<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Outsource IT – The Numbers Back it Up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.softlayer.com/2008/outsource-it-%E2%80%93-the-numbers-back-it-up/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.softlayer.com/2008/outsource-it-%e2%80%93-the-numbers-back-it-up/</link>
	<description>A Behind the Scenes Look at the Best Hosting Provider in the World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 19:20:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff at rackAID</title>
		<link>http://blog.softlayer.com/2008/outsource-it-%e2%80%93-the-numbers-back-it-up/comment-page-1/#comment-421</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff at rackAID</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 23:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theinnerlayer.softlayer.com/?p=128#comment-421</guid>
		<description>Several years ago I ran a similar analysis and found a break even point to be around 6-7 servers when comparing using a dedicated server provider vs. co-location.  This was just for a single site installation.  I am sure costs would increase when you have 2 locations due to all of the network gear required.

There are also many hidden benefits about outsourcing infrastructure, especially if you have minimal needs or are just starting up.  I&#039;ve dealt with many start-ups that enter into full rack co-location agreements, load the rack with top-end hardware with expectations of growing quickly.  However, when that growth does not happen or development take longer than expected the high overhead starts to takes it toll.  With turn-key infrastructure, you could launch a new service with minimal upfront costs and grow and contract as needed on-demand.  I find this to be the most powerful feature of dedicated server providers like SoftLayer and others.  

Lastly, there&#039;s a lot of intangible benefit to simply not worrying about your IT infrastructure.  When that server dies at 3AM, you don&#039;t have to worry about replacing it.  That alone can be worth a bundle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Several years ago I ran a similar analysis and found a break even point to be around 6-7 servers when comparing using a dedicated server provider vs. co-location.  This was just for a single site installation.  I am sure costs would increase when you have 2 locations due to all of the network gear required.</p>
<p>There are also many hidden benefits about outsourcing infrastructure, especially if you have minimal needs or are just starting up.  I&#8217;ve dealt with many start-ups that enter into full rack co-location agreements, load the rack with top-end hardware with expectations of growing quickly.  However, when that growth does not happen or development take longer than expected the high overhead starts to takes it toll.  With turn-key infrastructure, you could launch a new service with minimal upfront costs and grow and contract as needed on-demand.  I find this to be the most powerful feature of dedicated server providers like SoftLayer and others.  </p>
<p>Lastly, there&#8217;s a lot of intangible benefit to simply not worrying about your IT infrastructure.  When that server dies at 3AM, you don&#8217;t have to worry about replacing it.  That alone can be worth a bundle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
