Issue link: https://insights.oneneck.com/i/1477879
marketed at the time. I'm not trying to say that Microsoft was engaged in false advertising, but rather that the cloud was still relatively new and that the way that cloud services were being marketed led at least some people to make some incorrect assumptions. At the time, cloud service providers were working overtime to convince potential customers that cloud services were some sort of utopian solution to all of their problems. Many such providers gave people the impression that if they opted to run their software as a service rather than running it on premises, then they no longer had to worry about doing any sort of software-related maintenance. Of course, there is some truth behind this idea. If you run a software application as a managed service in the cloud, then there are a lot of things that the provider handles for you. Consider Microsoft Teams for example. Microsoft handles things like software upgrades, patch management, hardware maintenance, and deals with outages so that you don't have to. I think that because cloud providers like Microsoft handle so many maintenance tasks on behalf of their customers, it gave many people the idea that if they opted to run software as a cloud-based managed service then they didn't have to worry about a thing. They could simply use the software and allow the provider to worry about everything else. Ultimately, I think this probably gave a lot of organizations an incorrect perception that they didn't have to worry about backing up their cloud-based resources. The other reason why I believe that Microsoft 365 backups didn't catch on initially, was because there really wasn't a good way to back it up. After all, the backup software of the time was purely designed to back up resources residing on premises. The cloud was brand-new, and the backup vendors and providers had not yet caught up.