense. They got a Citrix farm, but also with no real plan for using it. Millions and millions spent just so an exec could say "we have that too" at the club.

The only companies getting out of the cloud are the ones that tried to hop on a trend they had no business being a part of. The cloud - mostly in a hybrid model - is a very valuable resources for many industries but not ALL businesses. It’s important to know the difference and to do a proper analysis to determine the cost vs benefit.

You forgot one huge aspect that is not spoken much about, that is political influence Look at what AWS did to a competitor, or others who speak up on political topics. they get their infrastructure pulled from underneath them Not your hardware, not your service

NVME is getting so fast and so cheap that storing data on premise is actually a lot more efficient, cheaper, and secured than using a full cloud solution. Many companies moved to the cloud but didn't actually have good usecases for them. They moved just for the sake of following trends. It really depends on the situation and the needs. There are pros and cons for each.

They say "you only pay for what you use." What they really mean is "You pay for EVERYTHING you use." It is a perpetual opex that should be a one-time capex. It's a hardware subscription.

@SilverKnightPCs

6 ай бұрын

The cloud has always been a name for servers in someone else's facility. It was data center marketing respin

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

You pay for everything - period. Every scrap of data you place on a cloud storage site has to be paid for under whatever capacity umbrella you've chosen.

It IS cloud failure. The cloud was supposed to be cheaper than buying and hosting and maintaining own hardware, and it failed to be cheaper. It is the same problem as housing rental. The rent is too high and it is pushing the tenants out. We see lot's of businesses on streets closed down because they simply cannot afford to rent the place anymore. Same story with the cloud. Rental-capitalism kills the entrepreneurship.

I have been trying to change the name of the “The Cloud”. To “The Fog”. This better represents what it is!

For multinational companies that need to adhere with government regulations like data residency, it is hard to create, maintain and scale the infrastructure everywhere as needed by yourself. Cloud does have lots of use cases, it's just people who didn't do their due diligence first that might be moving away.

@Anonymous______________

6 ай бұрын

Is it really though? Or are you just too lazy? Migrating to the cloud doesn't automatically enhance security, this is the fallacy those duped by used car salesmen perpetuate as fact.

"Cloud" is not dying because it is not "Cloud". That is why this is such a joke. Everyone knows that "cloud" is just another data center where you do not have to go change a failed disk in the middle of the night. As an IT pro that has been doing this for 30 years I do not ever want to mess with crappy hardware anymore. Let someone else do that and more than willing to pay for that

@duduoson1306

6 ай бұрын

95% of the comments are people who have absolutely no clue.

I've always been an opponent of "cloud" computing. You lose control of your data, the second you move the data to someone elses platform.

Over-simplification and rules of thumb drove the stampede to the commercial cloud. The commercial cloud still makes sense when: 1. Your workload is predictably variable and you can use "pay for what you consume" pricing. 2. You require rapid infrastructure changes and don't want to pay for spare capacity. 3. You don't have (or maybe never had) expert and agile on-premise operations staff. Before you rush back to on-premise hosting don't forget to consider: 1. Depreciation expense. 2. The cost of upgrading, replacing, configuring, and securing your own hardware, software, and networking on a regular basis. (And yes, configuration and security apply to the cloud as well, but generally at a higher, more generic level) 3. Increased headcount for physical infrastructure management. 4. And perhaps most important - less agility. For me, the bottom line question has always been - can I afford the cost to offload responsibilities that are not strategic to my business? As always, YMMV - "It depends".

@TurboLoveTrain

6 ай бұрын

I'm very curious to know if you have any formal training in computer software or hardware? A lot of what you talked about would be mitigated by competent network planning. I generally see organizations moving to cloud because competent IT professionals have been run out of the business to "reduce costs" which actually lead to greater costs down the road. What you listed is reactionary policy, not pro-active, and a competent IT expert who designs networks would avoid many of these concerns. I personally left two corporations because they wanted to migrate systems for "cost savings" as well as introduce automation and I didn't feel like wasting my time with incompetent management. All my predictions came true, they lost most of their talented employees and their IT budgets skyrocketed. Turns out if all the people that are technically savvy leave--you still have to pay technically savvy people to solve your problems but now they work for the cloud people and not you. Depreciation is a tax write off. Cloud is defiantly not more agile.

