Serverless runs on servers

[email protected]

Saying they’re the same as like saying that a self-driving taxi is the same as leasing your own car.

No saying serverless computing is serverless--which has several definitions btw like all marketing doublespeak--is like saying a taxi is driverless.

[email protected]

Serverless in cloud computing typically refers to ephemeral processes...things like lambdas and message handlers.

Outside of that it's marketing speech anyway (like "low code/no code" which is similar) so I guess any managed software is serverless by your definition?

[email protected]

an oversimplification of a complex solution.

it's like eating at a restaurant and bitching it's like eating at home.

while true, at home you didn't need to pay for the staff, stove, ingredients, pots, pans, water, flatware, plates, cups, etc... you also ignore the fact that your kitchen at home is comprised of a single 200w microwave, a minifridge, and a single plate.

ᥫ᭡ 𐑖ミꪜᴵ𝔦 ᥫ᭡

Why not just call it IaaS then ?

[email protected]

It's why you hire someone else to do it, like a network consultancy.

[email protected]

True.

But one thing you control, the other you don't.

[email protected]

Serverless Aurora is literally a thing in AWS

[email protected]

Is a waymo driverless?

[email protected]

Not every business has a need to run their own data center.

[email protected]

I was under the impression that "serverless" was marketing speak for "it has servers, but it's more opaque, and we will charge you a lot more".

[email protected]

CapEx vs OpEx.

[email protected]

"Function-based", "image-based" would have been slightly more accurate terms.

Wireless devices aren't actually "free of wires", it's that you don't have to deal with wires (or significantly less, since you still have to charge them etc., save for wireless charging). So that's not really new either.

Gregor

That's fair, I agree.

[email protected]

It's more like "it has servers, but you don't have to manage them, or hire someone to manage them, and we will charge you a lot more, but maybe you'll save money because you don't have to hire someone".

[email protected]

Not really. Serverless is OpEx. VPS is OpEx, but you also need OpEx budget for a person who can manage servers, not just a programmer.

VPS isn't rocket science, so you can probably find someone who can both program things and do the basic VPS server management needed. But, it is work that needs to be done by someone. In some cases, like if you're hiring scientists from academia who have never done any of their own sysadmin type stuff, it might be easier to just go with serverless so all they need to do is write programs.

[email protected]

Not really. Serverless is "you don't need to manage the servers". For some businesses, even managing a VPS is too technical a task. So, you could either go out and hire someone who can do that, or you can go serverless and pay a bit more for that, but save by not needing additional expertise.

[email protected]

From the point of view of the customer it is serverless. Maybe it's being done on a server, but maybe it's a magical genie in a bottle. You don't have to care because from your point of view you upload code and that code magically runs.

This fits perfectly in with other "-less" words. Like many "priceless" museum artifacts were bought and sold before they showed up in the museum. To the visitor and maybe to the museum they're priceless, but to the dealers who found it for the museum it had a price.

[email protected]

Yeah, and the big selling point for serverless is that you only deal with the code you want to run, none of that "server management" stuff. It's a perfectly reasonable name based on what's appealing about it.

[email protected]

I agree, and If you can't manage your own health, don't be alive, which is why the world should consist 100% of medical doctors.

[email protected]

It may also be cheaper because they only run (and acal) when needed, instead of having a few extra servers running "just in case".