3 ms·

> Take cars for example. IF K8s were a vehicle, it wouldn't be a car; it would be a multipurpose monster that could be used by some for getting groceries, or c

> Take cars for example. IF K8s were a vehicle, it wouldn't be a car; it would be a multipurpose monster that could be used by some for getting groceries, or configurable into an 18-wheeler for interstate trucking, or as a off-road missile launch platform and somehow also amphibious/submersible. That.... thing will be complex because it has to be able to achieve a variety of tasks. Also, cars are still complex beasts that have achieved economies of scale (I've had "repairs" where they just replaced an entire assembly instead of fixing a smaller component that was broken). I'm sure there are repair forums were mechanics complain about cars more than HN complains about K8s. > K8s is a great example of terrible design and half-assed implementation So where are the superior competitors by the master craftsmen with good taste, then? People willingly choose Kubernetes because the alternatives (third-party, homegrown or manual processes) are worse. Ops, configuration and orchestration management has been steadily getting better over the last few decades, but there is no silver bullet. If you know of one, I'd be happy to try it out and save a lot of money.

0xbadcafebee 3y ago
I agree that the monolithic nature of K8s is a bad idea and will always lead to more problems. The competitors don't exist because incumbency prevents progress. Nobody wants to write a competitor to K8s, because it would be impossible to get people to switch away from K8s, because K8s is a billion-dollar ecosystem. Thousands of companies now exist solely to service it and build parts for it. None of them want to support two such systems, and none of them want to completely reinvent themselves for some other platform. And from the user's perspective, it's not like getting into a different car, it's like learning to drive an entirely different vehicle, so they have no incentive to switch. This isn't just a tech thing, this is a universal thing. Incumbents suppress innovation and competition without even trying to.
- guiambros 3y ago
  Aren't you describing the perfect scenario of innovator's dilemma? Entrenched incumbents with a legacy and expensive technology, just waiting until a more nimble player comes along and disrupts the entire ecosystem from the bottom up. See the microcomputer, the PC, digital cameras, iPhone, Android, and so on. Except, we haven't seen any of these nimble players gaining any traction. Maybe they're out there, or maybe they're yet to be created. Or maybe the complexity is an integral part of the problem they're supposed to be solving. I guess we'll know in a few years.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > The competitors don't exist because incumbency prevents progress. Nobody wants to write a competitor to K8s, because it would be impossible to get people to switch away from K8s, because K8s is a billion-dollar ecosystem. Angular was an incumbent and still got toppled - albeit by a project from another tech giant (React). The question is - why hasn't Microsoft or Amazon incubated superior, simpler alternatives to K8s that works best on their respective clouds? The financial incentives are clear to me, but there's a big hole where that product ought to be

0xbadcafebee 3y ago

I agree that the monolithic nature of K8s is a bad idea and will always lead to more problems. The competitors don't exist because incumbency prevents progress. Nobody wants to write a competitor to K8s, because it would be impossible to get people to switch away from K8s, because K8s is a billion-dollar ecosystem. Thousands of companies now exist solely to service it and build parts for it. None of them want to support two such systems, and none of them want to completely reinvent themselves for some other platform. And from the user's perspective, it's not like getting into a different car, it's like learning to drive an entirely different vehicle, so they have no incentive to switch. This isn't just a tech thing, this is a universal thing. Incumbents suppress innovation and competition without even trying to.

guiambros 3y ago
Aren't you describing the perfect scenario of innovator's dilemma? Entrenched incumbents with a legacy and expensive technology, just waiting until a more nimble player comes along and disrupts the entire ecosystem from the bottom up. See the microcomputer, the PC, digital cameras, iPhone, Android, and so on. Except, we haven't seen any of these nimble players gaining any traction. Maybe they're out there, or maybe they're yet to be created. Or maybe the complexity is an integral part of the problem they're supposed to be solving. I guess we'll know in a few years.
sangnoir 3y ago
> The competitors don't exist because incumbency prevents progress. Nobody wants to write a competitor to K8s, because it would be impossible to get people to switch away from K8s, because K8s is a billion-dollar ecosystem. Angular was an incumbent and still got toppled - albeit by a project from another tech giant (React). The question is - why hasn't Microsoft or Amazon incubated superior, simpler alternatives to K8s that works best on their respective clouds? The financial incentives are clear to me, but there's a big hole where that product ought to be