Hacker News Reader

Comment by AnthonyMouse | Hacker News Reader

> Microsoft also had trouble understanding why its storage infrastructure didn't come back online.

> Storage hardware damaged by the data hall temperatures "required extensive troubleshooting" but Microsoft's diagnostic tools could not find relevant data because the storage servers were down.

Should've self-hosted it instead of trusting some cloud vendor.

View on HN

At this point, after dealing with AWS and Azure for the last decade, I concur. We had lower TCO, higher aggregate reliability, lower staffing costs and importantly far far fewer problems when we had two redundant datacentre cages.

I think our costs are around 7x what we had before with no material improvements.

Cloud vendors should focus more on "low/mid level" stuff(hardware and basic virtualization) and less on all their abstraction that should be left to end-users or third party software vendors.

Unfortunately, this will never happen.

This is what co-location do. Some hosting company still does that. So look for those, then you just bring your own hardware appliances. Then you just using their facilities, uninterrupted power supplies.

I don't want to mess with my hardware.

Anyway, with "abstractions" I mean all services like AWS App Runner that are build on top of foundational services (ec2, ebs, s3, vpc) that drains resources and money at the expense of the low level stuff.

> Unfortunately, this will never happen.

They only do it because people buy it from them.

Debugging MSFT stuff is such a nightmare that this is kind of funny to hear.

What do you do when you are the cloud vendor?

You do better than this so your customers don't start hosting themselves.

Obligatory XKCD: https://xkcd.com/908/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com