I’ll admit I was three sheets to the wind when I originally commented on this. Definitely could have left the ignorant low blows out.
That being said, I think what gets me most about this is it seems to overlook the fact that serverless exists to remove the effort and time and cost spent on maintaining servers and aims to allow developers to focus purely on providing value. There’s no doubt you pay more to have it managed by someone else, but at the same time costs are optimized as best as possible by only charging on a per use basis rather than having servers running all or most of the time to host services.
Massive monoliths are very difficult to maintain and often lack resiliency based on the often coupled nature of them. Microservices aim to solve this and also provide more ownership for teams. They also allow for flexibility in hosting as well.
This is stupid. If you don’t recognize the benefits of serverless of the capabilities of this you shouldn’t be writing about it. Go back to retirement if you remember the 70s. Maybe you would have laughed people out the door in 2000 but that doesn’t mean you by any means are right. Serverless doesn’t add complexity but provides a service that manages everything for you without having to manage scaling manually. This provides ease of use across teams and also consistency which is not found in self managed servers across any size of organization.