Comment on Open letter: ~100 EU companies urge EU lawmakers to take “radical action” to shrink the reliance on foreign infrastructure by fostering a so-called “Euro stack”.

• Bjornir@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Nobody is forcing you to use the cloud, you can host your apps on your infrastructure. Of course the cloud has its uses, but I think it is way overutilized and many companies could save quite a lot of money if they returned to on premises.

  source

  • joel_feila@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    true epically for smaller companies. Some really big companies like the could because they need to network all their 100 plus buildings. There is also externalizing responsibility and costs. But a doctor’s office as no need for the could. But they all just pay for azure to get ms office.

    Honestly I would be surprised if micro or on site cloud solutions becomes a real things for smaller sites.

    source
  • TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Running on prem is certainly possible, but requires a dedicated sysadmin team for anything serious. It is very important to be able to have availability guarantees and some expert you can count on to solve your problem with a phone call.

    source

    • dnzm@feddit.nl ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Running the stuff on someone else’s computer still requires a dedicated team for “something serious”, unless you stuff everything in specific “serverless” platforms, in which case you’re still paying for admins, just not yours.

      source
    • zlatko@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I mean, often enough even that phone call won’t help.

      But you’re right, as long as everything is working normally, working on premises slows you down to do maintenance, updates etc etc. Cloud (of all kinds) takes that work away and you can work faster. And in the VC-driven daily and eternal grind, moving faster is the only thing that matters.

      source
  • ByteJunk@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    As a software house, running our own infrastructure would be a nightmare in so many ways… Just thinking of all the hardware that needs to be deployed, and how many sites worldwide we’d need just to provide the same level of service we have now, and then being able to scale up massively during peak time but have all that capacity go to waste during low season, then dedicated teams on all sites to handle emergencies 24/7, the massive loses of revenue anytime the services are down…

    “Just in-house it” is definitely not the answer, there’s a reason AWS makes so much money.

    source
• ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I’m going to give a sincere answer.

  Usually AWS (or Vercel and Mongo Atlas if it’s a Node/MongoDB situation or an early dev situation). I forget all the brand names the other cloud providers use and have to do a search for “EC2 equivalent Azure” or whatever. You can’t be an expert in everything, after all. Plus, Azure has admin pages where I have to use Chromium instead of Firefox and it’s like, “Come on, assholes.” I don’t mind Google Cloud but it’s rarely cheaper and Incant justify it to someone paying me.

  I know Amazon is evil. I cancelled my Washington Post subscription — I lived in DC so I kept it longer than most would — because Jeff Bezos is a fucking menace. But you kind of have to pick one or keep a chart on your desk with all the different brand names and what equals what.

  source

  • ByteJunk@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Thanks for the straight answer, brother.

    source