The question has become more grave with Amazon’s outage, which has introduced new risk for organizations that have only limited monitoring and control. Super high availability requirements are more challenging to achieve when mission-critical apps are deployed in the cloud. This scepticism continues, as questions regarding cloud being more expensive, with added latency diminishing the value of the data still are unresolved. In addition, companies are sceptical about its adoption as market data is I/O intensive requiring instantaneous bandwidth expansion. To evaluate cloud viability, firms need to categories their app into non-critical and critical as both have their pros and cons.ĭue to the increased cost and difficulty of managing a private network in the cloud with the lack of quality guarantee, critical trading apps have not chosen the cloud technology. Read Also: SaaS to Remain the Highest Spending Cloud Service by 2023įear should not stop businesses from moving their essential or critical applications to the cloud.

Individual companies build out expensive infrastructure to handle peak loads while the cloud providers offer a flexible approach of scaling resources that is more efficient and cost-effective. SaaS achieves more significant economies of scale with shared applications, some key examples being Google Apps, Salesforce, and NetSuite.įirms are now overcoming the mental fear regarding cloud safety, both by comprehending the provider’s capabilities and by effective negotiation for the appropriate service-level agreements (SLA), which allows firms to reap savings associated with shifting mission-critical applications to the cloud. The leading SaaS vendors have a robust tracking system in place as they invest far more in securing their environments compared to security measures in non-cloud-computing companies’ data centers.

Download mission critical companies