>buy serverless cloud
>look inside
>servers
>make website on no-code editor
>look inside
>code
It's not serverless, it's just someone else's server
That you don't need to care about.. as a dev you want to write your code, deploy and not have to care about the underlying server maintenance.. you are paying for that to be someone else's problem.
I'm as critical as the next guy of how overused and abused serverless/microservice architectures can be, but there's disliking something and being completely disingenuous. Some of the comments every time the subject is even remotely mentioned fall into the latter. This time is not the exception lol
I mean that’s generally the case with most tech. Just like the never ending PHP hate. Plenty of reasons to dislike or not use it but no reason to think it’s the scum of the earth.
I think it's a maturity thing. You eventually see so many trends come and go, peaks and troughs of hype cycles and some developers (probably including yourself at least once!) overusing certain new tech.
You eventually discover what works with current tech and then you can become healthily critical of anything new. You see it more for where it can fit and where it can't.
If you have something small and stateless then serverless is easy and, more importantly, scalable. It was a little easier to see its role once the hype fog had lifted and I had a problem to solve with it.
Eli5 server less, even on paper...
Instead of spinning up a classical server like Apache or IIS for what you need, you just write a single function that you can bind to an endpoint and just host that - the rest is abstracted away from you.
Someone else has a server and their infrastructure is set up so you can upload a zip of some executable and they'll figure out how to make it run. You don't worry about any details except your code and whatever API is require to be compatible, and they worry about hosting it, making sure it has memory, CPU time, disk space, DB, etc.
For the sys admins etc.. saying it's still a server, you are missing the point.. it's conceptually serverless in that you are paying a premium so you don't have to care about the server maintenance etc... That's someone else's problem.
I haven't ran into a good use-case to try out server-less yet. Either cold starts would be a problem (for example, I have an endpoint that needs to load a 5GB model into RAM, and it takes about 45 seconds). Or, it's just much more expensive than a VPS if the service is projected to constantly serve many requests all day. Containerized services on a VPS doesn't require much server maintenance (unless you have a dozen or so micro-services, then yeah, Kubernetes maintenance adds a lot of overhead).
serverless devs are the same as devs who don't know what graceful degradation is.
you don't have to be a server admin but at least know the basics
But think of the profit margins, and all the buzzwords our marketing team can use
I didn't known that it was seen as a bad thing by some devs. At my company (consulting) are we saying that we failed if we spin up a full server. we do infra as code very often and that wouldn't be as easy or possible as with serverless. It is easier to monitor what cost money (need more performance) that way too. I have seen some wish to get into the server, you don't have to, that is the thing, all your configurations are done with in a portal like azure, the only times (extremely few) i have went into a serverless is when i have to check the apps configuration for a very old app that may have been deployed manually (get surprised every time) and i don't know the values that need to be set and there has been times logging is done to disk instead of using application insight. But thankfully these are exceptions not the norm. It is usually applications that was a fire and forget project and have always worked until they want some new functionality.
