Media companies recognise that to gain a competitive edge, they need the best possible infrastructure and tools in place to ensure their needs are perfectly met. And for media companies running either part or all their operation from the cloud, this means selecting the right cloud provider that offers the services, tools, functionality and performance that the business requires, all at the right price point. Some media companies are also attracted to the multi-cloud approach, which leverages cloud services from multiple cloud providers, as opposed to relying on a single provider.
Advocates of the multi-cloud strategy argue that it allows media companies to capitalise on the strengths of each cloud platform, benefit from improved flexibility and redundancy, and avoid risks associated with vendor lock-in. However, while the multi-cloud approach may sound good in theory, from a technical and practical viewpoint, it’s far from straight forward, and can also be hugely costly. So, the question is, is the juice worth the squeeze? In other words, is multi-cloud worth the cost and effort, or is it better to select just one provider?
Motivations behind multi-cloud adoption
For certain operations, there is demonstrable business value in adopting a multi-cloud approach; in a B2C business model, a multi-cloud strategy can provide improved resilience in service and uptime. For example, a content delivery network delivering content to end-users in different regions may benefit from using multiple cloud providers. This is because some cloud providers have a stronger presence in certain regions than in others, which may make them a better choice for delivering an optimal streaming experience in that specific region.
You’ve also got some media businesses that like the idea of going multi-cloud because they instinctively want to avoid being tied to one vendor. In an age when media companies want to pick and mix the tools and services that best meet their needs, this is understandable. Being able to consume some services from one cloud provider and other services from another cloud provider may seem like the ideal solution, particularly if you have the ability of moving a function from one provider to another when it makes cost or operational sense to do so. However, the practicalities of this approach introduce significant costs and technical challenges.
Realities of multi-cloud complexity
If media companies want to consume services from multiple cloud providers or move functionality from one provider to another, what needs to happen to the data? Do you move all data or content to the preferred provider, incurring significant egress fees in the process? Or perhaps you want to consume services from multiple cloud providers simultaneously. For high performance media applications, your compute needs to be closely coupled to your data, so if you want to split your processing tasks between two providers, this could well mean having the same assets with two providers. Given that storage is one of the most significant expenses in media production, with petabytes of data often needing to be stored, the costs associated with this approach are likely to be substantial.
Additionally, the engineering efforts required to support and maintain multi-cloud environments are extensive. Dealing with the nuances, bugs, and support issues from multiple providers adds layers of complexity, significantly increasing the operational overhead. This is especially problematic for smaller companies or those with limited engineering resources. When you have one cloud provider to deal with, you have one layer of complexities, adding another provider doesn’t just double the complexities, but rather squares it. And if you add a third cloud provider into the mix, you’re adding complexities to the power of three because you’ve got not just three systems to manage but also the impact of bringing those three environments together.
And from a development point of view, the multi-cloud environment can also necessitate a lowest common denominator approach. If one provider doesn’t offer the same feature or functionality as another, it may need to be rejected which can lead to suboptimal performance and increased complexity in managing applications across platforms.
Proceed with caution
While multi-cloud can offer certain benefits such as improved uptime and service redundancy in a B2C context, for most operations, the cost implications and engineering effort will usually outweigh the potential gains. Additionally, the complexity of managing a multi-cloud environment can slow down development and innovation, counteracting any theoretical performance gains.
Rather than introducing the inherent complexities and additional costs that come with multi-cloud deployments, for most media companies, it makes much more sense to focus effort on ensuring efficient and streamlined operations with a single cloud provider.
