Cloud vs On-Prem Costs

it really depends on the scope of what you run in the cloud and what kind of support/uptime you expect/require.if you're going to run your own servers with same level of support it will definitely be much higher than $120/monthbut this is, alas, not the tech issue, but a more low level understanding the reasoning of why cloud is more interesting for certain use cases, and on prem better for other.it is definitely not a one solution fits alledit: <a href="https:&#x

This is wrong, most companies at scale use the cloud nowdays, the operational cost + expertise you need to replicate those cloud platforms is huge.

Isn't it commonly recognized that it's cheaper to run your own hardware than to pay a cloud provider? It just requires more capital outlay and maintenance.

TL:DR = people cost more than servers = stay in cloud

Meta-comment:cost: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23098576cost: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23097812cost: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23098658abiliti

Like many others have pointed out: Cost.I'm the CTO of a moderately sized gaming community, Hypixel Minecraft, who operates about 700 rented dedicated machines to service 70k-100k concurrent players. We push about 4PB/mo in egress bandwidth, something along the lines of 32gbps 95th-percentile. The big cloud providers have repeatedly quoted us an order of magnitude more than our entire fleet's cost....JUST in bandwidth costs. Even if we bring our own ISPs and cross-connec

I think part of the benefit you get from cloud is that if you only need 5 machines on the weekdays, but 10 machines on the weekends, you can easily scale up and down (instead of running and managing 10 machines). Another is reliability. It is not uncommon to have AWS/GCP instances stay on for years (since the underlying hardware is abstracted way), etc.If you don't care about that, then the balances changes. If you're OK with 1 on prem server, you can just buy a AMD or Intel wo

There was a time when cloud was significantly cheaper then owning.I'd expect that there are people who moved to the cloud then, and over time started using services offered by their cloud provider (e.g., load balancers, secret management, databases, storage, backup) instead of running those services themselves on virtual machines, and now even if it would be cheaper to run everything on owned servers they find it would be too much effort to add all those services back to their own server

I am quite puzzled, at such scale with low seasonality what are the reasons they haven't moved to their own infra? Managing and hiring people to do so would result in big decrease in cost compared to the cloud.

The same arguments apply to hardware and software. Cloud providers’ core competency is cloud infrastructure and services and they have the scale to economize their offerings. Your business very likely can’t compete with them, so to the extent that you’re owning things that cloud providers could sell you, you’re throwing away money and that figure very likely dwarfs the risk adjusted cost of maybe having to migrate to another provider one day. (Of course, there are services that are