Private cloud is ill-advised and archaic says AWS boss

Private cloud is ill-advised and archaic says AWS boss

Summary: Private cloud offers few of the benefits of public cloud services and many of the costs of running on-premise infrastructure says AWS SVP Andy Jassy

SHARE:
11

Private clouds are often sold as an inevitable stop over for companies on the way to adopting public cloud services.

But — perhaps unsuprisingly — the boss of the world's largest public cloud services provider Amazon Web Services disagrees.

Playing with the building blocks of the cloud: Getting IaaS right

Playing with the building blocks of the cloud: Getting IaaS right

Playing with the building blocks of the cloud: Getting IaaS right

Private clouds offer "none of the benefits" of public cloud services and many of the costs of running an in-house infrastructure, according to AWS SVP Andy Jassy.

"To build a private cloud from scratch seems ill-advised, it's not cost effective and it's an archaic solution," he told the AWS Enterprise Summit in London today.

Unlike using a public cloud service, Jassy said building a private cloud infrastructure saddles companies with the capital expense of buying hardware and forces them to commit to running a base level of hardware, rather than spinning up servers on demand.

If internal IT staff are often still involved with running this private cloud infrastructure it means they have less time to work on tasks that will differentiate the business.

If a third party is running this private cloud then the infrastructure will likely cost more to operate than if a business ran it itself, he said.

The reason that large, incumbent technology companies are so keen to sell private clouds to enterprise is to "preserve the very large margins" they have historically enjoyed in the enterprise IT market, he said.

Hundreds of thousands of customers in 190 countries use AWS' suite of compute, storage and database cloud services, primarily its EC2 compute service and S3 storage service.

Further reading

Topics: Cloud, Data Centers, Hardware

About

Nick Heath is chief reporter for TechRepublic UK. He writes about the technology that IT-decision makers need to know about, and the latest happenings in the European tech scene.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

11 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Crazy talk

    Makes perfect sense to me. Expose your data to the NSA and other black agencies, in addition to hackers, etc. in order to save some money. You can always pay the piper later on.

    Public cloud computing is trying to do to the hardware sever market, what Linux did to the software Linux market: make everything cheap, resulting in the driving away of money, jobs, innovation, and investment from the market. AWS is the biggest cloud provider, and it makes no money from cloud computing. What good is a market which generates almost no profit, and puts your data and your company's well being at risk?
    P. Douglas
    • Correction

      I said the following in my comment above:

      "Public cloud computing is trying to do to the hardware sever market, what Linux did to the software Linux market:"

      I meant to say:

      "Public cloud computing is trying to do to the hardware sever market, what Linux did to the software UNIX market:"
      P. Douglas
  • A guy who makes his money in public cloud computing.

    Says private cloud computing is bad.

    I don't see a conflict of interest at all.
    mikedees
    • Yep.

      Another useless article with an obvious outcome.
      IT_Fella
  • Of course he would say that

    Private clouds have a place. All a cloud is, is a data center that looks like a server. If data security is important, then having a private cloud in a physically secure data center is more secure than having the data in a public cloud.
    grayknight
  • Public clouds may be in danger

    If hardware keeps getting cheaper and cheaper public clouds may become economically unfeasible. In the end the only positive side of public cloud could be it's management software and geographic distribution. If you do not need geographic distribution then then the need for public cloud diminishes.
    paul2011
  • Hmm... PRIVATE

    I guess the reason you'd want a private cloud is because it is PRIVATE.
    duckdive@...
  • When all you have is a hammer; everyting looks like a nail

    Argh, there is a disease in IT and that is this all or nothing mentality. Sure public clouds have a market when it is appropriate given the proper business case. It is like ANY IT solution. We see the same argument of SaaS vs On-Premise software; where there is almost always a cut-over point for the rent vs buy decision. I think Mr. Jassy would better serve AWS if he acknowledged that private clouds have their place and instead show potential customers where public clouds excel, something I think MS is doing correctly with Azure. Can't the industry stop with this all-or-nothing mentality; there are always proper alternative solutions that make sense for any given scenario.
    DCBurr
  • Yeah, because he wants more business.

    "But — perhaps unsuprisingly — the boss of the world's largest public cloud services provider Amazon Web Services disagrees."

    Yeah, because he wants more business.

    "it's not cost effective"

    Some businesses value control over their data over cost - and frankly, control over your own data can sometimes reduce costs.

    "and forces them to commit to running a base level of hardware, rather than spinning up servers on demand"

    Unless the business overbuilds their architecture like they should, in which case they *can* spin up more servers on demand. This is more a planning/architectural issue rather than a "public vs private" issue.

    Even a "public cloud" business needs to keep buying new hardware; it's not as if computation and storage are magic just because you plaster the name "public" in front of the word "cloud."

    "If internal IT staff are often still involved with running this private cloud infrastructure it means they have less time to work on tasks that will differentiate the business."

    You don't hire each and every employee to "differentiate the business." Yes, you still have to hire people like janitors and accountants and such. This is a rather absurd argument.
    CobraA1
  • Not Biased

    It's great hearing a lovely biased comment :-) The head of AWS is hardly likely to state anything different. This article might as well go into the sales and marketing section

    Private Cloud is all about internal optimisation. Not everyone wants to stick there date on centralised systems located god knows where, managed by god knows who with the continual worry of whether it'll still be online in the morning

    Private Cloud is about bringing cloud computing concepts to internal IT systems. It's about moving away from archaic manual processes, re-engineering them and automating where possible.

    It's all about doing what you current do but in a better fashion, allowing the IT team more time to be customer focused, or innovative, etc.
    steeveeh@...
  • What would a pusher say? Don't get drugs?

    Public cloud services like AWS could be very beneficial for SME's but when you run a big enterprise the risks and the cost of public cloud make the services no convenient at all.

    Moreover the level of customization of an inhouse service has the potential to make thing more efficient for the business.
    Danxz