@markrosenthal9108

6 ай бұрын

@@TurboLoveTrain Yup, continual training for decades as an architect because things never stop changing. There was a reason why I said "It depends". You may have been an experienced, responsive, and client-focused "IT expert", But my experience as both a full-timer and a consultant is that those "experts" that were run out focused more on doing it their "formally trained" way regardless of cost and speed, than the business requirements. And that's how the cloud vendors opened the door. Still, I've run into a few that were as invested in my success as their own and it was a joy working with them. It's about responsiveness to the business problem, and don't kid yourself. It's not about eliminating risk - it's about collaborative evaluation of risk vs. reward. You can also have local "cloud experts" that aren't team players.

@TurboLoveTrain

6 ай бұрын

@@markrosenthal9108 you were an architect--got it. I find it ironic that you're talking about other people thinking out side of the box when almost your entire job revolves around code compliance. You didn't really address any of my points and rather supported what I said. You're the example of someone in a position to influence IT decisions and you very clearly are not qualified to make those decisions.

@markrosenthal9108

6 ай бұрын

@@TurboLoveTrain Mark Twain said: "It ain't what you don't know that get's you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." Good advice, eh?

@TurboLoveTrain

6 ай бұрын

@@markrosenthal9108 Advice like that is like reading a horoscope--it's whatever you want it to be. Cloud was always a scam and the only reason it still persists is because boomers like you who think they're smarter than the IT guys keep hemorrhaging money instead of admitting they were wrong.

I stopped bothering tinkering with the cloud when "serverless" stopped scaling to 0. Just a few years ago, there were many services that if you didn't use, you didn't pay. Now almost everything has a flat rate minimum, plus pay per use. I don't do IT professionally, but if I did, I'd be heavily biased towards using on-premise solutions because that's what I already know.

@jhill4874

6 ай бұрын

On premises with back up off premises.

The most expensive moves are lift and shift. EC2 bills are insane. The Cloud provides best value when building serverless architecture using serverless compute. Event driven systems are cheap. However, it takes a skilled architect who specializes in serverless to design such a system. Finally, AWS has a partner program which motivates pushy consultancies with an army of salesman. They take your CTO golfing one day, and suddenly a consultant is building out infrastructure for you.

@101Mant

6 ай бұрын

Really depends on the type of applications. Serverless can work well for apps that work in bursts, quickly scale up to handle load, shut down when inactive. Something like web servers are very inefficient serverless. You are running a lambda pet request, so a process per request. A web server running async code can run hundreds of requests per process.

@mudi2000a

6 ай бұрын

@@101Mantyes therefore architecture is very important. Often that is lacking and you can end up with very expensive EC2. Then you better go to a different provider. Server resources can be had for cheap everywhere. Even often on short term basis so you don’t have to tie yourself to long term contracts.

Cloudfuscate - The acting of hiding your existing infrastructure problems by moving everything to the cloud Cloudpanic - The sudden realization that you've made a mistake by moving everything to the cloud

The cloud does not exist. It's just a computer belonging to somebody else. There are many reasons why this could go horribly wrong.

@StevoDesign

6 ай бұрын

So insightful

The whole "cloud" idea was ridiculous from the beginning! Just think about it. Paying someone else to store your business data and have access to it, while relying on the internet. Not to mention, from a security standpoint, a business should have control all things that pertain to it. I never used it.

@Picasso_Picante92

6 ай бұрын

I see your point. But I also see the cloud being the best option for say a mobile app that needs to grow exponentially with user data as well as running app instances by the millions. That would be impossible for a 4 man operation in Brooklyn or Boise.

@Scott__C

6 ай бұрын

@@Picasso_Picante92 And that's when some companies will try to scale up too fast or hire too quickly and things can go awry.

It is nice to hear a balanced point of view. I like the comment that is similar to “use what works, not what is trendy”.

Extra extra, turns out paying someone to do the work is more expensive than doing it yourself. Whole world completely surprised. History made.

@caob1876

6 ай бұрын

These cloud companies are desperate to recoup investment costs. Cloud shouldn’t necessarily be more expensive. The tech giants have a monopoly on it

Competition is good. It forces price competition and innovation and is healthy for consumers and businesses. For those who are in love with the cloud, remember that competition benefits them as well.

We are running our online business for the last 20 years and we always had troubles with the hosting. Hardware failure, network failure, support not working or not answering. We had experienced a lot of down time caused by hosting troubles. Until we moved to the cloud. Now all this troubles are in the past. We had no downtime in the last 5 years. I didn't talked to support for a decade. No data losses. People just don't realize that running your own server is a pain in the ass.

Servers are cheaper. Data transfer costs on the cloud are so ridiculous.

