• AGM@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s just not practical for a lot of businesses. Offloading the capex, operational costs and other hassles to a service provider makes a lot of sense for most companies.

      • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        ok what do you think that costs? you’ve clearly given this a lot of thought to have such a strong opinion.

          • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            You’re treating data as a special unicorn. Why don’t companies manufacture their own computers? Why don’t they build their own delivery vans?

              • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                It’s an ROI thing, as people are pointing out. You’re hand waving that part away. A small business has to weigh an small annual fee and loss of control against buying expensive hardware and paying the salary of one or more IT professionals to maintain their in house systems. This also scales with the size of the company and their data, it’s expensive for a small company to buy one or two servers and storage solutions, it’s expensive for a big company to buy 20 of the same.

                You also lose out on off-site backups (without more investment of course) and global availability. Will every company that has a global team roll out servers in every global region? Small companies can have global teams as well.

                It’s simply not cost effective for everyone to have their own infrastructure. Cloud infrastructure is the same as any other infrastructure, it is cheaper to pool resources and share