Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
bitbucket.org
Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#2A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?"
As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#3A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?" As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
It really depends on what cloud services are used. The strategy of all the major cloud providers is to attract customers with cheap low lock-in commodity resources like S3 or EC2 and convince them to start using high lock-in and high-margin services like serverless computation. If they succeed (and they frequently do), the bills go through the roof.
Read also: https://a16z.com/2021/05/27/cost-of-cloud-paradox-market-cap...
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#4A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?" As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
What is almost never considered is that these large corporations don't pay public pricing. It's all negotiated to be heavily discounted. Bandwidth is hardly an issue like it is for regular customers.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#5A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?" As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
The truth is somewhere in the middle.
I’m a sysadmin, I know hardware. I think it’s a complete myth that hardware is hard: especially compared with the irreducible complexity that is AWS.
But: I find myself coming back to the cloud.
Why? It costs more and you have less control. Scale up is not as important as it seems and the 10x cost difference would mean scale is not a factor either.
But, in my experience, not dealing with an IT department is the main reason.
Hardware lead times can be high, sure, but there is nothing more frustrating than depending on someone to do their job and they do it bad.
The “efficiency of scale” is almost entirely in the tooling, certainly not the cost, when it comes to cloud.
I keep coming back because even though compute is not hard, nor networking for that matter: distributed storage is still hard.
I have three on-premise servers now and dealing with the IT team is.. well, let’s just say I prefer to deal with the cloud vendor.
The number of people hired to manage the cloud tends to be the same number as hired to deal with on-prem.
I've been in a company with many hundreds of physical machines to manage and a team of 4, and I've been in a company with infrastructure that handles a similar use-case on cloud in a team of 5.. So I don't buy the headcount argument honestly.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#6A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?" As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
The truth is somewhere in the middle. I’m a sysadmin, I know hardware. I think it’s a complete myth that hardware is hard: especially compared with the irreducible complexity that is AWS. But: I find myself coming back to the cloud. Why? It costs more and you have less control. Scale up is not as important as it seems and the 10x cost difference would mean scale is not a factor either. But, in my experience, not deal…
Great points, but also consider for medium and small (and large) businesses, being able to provision and pay for only what they need today is often cheaper than spec'ing out beefy hardware to handle tomorrow's scaling issues.
After all, most companies using the "cloud" still have on-staff IT anyway, since non-technical people still cannot manage AWS or any other cloud provider on their own.
Cash flow is another thing - lay out big money for redundant on-site servers and supporting hardware today, or pay as you go and use the cloud. Even if the cloud is ultimately more expensive, it's easier for C-suite folks to plan for a small monthly expense vs. huge up front expenses and then dealing with failures and upgrades, etc.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#7A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?" As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
The truth is somewhere in the middle. I’m a sysadmin, I know hardware. I think it’s a complete myth that hardware is hard: especially compared with the irreducible complexity that is AWS. But: I find myself coming back to the cloud. Why? It costs more and you have less control. Scale up is not as important as it seems and the 10x cost difference would mean scale is not a factor either. But, in my experience, not deal…
And then when you get large enough and hire dedicated “devops” team to manage your cloud and now you’re back to “dealing with IT department” (rebranded) except now you also pay through the nose for network and storage and anything managed. Oopsies.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#8A common post I see on HN is "why is Company X using the cloud, don't they know, at their size, doing it themselves would be cheaper?" As more and more companies are moving to the cloud, I'm assuming that a lot of smart people have done the math and have decided Cloud is more efficient.
The truth is somewhere in the middle. I’m a sysadmin, I know hardware. I think it’s a complete myth that hardware is hard: especially compared with the irreducible complexity that is AWS. But: I find myself coming back to the cloud. Why? It costs more and you have less control. Scale up is not as important as it seems and the 10x cost difference would mean scale is not a factor either. But, in my experience, not deal…
Why not then lease dedicated servers from a hosting provider?
You still get ridiculous cost savings over cloud, and none of the long lead times you mention when buying your own hardware.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
The truth is somewhere in the middle. I’m a sysadmin, I know hardware. I think it’s a complete myth that hardware is hard: especially compared with the irreducible complexity that is AWS. But: I find myself coming back to the cloud. Why? It costs more and you have less control. Scale up is not as important as it seems and the 10x cost difference would mean scale is not a factor either. But, in my experience, not deal…
Great points, but also consider for medium and small (and large) businesses, being able to provision and pay for only what they need today is often cheaper than spec'ing out beefy hardware to handle tomorrow's scaling issues. After all, most companies using the "cloud" still have on-staff IT anyway, since non-technical people still cannot manage AWS or any other cloud provider on their own. Cash flow is another thing…
> pay for only what they need today is often cheaper than spec'ing out beefy hardware to handle tomorrow's scaling issues....plan for a small monthly expense vs. huge up front expenses
this is probably the biggest "value" in cloud infrastructure. Capital expenditure is difficult to obtain, but debt is both easier to obtain (esp. in such low interest rate environment of today), plus debt is tax deductible immediately, while capital expenditure is at most a depreciation over the expected lifetime of the hardware.
Re: Bitbucket Cloud has landed in AWS
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
The truth is somewhere in the middle. I’m a sysadmin, I know hardware. I think it’s a complete myth that hardware is hard: especially compared with the irreducible complexity that is AWS. But: I find myself coming back to the cloud. Why? It costs more and you have less control. Scale up is not as important as it seems and the 10x cost difference would mean scale is not a factor either. But, in my experience, not deal…
And then when you get large enough and hire dedicated “devops” team to manage your cloud and now you’re back to “dealing with IT department” (rebranded) except now you also pay through the nose for network and storage and anything managed. Oopsies.
It’s obviously not that simple.
Like almost everything it’s a trade off.
I see a lot of underpaid, short staffed IT staff moving to the cloud because it takes massive swaths of headache off their plate.