Abit off topic, but I was never a big fan of them maintaining their own local servers. User loads are far too unpredictable for that to be a reliable solution.
Load balancing existed long before AWS/Azure etc, it is just matter of architecture and scale rather then local server vs cloud.
If we check history of T212, I could guess for years their infrastructure/architecture was good enough.
Non planned to have such exponential/hyperbolic growth over course of single year.
So it is rather hard to completely change/rebuild the whole infrastructure to handle the newly acquired user base while having to maintain stability of existing solution.
1 Like
To late. They arleady made the investment into servers.
That’s the point, local servers don’t scale well. There are numerous examples of companies telling people, don’t worry, their server solutions are adequate only for them not to be.
On serious note, cloud is just a fancy buzz in today age, relevant maybe for small businesses who don’t have manpower or are to small in size to justify operating their own infrastructure.
Any big company who switched to cloud will tell you, “it is f***ing expensive”.
While if proper architecture/solution is designed, “local” servers can handle it rather well.
In addition Virtual environment (aka vmware) is lot cheaper to operate then pay absurd fees for Dev/Prod cloud infrastructure.
1 Like
There is something to be said for redundency across the board when using a cloud solution. That is what you are paying for and the reason why local hardware sucks. Instead of having a server in the office, you can leverage a data centre.
Costs can really depend. I’ve been paying for a nice little cloud server on digital ocean for many years now. It has been way cheaper than setting up a server myself. Obviosly this changes with scale, but I reckon if its cheaper for Netflix to use AWS and me, it’s gotta be pretty cheap for the mid tier users also.
edit: It has not been cheaper than my Pi, but that thing is just a Pihole.
I can just say. Cloud is part of the “you will own nothing and be happy”.
Test run on companies, moved to general public by 2030.
I personally would never want to have my business depend on 3rd party. Especially when in today age M&A happen daily, contracts get changes and broken every single day.
One of recent experiences, global company for transport, based from EU.
Paying large maintenance fees for software solution, the vendor at hand was acquired by 3rd party. Contract for support was voided and pushed to 3rd party support provider, while in original contract client was core/strategic. (We are talking about multi million contracts)
Moral of the story:
T&C can change over night, lot of solutions today are made to be “sticky” meaning companies have hard time moving away aka becoming very dependent.
If some change would to happen, you are stranded in very awkward situation.
1 Like
Wasn’t that the same argument to why music streaming wouldn’t work? That people wanted to own their own music.
Edit: I agree with the rest of what you are saying. But norms can change.
1 Like
I didn’t say anything about (not)working.
Just that this decision are not so clear cut as one would want them to be.
1 Like
On a completely not related note, the you own nothing comment. I wonder for example in console and PC gaming/ use industry that ultimately people could just have a screen and keyboard and “connect” to a cloud computer that has the latest gpu etc to play games? So the user no longer has to invest and upgrade equipment, merely changes a subscription etc?
I’m guessing this probably already existing to a certain degree…
@nickspacemonkey Cloud services are probably data sucking systems. I doubt allowing valuable financial data to go through Microsoft, Amazon or any other cloud company would be a smart move in the long run… Just speculating though, I might be wrong.
It depends on the needs a company has.
This account is completely compromised @Bogi.H @Momchil.G @Michael.M and you keep letting it post adverts. Why?
1 Like
What in the fresh hell is this.