3 ms·

By that logic, linode, shared webhosts, and facebook are all serverless.

• edblarney 10y ago
  No. Nobody ever used a social network and had to manage servers to do it, or ever referred to servers, nor where they implied. Using a 'social network' has nothing to do with servers. Managing back end infrastructure is fundamentally a 'server oriented' paradigm. 'Electric cars' are a perfectly apt name to refer to cars that are not gas/cylinder engines, just as 'steel roofing' is perfectly apt to differentiate from the standard tar based products at least in consumer roofing (in cold climes). Salesforce's mantra for a long time was 'no software' - which was reasonable because IT departments didn't have to install and manage software, although obviously salesforce themselves use 'software'. 'Serverless computing' is a perfectly fine name, 99% are fine with it, they know what it means, and it has nothing to do with Amazon's marketing initiatives. In fact - Amazon is way behind in positioning it - they are not even properly catering to hosting websites using the service, they are still mostly focused on IT folks.
  • Can_Not 10y ago
    > Nobody ever used a social network and had to manage servers to do it, or ever referred to servers, nor where they implied. > Using a 'social network' has nothing to do with servers. So when I goto facebook, instead of a server, I connect to a ______? > 'Electric cars' are a perfectly apt name to refer to cars that are not gas/cylinder engines, just as 'steel roofing' is perfectly apt to differentiate from the standard tar based products at least in consumer roofing (in cold climes). Electric cars are called so for semantically useful and intuitive reasons: They are electric instead of gasoline. Steel roofing is called so for semantically useful and intuitive reasons: its a roof made from steel instead of tar. That seems incoherent as a defense to using them term "serverless" to refer to something that is literally a several buildings full of servers.