Hacker News Reader

Comment by jcims | Hacker News Reader

I feel like large enterprises primarily see AWS as a way to outsource capital expenses.

This is literally the main reason a lot of companies use AWS. In Australia, it is very hard for Government Departments to get capital expenses approved for infrastructure as it requires a lot of rigmarole.

However, once you’re in AWS its OpEx, who cares as long as you don’t break the budget too soon before EOFY.

So basically this ... «Ah, I see you have the machine that goes ping. This is my favorite. You see we lease it back from the company we sold it to and that way it comes under the monthly current budget and not the capital account.»

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKodtNFpzBA

AWS and Azure are a permission to spend.

Are they really though? A serverless event driven architecture system I’m working on literally costs less than £10 a month on Azure. Running full blown VMs instead of cheaper more appropriate technologies like containers or functions will always cost more.

As per our calculation for CloudAlarm [0], as we reach a few hundred users, it'd be cheaper to use a dedicated instance than serverless (Azure Functions) design. So it may vary from system to system depending the amount of work you perform for each user.

0: https://cloudalarm.in/ – btw, you may wish to have daily budgeted pace based alerts using it – to inform you when the usage spikes up (much faster than Azure's consumption threshold based alerts).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com