As a building automation service technician, I love cloud computing and remote virtual servers. It makes me a ton of extra money since it takes so much extra coordination to make repairs, most of my service calls are twice as long as they are on a site that just has their own physical server in a rack.

@etiniartur2193

6 ай бұрын

did you see a lot of software that benefits from cloud, or was it just companies following trends without considering if it made sense using it?

@cosmicinsane516

6 ай бұрын

@@etiniartur2193 Not really, but my application was a little different. Mostly it was just companies getting rid of their IT departments and just outsourcing everything. It honestly seemed to work fine for their normal business (at least from what I heard). What sucked was all the other systems that ended up being remote too. Security cameras, building automation, access control, all the logistics that go with operating large commercial buildings. There’s was honestly nothing wrong with off-site virtual servers from my perspective, just like working on a rack. It was the added logistics of having to deal with a 3rd party company every time they needed service. Now I had to coordinate between two different companies, and often the IT company wasn’t prepared to help us because our systems were different than what they normally deal with.

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

Thank you for telling it like it is. The cloud has introduced countless jobs that didn't exist (and didn't need to) that don't really provide value except keeping the beast fed.

The problem is they don't own the pricing for licensing, and year on year they are rising. You don't pay you get instant disconnection. With on-Prem, you are in full control.

@Redmanticore

6 ай бұрын

well you still pay licensing fees if you use windows when on prem

@UrbanCha0s

6 ай бұрын

@@Redmanticore Agree. But think about all the additional SAAS service costs. Business software etc. costs way more than on-prem, which you would have bought and own the solution.

Finding the people to manage the onsite equipment is a problem as well. Having an internal IT dept was pretty standard a couple decades ago, but everyone is so specialized now. You end up needing 4 different people because nobody seems to know more than one thing now. If they bring it in-house again, then they just have to outsource all the IT to manage it all.

@conchobar

6 ай бұрын

Talk to people in Healthcare, it's all done in-house in most major hospitals.

1) security issues 2) pricing ~ when you charge per mb of data transferred per month, most cloud server options are far more expensive then building an on site server farm 3) poor performance (especially for database programs such as sql, which does not work well in the cloud)

@arizona_anime_fan

6 ай бұрын

@@razorx999 sql hates latency, and generally cloud servers have high latency. i've seen them brake countless programs based on sql, it's not the only database program that can poop out over high latency either.

With all the heavy documentation and dense “this is how it works”, at the end of the day, you have an technician that may or may not be qualified to build, lift/shift, or etc. with a business owner screaming at him to just get it working on the cloud - I’ve seen this first hand in AWS, Azure, and in private clouds. The focus is just get it working by “this day of this month” because it agrees with a billing schedule. Getting it working right was never the focus.

There is no such thing as the cloud. It's just someone else's computer.

@Nnomadd

6 ай бұрын

yes, but those computers are named Cloud

@aorangivaia8028

6 ай бұрын

Actually. Pretty accurate lol

@earthandenergy

6 ай бұрын

Exactly 😂

@77jaykb

6 ай бұрын

Its a name given to compute power that come with specific features and advantages over what was offered traditionally

@VroodenTheGreat

6 ай бұрын

yes, someone else's computer.

It’s generally cheaper to buy an apartment and pay it off than to live in a hotel.

I work at a large healthcare firm in Chicago and we had a meeting about going into the cloud, our vendor told our execs “if you think the cloud is going to be cheaper think again, it will cost you 2-4x times more money than being on prem…” the execs looked shocked lol

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

Remember that the higher one is promoted up the food chain, the less that is due to talent and wisdom and the greater that is due to their personal network, political savvy, demographics, and sheer skulduggery.

In the places I've been a lot of them just throw stuff in the cloud in an overall inefficient way. Logging is going full blast, nobody wants to hire a DBA anymore so the programmers go hog wild with nosql databases, no IAC just have some DevOps guys configure configuration and environments manually, etc. their entire it and software engineering effort is dumb down with people with nice titles but little experience to match. So then they get the bill because their entire process is bailing wiring duct tape in their shocked. Yes, clouds could make it easier to really predict your costs but the root problem are companies don't have true experienced leadership in that area and their results show. If they can't properly administer and maintain a cloud organization, are they really going to be able to administer and maintain an on-prem setup? Security? Doubtful. Hackers will have a field day. Backups will be a shambles. The database server is down well damn, we don't have a DBA. Just ask our guy who bought the architect title on a street corner to fix it. Yeah or throw that guy with a senior software engineer title at the problem.

