The Cost of Aging IT Infrastructure

The Cost of Aging IT Infrastructure

At first glance, using CapEx to purchase hardware for your organization seems like the right decision. IT is expensive, so you want to get as much use out of it as possible – your computers, your servers, and so forth.

 

However, at the pace technology is evolving, aging infrastructure is costing organizations more than an upgrade or a refresh. It chews through CapEx budgets, and if an organization is waiting for the server’s doomsday, they will be limited on how to invest the remaining IT dollars on new infrastructure.

 

Many reports say there is a significant increase in failure rate after 4 years of IT operation, and a server’s life span is between 3 to 3.5 years. The reports also say an upgrade will result in a return of investment of above 150 per cent over a span of three years, and the savings generated through an upgrade will cover the initial investment after 11.7 months. Financially, it makes sense to keep current infrastructure.

 

The main issues aging infrastructure causes are a lack of cost efficiency and lagging performance. But if we investigate further, these two issues are the umbrella for an unfortunate reality of many small businesses and organizations:

 

PERFORMANCE LAGS

Every year, IT companies introduce hardware with improved specifications, such as faster processors and larger RAMs. Software releases will be programmed based on current hardware specifications, not on aging infrastructure. The application performance will, therefore, lag on old IT and in most scenarios, slow down the hardware.

 

OLD APPLICATIONS

Organizations tend to use older softwares because current versions slow down the hardware, there are not enough resources to support the current applications or they’re not compatible with the hardware.

 

HARDWARE COSTS RISE

With more breaks, more lagging, more stalling and more fixing just to keep the hardware afloat, maintenance costs keep increasing. In time, these costs may equate to new hardware costs.

 

LOSES ITS ENERGY EFFICIENCY
The price of higher power use and increased cooling rises as older servers age. Almost all updated models are built to be more energy efficient than their predecessor.

 

LESS MULTI-APPLICATION PROCESSING SUPPORT
The number of applications that PCs can run simultaneously increases by 30% with every hardware refresh.

 

MORE SECURITY PATCHES
The issue with legacy hardware is that there is more time for hackers to understand how to infiltrate these systems. In the unfortunate circumstance, the manufacturer has stopped producing security patches for the hardware. But if there are security patches, someone would be responsible for continuously updating the hardware to ensure security compliance and application compatibility. However, this requires ongoing maintenance, which over time becomes cumbersome, especially if the organization frequently encounters hardware issues.

 

CLIMBING REPLACEMENT COSTS
A direct correlation exists between aging IT with replacement costs. If an organization looks to replace hardware parts, the line of compatible products becomes further limited as time progresses. The variety of parts available in year 1 decreases by year 4 to significantly fewer vendors, fewer configurations and compatibility options and thus, higher costs.

 

LACK OF SECURITY AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Quite simply, security and regulatory requirements are set on current IT configurations. Filling gaps with patching and security packs will create Band-aid solutions, becoming a substandard method of meeting requirements.

 

HINDERS INNOVATION
Management is asking employees to take initiative and test new methods to improve productivity and test innovative products. However, after 3.5 years of use, aging infrastructure refers to slower, failing and lacklustre infrastructure. Numerous studies show restricting employees of essential, working IT creates a frustrating, stressful work environment with less job satisfaction. It’s worth keeping hardware up-to-date to allow employees to work productively and explore.

In an era of drastic technological change and fiery business competition, now is not the time to let your IT keep your organization from moving forward. Call Quartet to speak to your account manager or a sales representative to learn how you can improve your IT infrastructure.

 

IT for Financial Services
Quartet has a long history of providing IT services and solutions that will help Canadian Financial services firms improve their infrastructures, save money, and comply with legal and regulatory requirements.

Firms working within the Canadian Capital Markets outsource to Quartet because of our financial industry IT expertise in areas such as:

 

 

FACT
20% of Quartet’s 500+ clients come from the Canadian Financial Services Industry.

THE RIGHT PARTNERSHIPS
Quartet is also exclusive IT support partners with Collaborative Financial Services Inc (CFSI).

CFSI is a Canadian based professional services and solutions provider serving the Canadian Capital Markets. They act as a channel to market or agent for financial technology firms wishing to enter the Canadian market and local vendors wishing to grow their existing business in Canada. CFSI also offers cost effective and innovatively packaged products and solutions jointly developed with its partners and associates.

 

FINANCIAL SECTOR CLIENTS INCLUDE:

KPMG CICA
Collins Barrow Toronto LLP Cormark Securities Inc.
CPA CANADA INVESTORS GROUP TRUST CO. LTD
RCAP LEASING INC Structured Settlements Group Inc.
Beringer Capital BFCP Services LP
Catalyst Equity Research Inc. Creative Planning Financial Group Inc.
Faircourt Asset Management Hillsdale Investment Management Inc.4
Ironbridge Equity Partners Liikfam Holdings Inc.
Milford Capital Management Inc. Nemeth Financial Services Inc.
Northfield Capital Corporation Olympian Financial Inc.
Richter Management Toronto Solidus Resource Capital Inc.
Richter Management Toronto Stone Asset Management
Stone & Co. Ltd. Stone Asset Management
Valleydene Corporation Blue Chip Leasing

 

No Comments

Post a Comment

Comment
Name
Email
Website