Various options around for simple alternatives, the simplest is probably just running single node.

Maybe with fail over for high availability.

Even that's fine for most deployments that aren't social media sites, aren't developed by multiple teams of devs and don't have any operations people on payroll.

> So you're comparing Kubernetes to what? Not running services at all?

Surprisingly there were hosted services on the internet prior to kubernetes existing. Hell, I even have reason to believe that the internet may possibly predate Docker

Next you’re going to claim the internet existed before Google too.

That is my point! If you think "just using SystemD services in a VM" is easy but "Kubernetes is hard", and you say "Kubernetes is hard" is because of Linux, cgroups, cloud storage, mount namespaces, ... Then I can't comprehend that argument, because those are things that exist in both solutions.

Let's be clear on what we're comparing or we can't argue at all. Kubernetes is hard if you have never seen a computer before, I will happily concede that.

ah I apologize for my snark then, I interpreted your sentence as _you_ believing that the only step simpler than using Kubernetes was to not have an application running

I see how you were asking the GP that question now