Yeh but a pragmatic decision like a $40pcm box won't go down well with your now very bored team of SREs, DevOps and distributed systems engineers(tm) who demand more playtime with the magic cloud toybox (for a 100DAU internal app).

Those people will actually be grateful they don't have to deal and spend weeks to debug yet another cloud provider hidden gotcha or bug and convince support they are right. They will now very happy as they can now deliver value (at relative scale) and really speed up processes. I know I am.

Good ol' bare metal is real nice, but it won't save you from application complexity, security requirements, and so on - you still need to manage it somewhat. If you're not a startup looking for market fit at least.

Is there anything stopping those teams from deploying k8s and every possible apache product onto these machines?

There's also middle ground in the form of Digital ocean's kubernetes which runs noticeably cheaper than big tech cloud offerings.

I'm not sure about that. We get paid well for working with (or around) public cloud complexity, but I bet many of us would gladly manage much simpler setups like the Hetzner Cloud.

You guys have teams that decide the infra they run ?

If they manage it in my company at least of course, the real question is if they want to manage it (and know what that means). Usually they don't, in my experience.

Dang, that is a fantastic deal. The €100 / month is even better - DDR5 RAM, 2TB NVME raid 1, and it's all customizable too. Just have to wait for Ubuntu 24.04 to be available and might have to make this switch.

Just setup two Ubuntu 24.04 servers in last couple of days. One at Hetzner and another on AWS.

Yeah, they're all pretty fantastic. Can even upgrade existing servers with more RAM/disk, or store ~250 TB of data for $400/mo etc.

Not to mention unlimited free 1 Gbit egress/server

> Also of note that Hetzner is profitable, which means AWS has been operating at an insane markup.

You can also evidence of this on their 10-Q :^)

It's more than a box in a rack. These providers do actively monitor and fix these boxen. They can all be rebooted remotely as if you physically hit the button, you've got interfaces to access the machine as if you were logging in physically with a DB-9/RS232/ethernet/whatever console, etc.

It's not just "space in a rack and you deal with the servers yourself and you come to fix them if they break".

These companies know what they're doing.

You're missing the point. There's a massive difference between getting a box service, and getting a highly available regionally distributed service with a semblance of a SLA of bandwidth to anywhere on the planet. To quote a former manager, its not even apples and oranges, is apples and pumpkins. They simply aren't in any way the same scope.

What do you mean? The big bare metal providers have multiple datacenters with fat pipelines and peering. You can put those geo-separated servers in the same subnet. Europe and US is covered, it looks like Asia a black spot for Hetzner, I will give you that. I doubt that so many business have such size and global reach, that world wide latency is a priority. If it would be, the average site would not connect to 20 domains to load megabytes of javascripts, trackers and what not.

(Also, at Hetzner you can even rent their network hardware if you want to make custom solutions.

Sure, go build your own less reliable cloud. But don't pretend that single box pricing is comparable to single cloud service as a result.

I don’t know why you are suggesting that people will build unreliable things. My company’s first day of AWS was the first time AWS had a major outage. We were sold on more reliable, but I can tell you AWS is just as reliable as home grown BS, if not less reliable. The biggest difference is what you do during downtime: in AWS, you refresh status pages. In your actual hardware, you’re actually problem solving and able to build/deploy workarounds to get back working within 30m.

Having worked for one of the major cloud providers in the past, I second this.

In fact, I have no idea why people go for those. You pay a massive premium for the "privilege" of not owning the infrastructure, and being subject to opaque pricing and outages that are completely beyond your control.

And in terms of actually managing the stuff, now you have to pay staff to manage your cloud things too.

It makes no sense to me.

Hetzner is actually offering their Hetzner Cloud and it's a joy to work with because of its simplicity (think about the early days of AWS). You can do everything in Terraform or via their CLI if you prefer. Setting up a full k8s cluster takes maybe 10 minutes including all configuration.

Hetzner does have a cloud VPS option, which is still very affordable: https://www.hetzner.com/cloud

This is pretty heads-to-heads with EC2, in terms of how it works behind the scenes.

So go with hetzner?

Already do :-)

And this is just for the "dumb" EC2 instance, the markup on their "smarter" stuff is probably much higher. In general I understand why one would want to start off in the cloud but staying there for 10+ years is quite absurd given the costs.