No that is not correct, it is not double the cost, please see my reply above.

Salaries are a cost.

To an investor, a salary is a temporary cost ie, you pay the salary, get the TF scripts made, fire the employee while a checkbox driven, managed resiliency is going to cost you forever with no hope of ever eliminating that cost.

At least that’s what was recently told to me by my manager to explai why my employer prefers to hire people to self manage the AWS infra.

Wait. Are you saying that while AWS maintains multiple AZs they can’t maintain reliability on the failover systems between them?

Did you, by chance, reply to the wrong comment? Don’t think I said anything about failovers etc.

The point made to me was that a devops role can be made to eventually automate their own job away to an extent. To an investor, having a devops role on staff is acceptable.

If you never had a devops role and used AWS managed services, you can’t automate that and trim costs.

I.e., devops roles look like surplus in the system if they’re doing a worse job than managed services but to certain audiences, that surplus is necessary. So, if you’re looking to fundraise and your business has tight margins, don’t be too hasty to move to managed services.

I did reply to the wrong comment, apologies!