Hacker News Reader

Comment by Krutonium | Hacker News Reader

>I have sometimes been told its unprofessional or looks bad to run things yourself instead of using a managed service.

That's an incredibly bad take lol.

There are times where "The Cloud" makes sense, sure. But in my experience the majority of the time companies over-use the cloud. On Prem is GOOD. It's cheaper, arguably more secure if you configure it right (a challenge, I know, but hear me out) and gives you data sovereignty.

I don't quite think companies realize how bad it would be if EG AWS was hacked.

Any Data you have on the cloud is no longer your data. Not really. It's Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, whoevers.

View on HN

> I don't quite think companies realize how bad it would be if EG AWS was hacked.

I don't think they'd care. Companies only care about one thing: stock price. Everything rolls up into that. If AWS got hacked and said company was affected by it, it wouldn't be a big deal because they'd be one of many and they'd be lost in the crowd. Any hit to their stock/profits would be minimal and easily forgotten about.

Now, if they were on prem or hosted with Bob's Cloud and got hacked? Different story altogether.

> Companies only care about one thing: stock price.

Its rarely affected in any case. Take a look at the Crowdstrike price chart (or revenue or profits). I think most people (including investors) just take it for granted that systems are unreliable and regard it as something you live with.

I think that's more of a indicator that it hasn't effected their business. They lost nearly 1/5 of their stock price after that incident (obviously not accounting for other factors; I'm not a stock analyst). Investors thought they'd lose customers and reacted in obvious fashion.

But it's since been restored. According to the news, they lost very little customers over the incident. That is why their stock came back. If they continued having problems, I doubt it would have been so rosy. So yes, to your point, a blip here or there happens.

Configuring something on premises to match the capabilities of AWS or Azure or CloudFlare is very, very difficult and involves a lot of local money and expertise that often isn’t available at any affordable price.

>Configuring something on premises to match the capabilities of AWS or Azure or CloudFlare is very, very difficult and involves a lot of local money and expertise that often isn’t available at any affordable price.

A large number of cloud customers dont need the complexity that the cloud can offer. Like, yes, its hard to 1:1 feature replicate the cloud. But so many people just have some VMs and some routes.

And they would need a team to support the hypervisor. Znd its backup. And its performance. And, and, and.

This is fine if you are big. Anything smaller and it is a big problem.

This is also why they do not manage their plumbing and do not run z restaurant in house. Some things are better left to companies that do it at scale

Reply on news.ycombinator.com