It's not the architecture or licensing or where the apps physically sit. It's a people problem. There aren't enough computer science-minded or system-engineering folks building applications. In my previous role where we migrated tonnes of applications, data and built cloud-native/cloud-first big data pipelines in Azure, it was me and another colleague who kept bleating on about the cost and trying to optimize everything including restructuring the datamodels to ensure data transformation was fast. The company kept hiring consultant/analyst/business types who might call themselves Data Engineers but they werent. Honestly, they don't know the basics of programming or respect the core principles of serverless/lambda/event-driven pipelines or system design. In fact, moving to spot instances caused a shitstorm because these guys couldn't design their pipelines or refactor them to work with a lower memory/compute profile, they wanted on-demand highly accelerated spark clusters up and running for their shitty SQL, when they had the option to use scala with RDDs. Management caved to the mob and now they are bloating out their costs. The issue is the same as ever - an over-saturation of non-computer science/engineering types bloating out the organizations and not respecting that you should refactor, and optimize what you do REGARDLESS of where the application sits. They will hide behind agile and hide behind KPIs/OKRs but rarely do they include optimization or cost-reduction as part of this.

Too often I see cloud storage proposed as a solution to data management issues. Moving it to a different system doesn't fix that you are disorganized. Its just a garbage pile in another system that is harder to browse via a webpage. Also cloud data must transfer over the WAN. While connections can he very good, they aren't as fast as local and they do go down with high enough frequency to be very damaging to a business. It also exposes the data to many more points of entry making data security an issue. Which leads to my next problem. IP security and export compliance. Big companies almost always have data that cannot reside outside of a country. So if cloud is implemented you end up with multiple places storing data and greater architectural complexity. Some local, some cloud. Only now you won't get the proper funding to make the local storage what it should be and the performance will be terrible. Large storage firms usually have good security practices, but they are also huge targets because they have hundreds if company's data. Data breaches happen regularly, and often you are not informed. How is that company in China doing so well making your product? Maybe because they have your design. It's a risk that must be carefully studied.

Trends in IT change faster than the clothing fashion industry. Since it takes years to write software specifically for SAAS; it is a bit disturbing to find that by the time the software is ready that the industry has moved on to something different. It has always been less expensive to buy than to rent. What do people in IT not understand about this?

@portman8909

6 ай бұрын

Since we made the move to Google Workspace, I'm pretty confident in saying we won't need to worry about change for the entire rest of the duration I'm there. And what I mean by that is having to migrate all data over to another provider. I mean we obviously still have to deal with changes like Google enforcing oAuth 2.0 and moving to two step verification for clients, but we can deal with that as it comes. Migration on the other hand.... Nightmare with the amount of data and software being used.

@DroisKargva

6 ай бұрын

@@portman8909i agree that google is the most affordable overall except idk if i can trust them my data😅

As a performance and capacity manager for 25 years I think the issues are symptomatic of a wider problem at most companies - especially in IT. No one wondered whether cloud added a benefit. It was new and therefore it had to be good. The only people arguing against it were the people who you'd be making redundant anyway. Sadly, they were also the experts. The "change is good" mantra seems to be taken as something to be accepted rather than challenged. Like you said in the video. Self-inflicted injury. The sad news is that the people who made the decision to do it in the first place won't be hauled over the coals. And the expertise the company lost in getting rid of the on-prem guys will not be so easily reclaimed. Good luck to 'em I say. From a redundancied ex on-prem performance & capacity manager. Please ring me up so I can tell you where to shove it.

I have warned my clients not to invest in cloud services for several reasons. 1) With data replication across legal domains, what state law prevails in legal disputes? 2) When the vendor gets pissed at you, they can hold your data hostage and disrupt your services. 3) Third party servicing makes money by leveraging resources across many subscribers.

@heathbruce9928

6 ай бұрын

And since the "cloud" company has your data, who are they selling it to?

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

Yep. Just wait until the attorneys get up to speed on California Privacy Act.

Remember everything was going offshore. It was cheaper until it's not!

AWS and Azure cost 10x more and require weird custom development. Just get your own regular server, a windows or Linux box hosted at a hosting company.

