I think they're mad. Floor space for a DC, redundant power, HVAC, physical security, redundant high capacity internet, the actual hardware, spare hardware, staff to run the site(s) 24/7. Fire. Backups.
Interesting, makes a lot of sense. Cloud is great for really small start-ups and large scale enterprises but there probably is a large swathe of companies in-between where self-hosting is practical.
"very much not like something as mundane as "renting computers", even though that's mostly what it is." 🤨
I'm skeptical as to how much value they end seeing out of this transition back on prem. Have any other companies been successful with this? Dropbox started this effort but operate at massive scale.
I suppose a business case could be made, but taking on operations of what AWS/MSFT/GOOG are investing thousands of engineers and billions of R&D into doesn't strike me as a huge win - especially in the hyperchanging industry of tech.
Maintenance, new procurement processes, upgrades - and then forgoing every new managed service release and best in class AI/ML capabilities released every year - it seems like a lot to take on and a distraction for a company of ~100...
Driving a sports car to the grocery store rarely makes sense when a more economical car is an option. Many companies don’t need all those bells and whistles, some server boxes with some redundancy is “good enough” for many use cases. Really all comes done to running the numbers, and seeing what makes sense for any given business.
I know this is an old post but saw it in something related.
I interviewed with a company that was building out old Bunkers to use as datacenters and storage of crypto assets.
On premises only is the old way. Hybrid is ideal because you can leverage cloud and home office infrastructure. You can’t scale up quickly with on premises only. That’s not an efficient use of company resources. IJS. Godspeed.
I interviewed with a company that was building out old Bunkers to use as datacenters and storage of crypto assets.