I’m sure with all of your developers using the repository pattern to “abstract their database access”, you can change your database at the drop of a dime.
Companies rarely change infrastructure wholesale no matter how many levels of abstraction you put in front of your resources.
While at the same time you’re spending money maintaining hardware instead of focusing on your business’s competitive advantage.
Netflix does NOT use aws for their meat and potatoes streaming, just the housekeeping. They use OWS for the heavy lifting.
https://www.networkworld.com/article/3037428/netflix-is-not-...
But re: maintaining hardware, I only maintain my dev box these days. We are fine with hosted linux services, but backup/monitoring/updating is just too trivial, and the hosting so affordable (and predictable) w/linux it would have to be a hype/marketing/nepotic decision to switch to aws in our case. The internet is still built on a backbone and run by linux, any programmer would be foolhardy to ignore that bit of reality for very long.
Netflix is by far AWSs largest customer.
From the horses mouth on why they decided to move to AWS:
https://www.se-radio.net/2014/12/episode-216-adrian-cockcrof...
You could also go to YouTube and watch any of the dozens of talks NetFlix has done at ReInvent.
Of course Netflix caches it’s videos in the ISPs data center. But caching is not the “heavy lifting”.
Do you think you are gonna get AWS's attention with that $10 s3 instance when something goes wrong?!? You will have negative leverage after signing up for vendor lock in.
I'll take linux servers any day, thanks.