I remember the point in my career when I moved from a cranky old .NET company, where we handled millions of users from a single cabinent's worth of beefy servers, to a cloud based shop where we used every cloud buzzword tech under the sun (but mainly everything was containerized node microservices).
I shudder thinking back to the eldritch horrors I saw on the cloud billing side, and the funny thing is, we were constantly fighting performance problems.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
If anyone from oxide computer or similar is reading, maybe you should rebrand to BEEFY server inc...
idea for an ad campaign:
"mmm, beefy!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6ImwKMRq98&t=21s
i don't know how "worldwide" is the distribution of Chef "Boyardee" canned spaghetti (which today is not too good), but the founder's story is fairly interesting. He was a real Italian immigrant chef named Ettore Boiardi and he gets a lot of credit for originally evangelizing and popularizing "spaghetti" and "spaghetti sauce" in America when most people had never tried it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ettore_Boiardi
you know, "spaghetti code..."?
If you would suggest a word that would make a better substitute in this case, that could move the conversation forward, and perhaps you could improve the aesthetic quality of posts about leaving the cloud.
As someone who's had to rack some pretty heavy servers with lots of GPUs, CPUs, NVMe drives, and RAM, that turned out to be quite powerful, I'd say "beefy" is accurate.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/beefy
Side note edit: hefty and chonky don't tell me much about power. Stacked is usually more about a team or group of things (and for individuals, I'd rather not see it).
I think servers, especially bare metal, are in the category of grunt and raw power. Beefy feels right.
On the cloud it takes five seconds to get a new machine I can ssh into and I don't have to ask anyone for the budget.
You can save a lot of money with scaling, you have to actually do that though and very few places do.
One of the places I worked that was on-prem enforced a "standard hardware profile" where the servers were all nearly the same except things that could be changed in house (like RAM sticks). When they ordered hardware, they'd order like 5% or 10% more than we thought we'd need to keep an "emergency pool".
If you ended up needing more hardware than you thought and could justify why you needed it right now, they'd dip into that pool to give you more hardware on a pretty rapid schedule.
It cost slightly more, but was invaluable. Need double the hardware for a week to do a migration? No problem. Product more popular than you thought? No problem.
Sure this is made worse by frugality, but I experienced this problem when virtualization was in its infancy, much less cloud anything even existing much less being popular.
This isn't exactly realistic, not for too long anyway.
Once your cloud bill climbs into the millions, expect to see just as much scrutiny on what's costing so much and what can be cut and can you really justify the new thing you want to spin up (as there should be).
Having been through many growing startups, I'd say the freewheeling days of spin up whatever you want only last to about 50K to 100K/month AWS billings.
And in most "large" companies, you still need to go to different teams and processes to have those cloud ressources.
Oh and if your company made the mistake to outsource their IT, odds that you'll have a 4 digit bills to change a teraform.
Welcome to Western Europe.
There's also "cloud" as the API-driven world of managed services that drain your wallet faster than you can blink.
And once you're a customer you get to deal with sales channels full of quotes and useless meetings and specialists. You can't just order from the website.
Excuse me CEO your budgeting process is inconvenient to my work, please change it all to be more responsive.
This is not how things work and not how changes are made. Unless you get into the C-suite or at least become a direct report of someone who is nobody cares and you're told to just deal with it. You can't negotiate because you're four levels of management away from being invited to the table.
An organization that can make agile capital expenditures in response to the needs of an individual contributor is either barely out of the founder's garage or a magical fairyland unicorn.
this is me currently, not so much "tech" as repackaged cloud services as SAAS and middleware, department is amortizing hours and effort against projects, the eldritch horrors you're referring to are starting to manifest and I want out.
Of course Node could not compete, and the cost had to be paid for each thinly sliced microservice carrying heavy runtime alongside it.
Furthermore, the microservices craze only made things worse regardless of PL / framework.
IMO we have an entire generation (maybe two) of devs who never self-hosted. That's the main audience of the article and of many of the comments here.
The rest of us who only scoffed at the cloud and microservices were just waiting the world to start coming back to its senses again.
