Some of the most common, yet misguided reasons, for not considering public cloud can come from both smaller companies with fully automated deployments and Fortune 500 enterprises thinking about integrating public cloud for the first time.
Jason Cumberland, vice president for SaaS Solutions at Dimension Data, shares some of the highlights from talking to his clients. He adds that if companies are still citing these reasons, they are in danger of being left behind by their competition.
Reason #1: "I don't know how much it will cost me. My current costs are definitive."
"It's understandable that CFOs initially feel more comfortable approving a PO for a fixed amount for capital equipment, but that doesn't tell the whole story. It's one thing to be able to definitely forecast your costs for previously purchased equipment, it's another thing entirely to be able to forecast your demand. If you're able to do both, congratulations," said Cumberland.
He pointed out the reality is that very few clients can predict demand, or can expect it to grow consistently without peaks and valleys. To optimize the economics of the public cloud, users must be consider both the hidden costs of maintaining unused capacity, and the opportunity costs of not being able to meet unexpected demand exactly when needed.
"In a recurring revenue business, delaying delivery on an environment/implementation means losing revenue you will never recover. Even in non-recurring revenue models, cutting delivery time means improving cash flow. Delaying order delivery because of lack of infrastructure is a hidden cost often not accounted for when comparing legacy infrastructure to cloud," he added.
Reason #2: "Shared public cloud architectures don't offer the performance my applications require."
Virtual machines running on a shared infrastructure do offer less performance than their physical counterparts with similar specifications, admited Cumberland. However, he pointed out using that as a reason not to migrate applications to cloud was accepting the strawman argument.
"Yes, virtual performance is inferior to physical, but virtual machines also cost considerably less, come with no long-term commitments, and allow for automation of operations in ways that are significantly more difficult when relying on physical machines," said the Dimension Data executive.
The advance of hybrid cloud compute options and virtualized, high-performance storage solutions also allow a broad range of applications to effectively run in theregardless of the performance requirements, he added.
Reason #3: "We're 80% virtualized, so using public cloud offers limited benefits."
Virtualization and public cloud, while related, offer different benefits, pointed out Cumberland. "While virtualization is an important step on the path to public cloud adoption, hosting everything internally still forces you to deal with the inefficiencies of capacity management, equipment procurement, installation, and maintenance of the physical systems, including training of your staff to remain current on the latest technologies."
It also requires adherence to expensive security and compliance standards that may not be in the company's long-term interest to continue to maintain and pay for, he added.
"If you're already largely virtualized, the good news is that you are one step closer to conducting a critical evaluation of your current costs and infrastructure and beginning an evaluation of the public cloud. During that evaluation, it is important to critically evaluate the extent to which the time and budget spent hosting various applications and systems internally deliver a competitive advantage to your business, or whether they're hosted internally only because they always have been, and no one before you has done the hard work to bring increased agility and lower costs to your business," said Cumberland.