[Agingcoder]

Thanks.

I work for a very large org, and cloud benefits are not obvious to me ( ie we’re large enough to absorb the cost of a team managing k8s for everyone, another team managing our own data centers around the world etc ).

I view cloud as mutualizing costs and expertise with other people ( engineers and infra), but adding a very hefty margin on top of it, along with vendor lockin.

If you’re big enough to mutualize internally, or don’t need some of the specific ultra scale cloud products, it’s not an obvious fit to me ( in particular , you don’t want to pay the margin )

I understand that for a significant chunk of people it’s useful provided that they use as many mutualizing levers as possible which is what going native is about.

Is my understanding correct ?

[tg180]

Yes, the profit margin for cloud providers is very real—and quite costly.

I think one point that’s often overlooked is the knowledge gap between the engineers at cloud providers (such as systems, platform, or site reliability engineers) and those that an individual company, even a large one, is able to hire.

This gap is a key reason why some companies are willing—or even forced—to pay the premium.

If average or mediocre management skills and a moderately complex tech stack are sufficient, then on-premise can still be the most cost-effective choice today.

[Agingcoder]

Thanks a lot for the detailed answer.

I agree with the gap, and I understand why people would like to pay for the premium.

Where I work currently, wherever we don’t have the right people ( and usually because we can’t find them ), our cloud-like on-premise offering doesn’t work which ends up causing significant extra costs further down the chain.