Who would have thought.. Someone else's computer/infrastructure would cost more than your own. Not everyone should be in the cloud and not every part of a company should. Huge amounts of a companies compute should be on-prem in one or two datacenters. Some customer-facing stuff can be on-prem or cloud if it makes sense. However, this points something out very obvious. Once you are in someone's cloud you are in extreme vendor lock-in and it is hard to get out. That and they can just keep rising prices on you which forces you to either eat the cost or pass it to your customer. Archive: https://archive.today/9i97w From the post: >>After an initial euphoric rush to the cloud, administrators are questioning the value and promise of the tech giant's services. According to a report published by UK cloud outfit Civo, more than a third of organizations surveyed reckoned that their move to the cloud had failed to live up to promises of cost-effectiveness. Over half reported a rise in their cloud bill. Although the survey, unsurprisingly, paints Civo in a flattering light, some of its figures may make uncomfortable reading for customers sold on the promises from hyperscalers. Like-for-like comparisons for a simple three-node cluster with 200 GB of persistent storage and a 5 TB data transfer showed prices going from $1,278.58 in 2022 to $1,458.68 in 2024 on Microsoft Azure.