Maintain your own data centers and they become cost centers, with silly games for getting and maintaining capacity, reluctance to expand capacity, and old technology.
A few people will talk loudly about it but not much will actually get done because the people who have experience with the cloud providers and the alternatives won't have any interest in moving back for vague ideals or vague threats.
The only thing most anybody cares about is their cloud providers directly competing with the customer's business model (most notably Amazon).
A more real threat reaction is jurisdictions going after the big five or so for antitrust issues and trying to break a few of them apart.
Amazon or any of them don't care about national interests any more than they have to and they'll do whatever they need to to calm fears (more or less just strengthening the legal regional isolation as necessary).
It is much like the late 90's boom, when a lot of companies were selling banner ads to each other. Even the ones who appeared to be profitable weren't really, because all of their customers were not. Once the loss-making customers of cloud companies go away, the big three cloud companies may find that they don't have a business model either.
Most SaaS etc. businesses make money in a way that is indirectly related to their server costs. Bringing the cost of servers down increases margin ceteris paribus, but the Latin is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
It's not at all clear to me that the median AWS customer can save money by going self-hosting. If I had to bet money on it, I'd bet against it.
Step 1) "I don't like thing"
Step 2) "I really wish thing didn't exist."
Step 3) "Thing is probably dying/dead."
Step 4) "If event happened, it would really show thing is dying/dead."
Step 5) "Event can happen."
Step 6) "Event will happen."
Step 7) "Event is happening!"
Step 8) "Events 1, 2 and 3 can/will/are happening which forms a narrative proving thing is dying/dead."
Have you considered a career as a journalist?
Your comment wouldn't be too bad without the last sentence.
I really have no skin in this game one way or another. I don't work with cloud companies, I don't make money with non-cloud things either. And I don't give a toot about how this unfolds because I think all things that Tech brings forward these days are bad for humans and society. So whether it's the cloud or ActivityPub or motherfuckers who believe the blockchain will cure the worlds ills ... the only thing that is on my mind is making it until spring, so that I can fuck off again into the woods for a couple of months and not think about it.
But go on with your vague insults if it eases your own personal suffering.
It's already the case, no? My company recently contracted G Suite with a guarantee that the data stays in Europe.
https://fortune.com/2019/10/30/europe-cloud-independence-gai...
> Tired of its businesses turning to foreign cloud-computing providers such as the Google, Microsoft and Amazon, the German government is leading the push for a European cloud network called Gaia-X. France is also on board. “Data will be the most important raw material of the future,” said German Economy Minister Peter Altmaier in a statement this week. “The European economy urgently needs an infrastructure that ensures data sovereignty.”
https://www.zdnet.com/article/eu-turns-from-american-public-...
> Just like their American counterparts, more than half of European businesses with over 1,000 employees now use a public cloud platform. But European governments aren't so sure that they should trust their data on Amazon Web Services (AWS), Azure, Google Cloud, or the IBM Cloud. They worry that the US CLOUD act enables US law enforcement to unilaterally demand access to EU citizens' cloud data -- even when it's stored outside the States.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/european-cloud-project-draws-ba...
> Germany and France are introducing a government-backed project to develop European cloud infrastructure in an effort to help local providers compete with U.S. technology giants, which dominate the global cloud market.
https://www.uscloud.com/blog/3-reasons-33-companies-ditching...
> However, if you dig deeper, you’ll find that a growing number of organizations have public cloud buyer’s remorse. A recent VotE Organizational Dynamics 2017 survey found more than one-third of companies surveyed migrated data from public to private clouds in 2017. Forrester Research shows migration to hosted private clouds are on the upswing, with adoption rising from 28% to 33% in North America in Europe. In that same survey, 36% of cloud adopters and planners state hosted private cloud is – or will be – their primary computing platform.
https://www.cybersecurity-insiders.com/idc-says-that-compani...
> Out of 400 IT decision makers who participated in the survey, more than 80% of them agreed that their organization either migrated applications or data that were primarily on public cloud environment to on-premises data centers or private cloud solutions in the past 14 months.
But on the software side it's lacking. And suggesting SAP might bridge the gap for software quality would get a laugh from anyone who regularly uses their product.
In the sense of being customer centric, offering thorough services, standardizing and operating on thin margins in order to reinvest most of their profits into the company itself.
A lot of small players in the cloud fields either offer an incomplete set of services, or adopt hardly-scalable models of operations.
If you want to at least have a chance of winning european customers concerned with data privacy and stuff from AWS you should try to replicate their pros -- offer a compelling alternative.
They decided to back off from being a cloud provider. They got no skin (top-level don't know how to pull it off) nor skill (EU engineers aren't the best in hi-tech) in the game.
Last I saw they only tried to build a shim-layer on top of CloudFoundry to orchestrate infrastructure running on other cloud vendors.
They got zero clients for SAP Cloud Platform since their customers prefer "best of breed" (AWS/Azure). If they say they have customers, it'll be "internal" customers: SAP other divisions who used them and they charged those divisions (that's how SAP works).
Why not both? That’s how AWS operates in China.
I strongly agree with this. But there is a response to everything and companies don't operate in a vacuum. I'm not suggesting that SCION is our version of "let's build a wall and make Americans pay for it".
Apart from protecting regional interests (which is just 1), SCION has too many advantages that let operators/carriers monetize on, to be ignored.
This will be enabled by changes to the underlying infrastructure - moving away from BGP and adopting (BGP backward compatible) protocols like SCION[1], as currently implemented by Swiss carriers, which allow improved traffic shaping, and more importantly: jurisdictional geo-fencing.
We'll also see more legislation by the EU to level the playing field against US companies who currently do business with a Double Irish Dutch sandwich.
The current model where the US is the only cloud provider with virtually no EU based competitor and where EU data is locked into US corps is unsustainable. Europeans trust into US companies has never been strong to begin with and current politics (+horrible foreign policy) will reduce it further.
The cloud is dead imo. Because in a climate where national interests are suddenly more important than partnerships and international trade, the cloud is more of a risk than anything else. The US makes that same case too, illustrated by their hostility towards Chinese products (I'm not defending China here at all btw).
[1] https://www.scion-architecture.net/
edit: I have to dig up this quote again from Aral Balkan's recent talk at the EU parliament: "You are acting as an unpaid Research and Development department for silicon valley. Because if a startup here succeeds, it gets bought by Google or Facebook. If it fails, we pick up the bill.": https://video.lqdn.fr/videos/watch/861c07f7-7e9b-4e64-9765-c...