Is remote hosted storage ready for your tier one storage requirements?
Amazon seems to think so.
"This is intended to be very flexible to support any application a developer might build," says Adam Selipsky, Amazon's vice president of product management, adding that there is no limit to the amount of storage to which users can gain access."
A few years ago when everyone's darling was Storagenetworks. The Media thought that it was a great idea, customers were more hesitant. We ended up getting a lot of their NetApp equipment for our parts business, most of it was never even turned on. I always wondered why a Fortune 500 company would rely on a company like Storagenetworks to hold their most valuable databases. And it seems like a lot of other people were worried also, becasue they had very few customers for their service.
The problem is a matter of trust, who can you trust with your Data and its security and access? Would you trust Amazon more than Google with your customer data? Who has access to that data? What is your database worth to you, is it only a storage cost? Most companies view their corporate data as an asset, not only as a cost. I think that will remain an issue for the valuations of remote data storage services.