@voster77hh

6 ай бұрын

Which ties you to the individual who set it up for life. That person grows bored and lazy or is moved to other projects soon after. Doesn't get updated and the next ransomware wrecks massive havoc. You can barely SOCS audit such an environs at all. Visualizing and monitoring setups need to be run on top. You will likely have a single central master key. Then you get an event where Facebook/Meta guys shut themselves out of their own server farm due to a coding glitch of their farm management code. Such scaling down typically gets you into devilish hells of peoples issues. People going on premise will fet their burns from ransomware pretty fast. I know compabies clinging to their Windows 2000 servers buried deep into their on premise stuff. Moving thing back closers exposes these things to ransomware again. The real deal is how to design for AWS and Azure. How to enable your architecture to price play one provider against the other. Design systems they can follow the best offer fast w/o your comoanies clients even noticing. If you Cloud plan is a non negotiable monopoly you put yourself into a position of disadvantage. Many corporations should actually be able to rent out their own cloud services and compete. On premise is totally dead. But you might want to consider a smaller more competitive cloud provider than the big 3 grerdy megacorps. This is only an issue of Cloud design and Cloud provider preferences. Amazon or Microsoft are beyond your bargaining powers reach. At the same time the time pressurenkn IT migations and budget constraints and retention of software/code tendencies all create a lot of waste of ressources in cloud usage. Long term operating cost is of no concern in such design projects. Doens't mean any self-hosting would give you anything near to stabikity, reliability and build in security of your hardware. The theft, fire and flood risk on premise is massive. The burden on ransomware and APT protections also. I of self-managed big state government DC being rooted by white hackers in a political board meeting within 15 mins. Their entire staff kicked out of master admin access. The justice system, police, tax authority and social security all gone within those 15 mins. Off into criminals hands. People shed a lot of payroll and cost. Now their Cloud bills grow like the lawn grows. Ransomware and APTs are foreign state actors like Russia, China and North Korea. No, your under the Linux machine certainly won't do. Not for the physical nor the cyver risks involved. But people looking for savings in dire times always cut corners on risk mitigation. I get paid for salvage & rescue ops handsomely. I mostly issue death certs for failed corporate IT archiectures. There is spexialists for everything you know. I'm a corporate IT fixer. I reengineer those on premise boxes a decade later when you cannot access the person who dun it anymore. The reasons are funny. One person was denied home office wuen his wifeys mum got sick. Because no home office was corporate policy. That person immedialty found a local job without 1.5 hour commute solving all his off-work issues and getring a pay raise. You switch Cloud dependiencies for people dependencies. The key difference is all on one bill is very easy to critisize year by year. Total corporate IT cost and managing people become harder year by year. The lack of talent pool grows and IT needs grows even faster. People very easily don't consider biz workload, biz growth and changing security environment or cost to hire into such simplifications when looking for cost cuts in dire times. Good luck going off-cloud i/o of doing IT right. You essentially Russian Roulette with everything from fires to ransomware to human beings turn on you for whatever reasons. Just because you want a one-stop-shop provider because that is so easy to manage as Head Of IT? Fools will always be fools.

With all sorts of fancy words and technical packages to justify their rip off prices, as well as being so expensive, it's also the most unsecured way of storing sensitive company date. What a stupid and dumb idea it was to start with. I'm surprised so many so-called professionals fell for it.

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

The pros were never really part of the discussion. The sell occurred in the boardrooms to CIO's, CFO's, and other empty suits who aren't smart enough about tech to know they are being lied to.

I've never liked Saas, once you stop paying the subscription or they stop the service, you cant access the the data. I'm a tax accountant and quite often have to go back several years to view old data, if I moved services providers that information is no longe assessable. One option that was put forward was a bulk download of all the returns as a PDF form...

I always used the cloud for development and testing, never actual deployment. It's ALWAYS cheaper and safer to run your own infratructure.

The school I work for decided a few years ago to move from a local server, to cloud based MS systems. We had an easy to navigate file system on the servers, now we use Teams to file share which is an absolute nightmare. Everything is so much more difficult to find!

I've worked on the billing side of cloud computing, and can tell you that another big driver of the move from the cloud to on-premise is the difficulty many people have with managing their bill, paying their bill, managing costs, etc. As I worked, I always felt bad for customers who would often get frustrated with how little control they actually had, combined with the difficulty with which they could determine the cost they'd be paying ahead of time. Part of that problem is that there are too many products and services with VERY similar names which have vastly different pricing. With an on-prem environment, you don't have to deal with that. You ALSO don't have to deal with waiting on a support request for a billing issue, which may take a few weeks, depending on how backlogged the billing teams are, and how quickly the support engineers can work through the cloud company's red tape.

