If you look at most enterprises today you will see it deployed everywhere.
And most of the complexity has been abstracted away by the cloud providers so all you're left with is a system that can handle all manner of different applications and deployment scenarios in a consistent way.
> If you look at most enterprises today you will see it deployed everywhere.
This doesn't mean it's a game changer. It just means it has a big cargo-cult and people keep using it regardless of whether they need it.
> most of the complexity has been abstracted away by the cloud providers
The abstractions that people add make things more complex, not less. Unless of course you don't care to understand what you're running, which is precisely the problem with the culture around most folks that use kubernetes (and more broadly the US cloud providers as an entity).
The problem with Kubernetes and complexity is that because it simplifies a lot of things that are a huge PITA to accomplish on a "homemade" server/container setup is that there are a huge number of products and things you can run on kubernetes to "do stuff".
And it is hard for a lot of people and organizations to resist the "oh shiny" aspect. Stuff like "Oh, look I can do network policies and service meshes!" or "Lets create this really complicated and big thing so we can configure all our AWS infrastructure with kubernetes objects! Who cares that a bad commit can destroy the infrastructure the cluster depends on along with our ability to manage any of it!" or "Look we can have lots of namespaces for all our internal orgs and departments, lets make a gigantic centrally managed Kubernetes cluster that will be managed by IT and that everybody will be forced to use at the same time! Putting all our eggs in one basket is a awesome idea!".
K8s sorta removes the barrier of entry that world normally stop people from implementing those sorts of bad ideas.
Otherwise the core vanilla Kubernetes isn't really that complicated compared to most DIY solutions that try to manage large numbers of apps on clusters of systems. Most of the time it ends up a lot more robust and simpler in the right hands.
I guess I'm just really frustrated with seeing the people that get paid to use and promote it be so bad at what they do and I don't like cleaning up after them :)
Everything in our industry is built on abstractions.
By your logic we shouldn't be using operating systems, compilers, libraries etc and writing our own custom software to manually move applications between different hosts if they go down.
I don't really see how this is a particularly controversial statement and I will say I don't appreciate you trying to reduce it to some ridiculous extreme. You didn't add anything to the discussion and it's tragic, because you could have made a nice point about system boundaries, levels of abstraction and perhaps information overload.
That would have made a great point about why abstraction is sometimes necessary. Then we could have spoken about what makes good and bad abstractions. Perhaps someone who came upon this thread later could have learned something and we'd have made the site a better place together.
Obviously, there is exact opposite with stuff like fly.io but they can be extremely constraining.
