Comment on Federal Cyber Experts Thought Microsoft’s Cloud Was “a Pile of Shit.” They Approved It Anyway.
ramble81@lemmy.zip 20 hours agoI see the approach of Outposts, just don’t know if I agree with it. Part of the point is it lets you have a dedicated, isolated, on-premise platform **without ** the need to train existing engineers/admins on a secondary technology like Nutanix, ProxMox, etc.
So your calculus should include the cost to rent vs dedicated head count (and let me tell you, companies fucking hate headcount).
Now all that being said, I have yet to see a situation where it really is more cost effective, especially due to the things you mentioned.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 20 hours ago
You mean “private cloud”, right? No one who can afford outpost will be putting this in their server closet. It’ll go in the datacenter.
ramble81@lemmy.zip 20 hours ago
“Private cloud” has always been a synonym for “on-premise”. I’ve managed Datacenter infrastructure for decades and always referred to it to on-premise before private cloud even became a term. It basically is referring to Datacenter space you own or rent vs another company’s servers and DCs.
Hell, I’ve worked in companies where they had Datacenter space in the same building as their office (and not small either, one was 32 racks, another was almost 200). So that very much was “on-premise”
4am@lemmy.zip 19 hours ago
The whole point of “cloud” was to eliminate data centers.
If there was a low latency need for a private cloud, of course you put it as close as possible.