Hacker News Reader

You speak like clouds never have downtime, or don't charge you for space and power. Look at the article - that one company would needed to have paid more than their entire revenue to AWS for worse hardware. They'd have spent $400M in 3 years on the cloud! There are no "hidden costs" that can even begin to approach a fraction of that.

As for staff salaries, lol. It's not like AWS is self administering.

View on HN

In the cloud, costs are transparent, as you receive a single monthly bill. When you self-host, there are many hidden expenses you would need to track down (energy, admin, maintenance, etc.)

The figures in the article are for illustration purposes only and should be taken with a large pinch of salt. The author doesn't detail what hardware they are running, what EC2 instances he has selected for comparison and how comparable the storage statistics are. I would also love to hear the Finance Department's version of his calculations.

AWS is more expensive than self-hosting. However, it is not as skewed as the author claims. Otherwise, very few companies would be using the cloud.

Costs like energy, admin, maintenance were included. The figures for on premise are NOT illustrative but real figures.

It is hard to believe how high cloud costs are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com