Ok so here's the deal, although this is sort of well written-ish.
There is absolutely no surprise waiting for us in COTS, phony 4GLs that purport to "solve a problem".
I mean really? The fact that people still huck these tools means the software business might not be dead. Now if you work for a company that buys these things, I hope your not in tech. Because these fool things which are "container engines for consultants", will cost you a ton of money.
Maybe you prefer it that way?, its your money. The technical argument which sort of tried to make some point relative to event driven architecture was pretty obviously weak. Whether or not I personally agree with that architecture, I think that there could be arguments made there.
But we have MUCH bigger problems in tech. Some of them we cant talk about openly.
Like labor sourcing and scrum. So we may have people problems folks.
Let tool salesmen do their jobs and tend your own field and your own flock.
I would like to hire you on my next web aka "phony react mobile" project. And Im not kidding if I had your deets I would totally hire you.
This is sort of the exact problem but we cant talk about the exact problem.
What you are witnessing young fool is the intentional, extremely profitable business of "deprecating" "general purpose computers".
Did you seriously think that M1 macbook was about anything but escaping the legal definition (there is one) of a general purpose computer.
If you port for the M1 chip you have gone to the dark side.
Ill be here if you ever find your way back.
This reminds me of a conversation I overheard about 10 years ago, "I tried to delete my account on facebook I think all they are doing is scraping my personal information"
You folks here, yc grads, you either think you have us all fooled or you as dumb as rocks. Neither is likely true but there will be consequences nonetheless. Perhaps move to bitcoin island and spend your riches on some margaritas and a mud hut.
Land owners in the south are getting squeezed by the mills to the point there's almost no profit in growing trees. Some of them are turning to selling "renewable energy" in the form of wood pellets for "renewable energy" power plants.
In other words, its more profitable to burn trees then sell them to sawmills.
Pretty interesting how I was bag-shamed at the grocery store years ago using paper bags. And now those same people are using paper bags. I guess in the rock paper scissors of woke environmental policy, dolphins always beat trees.
Wow thanks for the pulsar AD.
Personally, i feel this writing is incredibly biased.
And the proposed architecture seems like something from the dark ages.
Engineers are really horrible salespeople. And maybe thats a good thing in the case of Scala. The functional programming paradigm has little or nothing to show for itself in the many years since this resurgence started. It personally has done nothing for me, not made my job easier, not allowed me to be more productive, and is not even really interesting. Any more interesting than LISP was in the 70s.
Scala is slow, wastes time celebrating its syntax of supposed correctness. Is a pretty bad JVM integrator. It cant get out of its own way and neither can its programmers.
I am open to learning new languages, we all should be, just to keep learning. But lets be honest folks. Scala is a highly opinionated academic and inevitably selfish decision to make over any other mainstream language.
I disagree completely with this article. What I have seen that should give people pause about microservices is, if you are not good at building software (which most enterprise shops simply are not), microservices could potentially destroy you.
But your legacy monolith already brought you to your knees so you have little to lose.
Most enterprise shops simply are not mature enough to implement dumb pipe/smart endpoints not because theres something especially hard about doing it but because their teams and their business people don't really have the perspective or desire to successfully manage such distributed complexities.
Where the monoliths fail is in the idea that this distribution is not needed (it always is) and instead offloads this on to the use of many different integration technologies such as queues, message buses, caches, document databases, RDBMS sidecar systems that will share data inappropriately, cause unresolvable data consistency issues, and generally only solve local problems while creating global ones.
Microservices are the other end of the spectrum, if your design has anything to do with sharing significant amounts of data to complete a transaction, you are entering a world of pain. You can share some data at the API level but beyond that you will be in for a ton of trouble. Its true this requires more discipline at the design level and more discipline in implementation and operations.
The moral of the story is that if you cant level up to managing microservices with the horses you currently have, personally, I would leave it alone. If your 3-5 years behind the curve already as an enterprise shop, you may want to consider
putting your whole system into maintenance mode, and paying a competent organization to manage it, buy a startup or buy some COTS and call it a day.
As for the single server guys know this, yes you can make a ton of money scaling that out on a limited basis and selling your startup or IPO-ing. But know that as soon as you cash out, it will be someones job to completely rewrite your single server drivel to serve even one more customer or business need in a predictable, scalable, cost effective manner. See JBoss, see ROR, see any already dead on the vine monolith technology. Its over there in the corner of the office. Its called the trash bin.
There is absolutely no surprise waiting for us in COTS, phony 4GLs that purport to "solve a problem". I mean really? The fact that people still huck these tools means the software business might not be dead. Now if you work for a company that buys these things, I hope your not in tech. Because these fool things which are "container engines for consultants", will cost you a ton of money.
Maybe you prefer it that way?, its your money. The technical argument which sort of tried to make some point relative to event driven architecture was pretty obviously weak. Whether or not I personally agree with that architecture, I think that there could be arguments made there.
But we have MUCH bigger problems in tech. Some of them we cant talk about openly. Like labor sourcing and scrum. So we may have people problems folks.
Let tool salesmen do their jobs and tend your own field and your own flock.