@mrvwbug4423

6 ай бұрын

Yup, one "surprise" Azure/AWS bill because your workload scaled into the stratosphere for a few days can kill a small startup. Cloud is great when you have wildly unpredictable workloads or you need to get your apps up and running fast. Otherwise it just costs too much.

@VincentMcmanus.

6 ай бұрын

@mrvwbug4423 I've witnessed that exact thing happen.

Cloud = Rent. Why would you pay rent, year in, year out, when purchase gives you a payback in less than five years? Purchase is back in, probably for good.

@jfbeam

6 ай бұрын

Because your hardware is fully depreciated and "old, outdated crap" in five years. It's a complex calculation that most can't figure out. There's the cost of the physical hardware, software, support and maintenance of both. Plus the costs for space (racks, office/colo), power, and cooling. And then there's the cost of the manpower to manage all of it. Many companies see the cloud as making that ALL someone else's problem -- I don't have to buy any hardware - including figuring out _what_ to buy -- find a place to keep the hardware, power and cool it, and most importantly I don't have to have people on the payroll to manage any of it. Cloud was supposed to be an easy button. In the beginning, it sorta was. Today, there's too many choices, too much configurability -- trying to be everything for everyone. The simplicity that lead to downsizing IT staffing has completely evaporated; you now need advanced experienced IT professionals to deal with the complexities of the various clouds. Which brings us to the other ugly little secret... when you put your shit on someone else's computers, *you* no longer control it. You're at the mercy of the cloud provider to keep your data safe. (i.e. not on a surplus hard drive on eBay.)

@JohnS-er7jh

6 ай бұрын

@@jfbeam I have seen a lot of hardware last WAY longer then 5 years. I do see the benefit of cloud for some systems/solutions. However, replacing hardware just because it is xyz number of years is nonsense.

@lanhikari87

6 ай бұрын

Because you may have to buy again in 5 years. The traditional high turnover rate in tech

Cloud has much more benefits like elasticity, agility, scalability, maintenance, support, "pay as you go" sub option, etc. I don't see how on-premises is more beneficial than cloud. If such companies pays more in cloud, then surely their design architecture is awful and have no clue what they are doing.

@mudi2000a

6 ай бұрын

Often the people say cloud is worse or too expensive don’t use any of the flexibility. Then of course Cloud is really stupid.

@wesley00042

6 ай бұрын

Amazon's net margin is over 30%. That's why it can be done cheaper on-prem.

Lol while everyone is ditching the cloud the military is just picking it up. Typical.

As with most trends in IT you have someone in management jump on the bandwagon with little to no research. It ends up being costly because it either wasn't needed or optimized. Finally the organization moves away from the trendy idea for good or just for now.

@Redmanticore

6 ай бұрын

organisation that jumps on trends will jump on the next trend

It's the cost when you come down to it. If your software is garbage in your Data Center it is going to be garbage in the cloud. Too many companies saw it as a way to "scale" their ways out of problems when in fact they just created some new and more expensive ones. The other cost is for development, test, and pre-prod environments that are not well managed. They can run up the bill very quickly. The real problem here is badly designed and rushed software that is not stable being shoved out the door due to Agile. The Sprint cycle time (a lot of times 2 weeks) causes a lot of sloppy rushed work and then it goes out to prod to blow up. Companies do this to themselves when it comes to common sense process and time to release. Again companies are only concerned with getting something out the door instead of putting the right thing out.

Cloud “engineers” that went to a three months bootcamp 😂 always promote the cloud followed by MBA graduates

It has always been smoke and mirrors. The 'tools' used to spec sizes uniformly presented only a rosy result - then 6-9 months past migration when everyone is complaining about performance, connectivity, loss of revisions to revert back from, etc - then they snap the trap shut with a 2-3X cost improvement to get what you already had in the first place on-prem. Then you have to eat the migration in reverse while also absorbing the ongoing costs of extracting your ecosystem and every known add-on the cloud provider forces you to use for what the systems had initially prior to the 'move'. It wasn't the cloud after all everyone - it was the abyss.

I think there's a bit of "bait and switch" with the cloud where the initial cost savings diminish over time, you are also locked into there way of doing things even if it makes no financial sense, I had a situation that in the physical world would be solved by one active directory server, aws however insisted the only way was two servers in every single datacentre we are in therefore increasing the cost ten-fold. Another example is them not offering static ipv6 addresses despite there being enough for every grain of sand on the planet (or something like that)

@londen3547

6 ай бұрын

Upselling services is a basic business strategy. I don't how this biz all works, but I suspect that a lot of cloud customers are paying hard cash for services/bandwidth that they don't need or never use.

