Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman!
A few years ago I spent a few hours pricing out a clients usage to move to aws the clients cost using their own hardware aka colo to aws the cost was 3 k colo plus about 80k of hardware to 15 k aws , anyone that can do math will figure out colo is way cheaper in the long run.
|
It's because you are comparing 1:1 and that is how most customers end up burning maybe 5-10x what they really should. They think
"I have 5 servers with 8 cores and 16GB ram each, I need the same in AWS"
... if you do that, you will get a shit solution. NEVER use Cloud as IaaS or Colo (exept maybe for DR or Burst-to-cloud) but that is not what we are talking about here.
If I get a customer that want to do a lift and shift, and I cant convince them to at least put refactoring the solution on the roadmap, then I wont work with the customer. I can not afford to have my name tied to a solution, that dont leverage cloud-native solutions.
For 7 months I worked for the world's fourth largest freight forwarding company, building a HCI solution for onboarding all their legacy applications, we are talking two digit $million savings a year from DAY1 - all Opex and no vendor/tech lock-in. I know what I'm talking about.
I have another example. One of the largest regional pharma companies wanted to go full dev-ops on their infrastructure, and move all to either OpenStack or OpenShift. I was asked to review their plan. Both involving two colo-providers, darkfiber interconnect and half a rack of Lenovo servers + ToR and Mgt switches + complete leaf and spine network + routers.
The rough calculations I did for them showed, that even without training, you could run the same load on Azure or AWS for 7 years, before break-even. Have you seen many that uses the same servers for 7 years (successfull people that is) - but what they forgot was they had to replace more than 50% of their staff, because OpenStack is not something you just learn overnight (And OpenShift is somthing you never learn unless you work at REHL) - so they ended up sticking to their VMware colo solution, because they dont want to fire people.
Im not saying traditional hosting is bad - its just not the same. There are many cases where a traditional colo or fully-managed solution is the best, both when it comes cost and business-strategy.
Cloud is expensive if you use it wrong.. same is Colo and anything else