[varispeed]

Another reason is that if you look for an investor, one of the first things they ask is how / where you host it. If it is anything remotely DIY you'll be turned down.

It was actually painful to see start ups spending thousands a month on hosting, that could be easily achieved as you say under 100 pcm plus. They would have to get a contractor to set it up and for support, but it would have worked out much cheaper and they could have bumped the salaries of their workers.

[monero-xmr]

Labor vs. commodity. Need an expert key-man to roll your own AWS. A few thousand bucks a month for the automatic one. Penny wise pound foolish etc.

[cyberpunk]

> If it is anything remotely DIY you'll be turned down.

Why is that?

[JohnBooty]

I'm sure you can guess - pure risk aversion. Your business idea is risky enough, and they would need engineers to assess your (possibly ever-changing) DIY stack.

You see the same thing in the corporate world for in-house stuff. Your manager (and your manager's manager) don't want to hear about in-house or self-hosted things that AWS can provide.

This is totally understandable. It's a repeat of the whole "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" mantra of computing's early decades.

It also totally sucks.