Limitations of traditional and public models
When redesigning infrastructure, organizations often end up choosing between two extremes. On one side is the traditional data center: predictable, but limited in flexibility. On the other side are public cloud platforms, which offer speed and scalability, but do not always align with requirements regarding data location and compliance.
In practice, neither model proves optimal for every organization, especially when business-critical applications, sensitive data, and long-term dependencies are involved.
Financial uncertainties
Traditional infrastructure requires substantial upfront investments. Servers, storage, and network components are purchased as capital expenditures (CAPEX), depreciated over multiple years. Capacity therefore has to be estimated and procured in advance.
This creates a fundamental tension. Overcapacity means tied-up capital and inefficient use of resources. Undercapacity limits innovation and agility. In both cases, friction arises between IT needs and financial reality.
Public cloud platforms, in contrast to traditional infrastructure, are more scalable but complex in terms of cost control, as expenses can grow exponentially with usage. As a result, IT becomes a budget item that is difficult to align with strategic decisions, while organizations are actually seeking flexibility, predictability, and a direct relationship between usage and cost.