But you could use `guest executable`, which has no dependency on their tooling. You can create exe with any language/stack.
But honestly, K8s has first class support from MS, Google, AWS. Has major buy-in from the community, good docs, plenty of recorded talks, presentations and war stories and a very active community.
SF has basically none of that. At the end of the day, SF isn't massively better than K8s for my use case and It would have to be to make up for all those disadvantages.
I think it's absolutely correct that the tooling for SF has been rough to use.
Especially at the beginning we were running into many issues related to the transitions between VS2015 and 2017, different project systems, changes in .NET/.NET Core, and our own lack of understanding about how the tools should work (I used to joke that I'm the PM that lives furthest from UI).
We had the luxury of being not-as-good at tools when we were just an internal thing at MS because other teams would pick up that slack. They were pretty forgiving, but that let us think that we had the development story figured out. We most definitely did not.
When the real VS org got involved before we announced the product publicly, it made a world of difference and I think some of us started to realize how much our previous experience sucked. It has taken us a while to learn how people actually want to develop on top of this thing in the real world and to climb out of that pit, building experience as we go.
In the last few months things have gotten better. There's still lumps (deploying many services to my dev box is still way slower than I'd like), but there's also been some improvements. We've made the transition to tools that are included in VS2017 by default (rather than having to download and maintain them separately), and made sure our APIs support .NETCore/Standard. Some of the MSBuild weirdness is still around (like whatever this is[1]) but overall the environment is much more stable and that's helping tremendously.
We've also made some SF specific changes around supporting what we call "Application Refresh Mode" and a single node local box experience (rather than making you run a whole 5 node cluster on your dev machine and doing full upgrades all the time, which can be more taxing). These things help speed up the hack-build-run dev cycle.
Most recently we created a whole new FabricClient[2] which is self contained and works over just http. This is a big change and fixes some of the things mentioned in this thread (like having to have the SDK somehow installed on your build machines just to deploy to a cluster).
Plenty of room left to improve in the tooling and improve the product overall. Thanks to folks for their comments - again this sort of feedback is really useful. I try to read the HN comments when we get our stuff posted here and pull out tidbits, but you can also just open up items in our GitHub issues list[3], which gets triaged fairly frequently.
[1]: https://github.com/Azure/service-fabric-issues/issues/1095
[2]: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/azureservicefabric/2018/05/...