You missed the fact that open source hypervisor software has gotten so powerful, companies can run their private cloud architecture with low to zero cost tools. Cost was one of the advantages AWS had over VMWare. Now the in-house cost is even cheaper than AWS.

The company I work for is foolishly moving our massive C++ builds to AWS. They’re already complaining about the cost and we haven’t even started using it at 100% yet.

@IdgaradLyracant

6 ай бұрын

I feel you, they brought in the product model, agile, offshore, and now cloud. 10 years ago we had on average 1 production incident a quarter, last friday they had 96 in one day. When they changed over in the first year we had more production incidents then the previous 2 decades COMBINED.

@titanandrews

6 ай бұрын

@@IdgaradLyracant yep. I don’t know of any case where renting is better than owning.

@YouveBeenMiddled

6 ай бұрын

@@titanandrews the rental (cloud) use case is for temporary applications. Such as intensive month end processing, or even daily batch processing. The key for a successful solution there is _temporary_ residence. It has to be a AirBNB type model, not a 2nd home model. You can't move in and only use the place on weekends in the summer. The solution has to include moving in, setting up and partying, then moving out and turning in the keys.

@mementomori29231

6 ай бұрын

Renting a secure vault at a bank to store important treasure is way more convenient than building your own bank vault at home, and hiring armed guards to guard your home vault 24/7. If you can't see how pooling resources to provide a secure central environment for critical data and software, I guess you have no real world experience or knowledge.

@njpme

6 ай бұрын

​@@mementomori29231you must be an AWS, GCP, or Azure spokesperson 😂

Always thought the cloud was a scam.

@Kane0123

6 ай бұрын

An L take.

What he’s not telling you is that the most common issue to cloud expenses are companies who refuse to train their on-prem engineers with cloud skills. Companies who have trained up their employees lead to way more more efficient cloud cost vs startups and slower migrated companies having unskilled on-prem engineers leaving cloud maintenance as Jira backlog items, causing cloud leak of cost. But 🤷🏾‍♂️ Cloud and AI aren’t going anywhere. Most companies don’t want the brick and mortar cost of hosting their own data centers. Good bait article though 😎☁️

I'll just buy office space to store the hardware, buy the hardware itself, increased electric bill, hope that I have electricity/uptime, have local data backup storage, hope that a geographical incident doesn't occur that risks the integrity of my servers (hurricane/tornado,etc), hire one or more IT guys to set this up and hope I hired well, have security setup to hope I don't get my hardware stolen, etc.... OR... I just pay AWS and have my developers work from home with the ease of mind that AWS prioritizes uptime, redundancy, scalability, and security.

@orterves

6 ай бұрын

But apart from scalability, maintainability, reliability, security, integration with productivity tools, broad recruitment pool, rapid deployment and relative simplicity, what has the cloud ever done for us!?

@Peter-bg1ku

6 ай бұрын

You can use hosting that allows you have your hardware in a datacenter.

@marcus268

6 ай бұрын

​@@Peter-bg1kuand sdwan for geo redundancy, run it on a kvm, or Kubernetes cluster, have that dc hosting staff care for connectivity and hw, done.

Because your data is no longer your data. Even as a printing company we could be using a lot of cloud storage but never ever will. Our servers hold all the data and don't have to worry about any outages (except local electricity of course). And yes some of that data when timely can be secretive. We have on occasion signed non disclosure agreements on projects we have produced. I will never trust any cloud based storage.

Cloud biggest cost is the data transfer\ processing costs. On-prem biggest cost is Support (people). The biggest mistake companies made was treating Cloud like it's an 'always on' service that they had enjoyed with on-prem. If your Cloud service isn't suspended for part of the day, you've put the wrong service on it and you will make no savings. In summary (from cost perspective), if you process or transfer large amounts of data, or need 24/7 service, keep it on-prem, it'll be cheaper. If you can suspend it for 6 hours a day or don't grind large data, put it in Cloud.

Our overriding reason for moving to the cloud is that we needed to be up 24/7. We needed redundancy. We needed to grow. We needed to be up when the electricity wasn't. And yes, we could keep our network staff smaller if most of our systems were in the cloud. We still had a server room, and some staff, and we still needed some servers. We had to have fiber coming into our building. The cloud allowed us to scale appropriately. But backups and redundancy and 24.7 service was the reason we threw what we could into the cloud.

