Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by benjamir 1584 days ago
Which costs you more than $100k monthly to operate with the same level of manageability and reliability.

We don't use AWS, because our use cases don't require that level of reliability and we simply cannot afford it, but if I needed a company to depend on IT that generates enough revenue... I probably wouldn't argue about the AWS bill. So long, prepaid at hetzner + in-house works good enough, but I know what I cannot offer with the click of a button to my user!
1 comments
Spooky23 1584 days ago
This is a religious debate among many. The IT/engineering nerd stuff doesn’t matter at all. Cloud migration decisions are always made by accounting and tax factors.

I run two critical apps, one on-prem and one cloud. There is no difference in people cost, and the cloud service costs about 20% more on the infrastructure side. We went cloud because customer uptake was unknown and making capital investments didn’t make sense.

I’ve had a few scenarios where we’ve moved workloads from cloud to on-prem and reverse. These things are tools and it doesn’t pay to be dogmatic.

link
sdoering 1583 days ago
> These things are tools and it doesn’t pay to be dogmatic.

I wish I would hear this line more often.

So many things today are (pseudo-) religious now. The right frsmework/language, cloud or on prem, x vs not x.

Especially bad imho when somebody tries to tell you how you could do better with 'not x' instead of x you are currently using without even trying to understand the context this decision resides in.

[Edit] typo

link
qorrect 1583 days ago
> So many things today are (pseudo-) religious now. The right frsmework/language, cloud or on prem, x vs not x.

Might have always been that way? We just have so many more tools to argue over now.

link