But don't let it encourage you to think serverless has no value, or it can't be done portably or cheaply. It has its sweet spots just like everything else.
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/implementations/aws-perspec...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24552779
(regarding costs, this setup ends up being +$500/month, again, to draw graphs of your architecture https://twitter.com/der_rehan/status/1308242717307174912)
This field used to be inspiring, but now I see the ideia of having a server being sold as the plague and lots of negativity towards people who are good at servers. They are not seen as another human being but the "other".
Also I can't understand why one would prefer to pay that much for such complexity.
It seems unsustainable for me, not to mention the new generation being spoon fed that that is way to go makes me concerned about the future of open computing.
To make an analogy, it's like hiring a carpenter based on the number of tools they have. NO. Show me your skill with a hammer and chisel, and I'll assume you can figure out the rest.
If there is one thing that dealing with AWS reps has taught me, it's that this was 100% by customers. I swear to god, AWS doesn't do anything without customers asking for it.
If you are wondering why products are build in AWS, it's because people wanted to give them money for this. Say what you want, but this isn't something are pushing on us. This is something "we" push on them to provide.
Just because it doesn't work for your situation doesn't mean it doesn't work at all.
It's a tool in your toolbox.
The new generation is always joining one cargo cult or another, that's why competent technical leadership is important. Remember when noSQL was the best thing since sliced bread?
Serverless can be a good option if you have large and unpredictable transient loads.
Like any architectural choice, you need to consider the tradeoffs and suitability for your use case. A TODO app probably doesn't need to be built with a serverless SOA.