The cost of the hardware is not the biggest thing anymore and I don't think it has been for a long time. Its other things like flexability, maintainability, security etc, etc, ... and of course if you host it yourself you need the manpower to maintain it.

@bluzytrix

6 ай бұрын

Exactly this. I've yet to see on prem advocates speak to the operational overhead of all of the software and people required to maintain a secure and up to date infrastructure. It's often ignored.

@mementomori29231

6 ай бұрын

100%. We can host terrabytes of data cheaply at home. That is one of the least important reasons for cloud. This video is like seeing someone saying that we are getting rid of the Internet so we can go back to watching VHS tapes at home.

@wesley00042

6 ай бұрын

​@@bluzytrix That software and cost doesn't go away. You're still doing "offsite" backups, patching/redeploying EC2 instance operating systems and container images, doing compliance scans against IAM and hiring SREs and platform engineers to design and maintain network schemas and architectures.

@bluzytrix

6 ай бұрын

@@wesley00042 Yes, I agree. You aren't doing physical switches with management, firmware updates to servers and storage, cooling costs, power costs, physical floor space, racking, equipment, electricity costs, spare parts management, Capex depreciation on hardware, virtualization costs with upgrades, fail over site costs etc just to name a few. Most businesses have no business running data centers but should be good at operating any one of the thousands available.

As a cloud based (to our subscribers) ERP system, we use a colocated datacenter (Not Azure, AWS, etc..) which technically was not mentioned. SMBs are best served by companies such as ours hosting on Colo. To them it's a cloud, but to us it's Colo. In evaluating going cloud ourselves, I agree that the migration wasn't worth it, and the lock-in even less so. Nobody talkes about the lock-in side of it. Having the ability to move across any datacenter you wish, when the company behind it has been aquired and starts to leverage (happened to us once), is something we never want to give up. If you remember what happened to Parlor with AWS a few years ago, you'll know cardinal rule #1 - Never put all your eggs in one basket. This is something we tell clients too, which interestingly downstream are doing that with us, which is where we counter with our business model, ownership structure, and reputation.

@bryanbisimotopinas345

6 ай бұрын

In my MSP company's terms, that's called "private cloud". Seems like an interesting model. We have clients both in colo and the cloud. One of the colo clients only use the cloud as cache and CDN, everything else colo in 4 different DCs. Mind if I ask what's your company? Want to look into it.

@mementomori29231

6 ай бұрын

In other words, a middleman in the cloud space. Like paying for Salesforce but add in a middleman to host. Might be useful in some cases.

@BizAutomation4U

6 ай бұрын

@@bryanbisimotopinas345 Personally, I think the cloud concept makes sense if you need to test your business model quickly and can migrate out of it when your model is proven. I say, leverage the business model (first one's on us, free to get in, etc..), but if you end up with a bonified business, you want control. Public cloud takes that away. See the name on my handle and your question will be answered.

in my experience, Federal Subsidies are behind the 10% growth in data centers and electric power usage. Property taxes and electric bill fees are skyrocketing to pay for the needed infrastructure for the new data centers to serve ever more pop up ads. "bipartisan" = skimming Federal subsidies

It's expensive! And you get "engineers" who just use any service offered instead of looking for lower-cost and/or more effective solutions.

Cloud is not a "move", it is a "transform". Don't move on a whim, make it count. If you did just a lift and shift, it is just carrying your existing debt to another loan giver.

There’s also a trend towards localisation (the opposite of globalisation) where national security concerns are driving companies to only host their systems on local soil and with cloud companies who are not beholden to potentially adversarial (hostile, sanctioned or sanction-imposing) governments. This is a big one. 👆

@fwwilliamson

6 ай бұрын

Where I work we see a lot of this type of migration, we are focused on the Nat Sec customer and they are very concerned about conus vs oconus compute and storage

Which is funny, because you hear CxO's saying "I don't want to be in the datacenter business", thinking the cloud is an easy answer that "problem".

@chuckschillingvideos

6 ай бұрын

No surprise there. The ratio of skilled, competent CxOs to the rest of the titled rabble is fewer than 1 in 10.

Cloud have always been for managers to show their need because as an engineer we have just always laughed at this

It's not a great idea to put all your data in somebody else's control. Issues with espionage and ip theft straight away.

One of the problems cloud fixed was non IT managers not being able to budget and release funds for cyclic upgrades and software licensing. People who have shifted to the cloud forget how many companies are still on Lync 2010 or 2013. Hybrid certainly is the way forward, keep expensive workloads on-premise while moving client hardware to leasing and software costs to monthly figure.