Works for me
Works for me
34 comments
-
-
Save them even more money by taking their desktops all off of Windows and downloading Ubuntu, it's free and I've been running it for over a week with no problems at home!
-
A whole week!?
-
Sometimes whole days go by where I don’t have to spend hours fixing a software issue in terminal before I can do my 5 min job.
-
-
-
And while you're at it, do they really need backups? I mean, it takes up so much space... And UPS... They need to be lifecycled so consistently, it's such a pain in the wallet.
-
Honestly I use ZFS instead of a UPS. It is much cheaper and works just as well.
-
At some point the number of pools will absorb the outage.
-
-
Oof ow my wallet!
-
-
Can't possibly be slower than GCP, either. Performance of BigQuery is something to behold.
Cloud makes sense if you've a very 'spiky' load, I suppose. A website that needs one VM most of the year, but a hundred on a couple of days. Maybe your data processing needs 100 TB of storage a couple of times a month, but not the rest of the time. But for fixed, predictable bread-and-butter stuff?
-
Customer was US government and decision was made by DOGE?
-
But how much of that half mill goes into your pocket? Surely that money is padding the execs wallets.
-
Have you priced out big data and compute in GCP?
Sure it's inflated as hell, but Google has a lot of expensive devs to pay
-
And I am sure the person hosting a NAS at home has a power bill that also needs to get paid.
-
-
34 comments
We migrated a bunch of clients back when we took over for other IT. Cloud was slower, way more costly, less utilitarian, and gave less control. I have no idea why people switched in the first place.
I actually brought it up on an MSP subreddit back when I was still posting there and was relentlessly shit on.
Because "cloud" was the hot buzzword of 2005
It is good for some things like a web server but bad for anything that involves high data or compute needs.
The theory is that on-prem includes a lot of ancillary costs like a team of staff for maintenance (or cost for outsourcing it), hardware maintenance/upgrades, cybersecurity, dealing with failures, backup, load balancing, multi-region/multizone etc.
I don't think cloud solves all these issues necessarily and I am convinced if you do the calculations cloud ends up being more expensive depending on the scale. I think you really pay the premium for convenience, speed (of getting things going) and user experience (the software)
Hybrid cloud is where it is at
My workplace started using “onprem cloud” and I can’t even begin to describe how I feel on the matter.
Broadcom fucked a lot of people with the VMware debacle. If I was a business owner I would think twice about where I'm putting my eggs.
Sorry, I've been out of the game for a while. Can you expand upon this? I'd like to better understand.
We've on-premed a lot of things in the past year, and plan doing more.
"Repatriation of workload" is a big thing right now. So yeah.
Hybrid cloud and multi cloud has been a buzzword for a bit.
Colocation or in-housing with your own clusters is slowly getting more practical, as long as you're not dependent on a bunch of vendor specific APIs. Much less effort to port things that are already in containers.
Whith US uncertainty talk has already started, at least here in Norway more and more are talking about looking at exit strategy. Costs are huge because reinvestment but disruption is worse.