Concepts should be carefully named because this is not just jargon between a tiny handful of highly competent and super technical people; a vast number of devs and non-technical users will use these terms and it is in everyone's best interest to use descriptive and sensible wording.
Data lakes, data factories, event hubs are product names, not concepts, but they are either exactly the same as their underlying concept, or very closely related. However, as stated for the 3rd time, serverless is not. It's completely inaccurate and vague.
Where did you get that "serverless" means function as an entry point with 2 params? Every platform is different, from entry points to parameters, to bindings, to runtimes, to concurrency, to scaling, to security, and more. So the term is meaningless in describing anything. Many "serverless" function/lambda systems are evolving into running arbitrary containers and now have come full circle to basically a modern version of PaaS, which is what they should've been called all this time.
There are clearly better options and tons of examples of poor naming causing annoyances and best and utter confusion at worst. We still live with the NoSQL hype repercussions and now serverless is following the same trend. It's not helpful and we can do better. What is a serious argument against that?
I had heard of “Nosql” two years ago but I didn’t know what it was until I was hired to implement two projects on top of Mongo. Did I complain about the use of the term “NoSql” every time someone mention it? No, I learned Mongo inside out so I wouldn’t design something non scalable and non redundant.
It's great that you research, but many do not. Hype, jargon, and excessively misleading terms are real, and they make a measurable impact on productivity and confusion. This is why marketing and branding is so important when naming, and its why there should be an effort made to use better terms.
I still haven't heard a single argument on why we shouldn't do better, other than that you can handle it. Good for you, but that's not the point.
I know most of the features of AWS either from real world day to day use or at least on high level that I can talk intelligently about them. The time it took to learn them wasn’t lengthened by the term “serverless”. That was one of the easiest things to wrap my head around - write your code like you always do and just have a function as an entry point that takes two parameters - a JSON object and a context object and wire up an event that calls it.
But on the other hand, when a bunch of Azure folks start talking about Azure features they are using, I am clueless. Does that mean that Azure services are misnamed or that I would need to spend some time learning about it on high level if I wanted to talk intelligently?
For instance when I heard friends talk about Data Lakes, Data Factories, Event Hubs, I had no clue what they were yamerring on about. The same when anyone starts talking about machine learning.