I think there are few thoughts here. a) I don't necessarily agree with that statement - witness HashiCorp's recent raise: https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/

I think there are few thoughts here. a) I don't necessarily agree with that statement - witness HashiCorp's recent raise: https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/news/hashicorp-scores- https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/news/hashicorp-scores- 175m-funding-round-5b-valuation/2020/03/ b) The vast majority of container users run their workloads on public clouds like AWS and GCP which run on top of virtual machines to begin with. I'm not stating you need to use terraform (I definitely don't) - what I'm saying is that you can use the underlying orchestration provided by the cloud of choice - be it the networking or the volumes. There's no need to replicate that on top as container workloads do. When people who speak of kubernetes/container complexity - this is what they are complaining about. If you look at a lot of the configuration mgmt software out there - chef/puppet/ansible/salt/terraform/etc. it all involves configuring a linux system whereas with unikernels it's literally just one application and instead of having to plumb your network together or ensure that your workloads or 'stateless' vs 'stateful' you just use the underlying cloud facilities. That's the magic. It actively removes complexity from the provisioning.