Limitations of traditional and public models
When redesigning infrastructure, organizations often end up at two extremes. On one side is the traditional data center, which is predictable but has limited flexibility. On the other side are public cloud platforms, which offer speed and scalability but do not always meet requirements regarding data residency and compliance.
In practice, neither model proves optimal for every organization, especially when mission-critical applications, sensitive data, and long-term dependencies are involved.
The financial uncertainties
Traditional infrastructure requires substantial upfront investment. Servers, storage, and network components are purchased as capital expenditures (CAPEX), with depreciation over several years. Capacity must therefore be estimated and purchased in advance.
This leads to a fundamental tension. Overcapacity means tied-up capital and inefficient use of resources. Undercapacity hinders innovation and agility. In both cases, friction arises between IT needs and financial reality.
Unlike traditional infrastructure, public cloud platforms are more scalable but complex in terms of cost control, as costs also increase exponentially with growth. This turns IT into a balance sheet item that struggles to align with strategic choices, whereas organizations actually need flexibility, predictability, and a direct relationship between usage and costs.