undefined | Better HN

0 pointsTimTheTinker2y ago0 comments

You may not be aware of the pain that many large, non-software companies currently have on AWS. Gigantic monthly bills (hundreds of thousands per month) coming from subdivisions that aren't capable or motivated to reduce their AWS budget or usage. To the office of the CTO, Oxide's value proposition (buy instead of rent) could be very motivating.

"Hey subdivision A, could we buy a few Oxide racks and move your workload there from AWS? It looks like they would have all the storage and compute you need. Yes? Ok, in 36 months we'll pay your current IT department employees a bonus of 50% of whatever it has saved us vs your current AWS budget."

0 comments

3 comments · 3 top-level

bjackman2y ago

If those subdivisions aren't capable of reducing their AWS usage how do you imagine that they are capable of migrating to an Oxide rack?

Or in other words, is migrating to Oxide somehow assumed to be easier than migrating to some other non-locked-in cloud infrastructure?

1 more reply

dewbrite2y ago

Having worked somewhere with an AWS spend of $30k/mo on _virtually nothing_, I can attest to this. I think most of it was sales demos that never got cleaned up.

1 more reply

cdchn2y ago

Most people who can do this (aren't as entrenched in AWS) end up moving to a cheap VPS provider so that they don't end up having to pay for all the internetworking, facilities, throw redundancy out the window, and then still have to pay the IT burden to heavy-lift all their workloads to this whole new "Oxide" system.

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse