Our industry appears to be going through a phase of giving new or not so new approaches short names which though catchy are so inaccurate as to be meaningless and possibly dangerous. These include "containerless", when containers of one sort or another are clearly present. Now we have "serverless ".
Look, I absolutely get what's behind the term: cloud has made it so that developers don't need to worry about deploying databases, web severs or whatever is needed to run their application and also takes care of scaling and fault tolerance. But servers and databases and other infrastructure are still there because your application still needs them; just because you don't see them doesn't mean they're not there.
2 comments:
Quite a lot of times now I see and hear people says *Serverless* also they refer to *Serverless* applications, well show me one app that can run without a server underneath. We can apply the same thing to the *Cloud* as there is no *Cloud* it's just server or clustered servers. Thank you for your article.
That's exactly my thought too. Cloud, Containerless are just marketing buzzwords
Post a Comment