AWS is legacy. That's why Kubernetes has uptake. They are in danger of becoming a rack provider if this continues. Their managed applications still have a place, but with third parties, they might become a glorified cloud app store, which they might desire anyway.

I haven't worked with Kubernetes but I have worked a lot with Docker. Building your containers is difficult, using existing containers has a bunch of gotchas and getting your containers up and running anywhere resembling a production environment is a giant hassle.

I think containers is the future but we need idiot-proof GUI systems that Heroku and similar services provide to wire up our applications, and we need a good way to handle persistence, which many modern tools ignore.

This reminds me of the OpenStack Hubris, wherein they would dictate requirements to AWS due to the sheer momentum of the community. Uh, nope.

Kubernetes' uptake is nowhere close to AWS by any measure. And AWS is the #1 public cloud that hosts Kubernetes workloads.

It's every IT vendor in the world vs. AWS, and so far, they're winning. Kubernetes and open platforms have a shot, but they're not moving fast enough yet in the direction that matters - up the stack.

AWS is a feature factory and they are breaking their own back. Today I had an issue where creating an AMI for an application feature set as a golden image (with a very modest price tag at t1.supersmall or whatever) does not scale into high end compute instances due to lack of support for ena. Never was the case before.

Rolled it back into KVM/QEMU in colo with a glue layer REST interface over virsh and will never look back.

Of course we don't use containers..they don't offer an overt benefit in HPC...and I don't think they ever will.

Legacy? They are exploding with new stuff weekly, and growing like crazy.

There is a much bigger market for infrastructure in the cloud than people realize, and I will be very surprised if kubernetes is not replaced in 5 years.