A Fortune 500 company would like to move its on-premises corporate email systems to a multitenant product hosted in the cloud where no maintenance of the underlying server OS or platform is required. Which of the following BEST represents the model the company should choose?
A public cloud model would be the most suitable option for the Fortune 500 company's requirements. In a public cloud, the corporate email systems would be hosted in a cloud environment shared by multiple organizations or tenants. This model eliminates the need for the company to maintain the underlying server operating system or platform, as these responsibilities are handled by the cloud service provider. This setup provides scalability, cost-effectiveness, and accessibility, allowing the company to focus on its core activities while the service provider manages the technical aspects.
I believe the correct answer here would be A as the question states that they would like to move the email systems to a multitenant product hosted in the cloud, meaning the infrastructure will be shared between multiple orgs.
Ok, let's go. If the company do want to maintenance or underlying the OS or plataform, the solution will be probably a SaaS (like Office 365), sooo that can't be a Hybrid solution. So i go with Public.
Ops sorry guys, "If the company DON'T". My mistake haha
I think they just move email server to a public cloud and leave the rest on-premises. Therefore the system would be a hybrid. That is the only thing I can think of a hybrid to be a correct answer for this question.
This is how I see it but I digress these questions are terrible
This is a bad question set by a person without any real world knowledge. He just read a chapter today or might have just glanced. God, this does not make any sense. I will select public
It is multi-tenant so it is not private cloud. Not hybrid and not other options. But what is the point of this question?
to reconsider you carrer choice
ChatGPT: A public cloud model would be the most suitable option for the Fortune 500 company's requirements. In a public cloud model, the corporate email systems would be hosted in a cloud environment that is shared by multiple organizations or tenants. The company would not need to worry about maintenance of the underlying server operating system (OS) or platform, as those responsibilities would be handled by the cloud service provider. The company would have the advantage of scalability, cost-effectiveness, and the ability to access email systems from anywhere with internet connectivity. Public cloud models are typically managed by third-party providers and are accessible to a wide range of customers over the internet.
Only the company's email is being moved over to the cloud.
I believe a Hybrid solution is not necessarily multitenant so A?...
If we're talking about a Fortune 500 company, it is likely that their corporate email system is not the only thing they would spend (likely) hundeds of thousands of dollars for the purchase, setup, and maintenance of on-prem equipment in. Therefore, if they're *only* migrating their email to the public cloud, and not their whole infrastructure, it is likely to be a hybrid model. Why? Because the email is hosted in the public cloud and everything else is on a private, on-prem cloud.
I'm gonna go with Chatgpt on this one: The model that the company should choose to move its on-premises corporate email systems to a multitenant product hosted in the cloud where no maintenance of the underlying server OS or platform is required is the Public cloud model. The public cloud is a type of cloud computing where cloud-based services and resources are provided over the internet to anyone who wants to use or purchase them. In this model, the resources are owned, managed, and maintained by a third-party cloud provider, who is responsible for the infrastructure, underlying server OS, and platform maintenance, leaving the customer free to focus on their application or service. This option provides the greatest degree of scalability, flexibility, and cost-effectiveness while reducing management overhead.