This is completely untrue, and I think it's part of the problem with discussions about microservices. People think it means "lots of small services". That is not what it means. That would be closer to SOA. Microservices is not SOA, and it is not "technobabble".
It has defined constructs, methodologies, and patterns.
This is not true at all. Microservices are a Service-oriented Architecture:
From section 2.3 in "Microservices: yesterday, today, and tomorrow"
" Microservices are the second iteration on the concept of SOA and SOC."
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.04036v1.pdf
There's probably other links I could dig up to prove the point, but I think that one's good enough.
I see it all the time. It's simply wrong to say that microservices is just "services". Many people being wrong changes nothing.
The earliest things on microservices seemed to be identical to early SOA stripped of lore, usually of specific-context origin, it had accumulated in a decontextualized way, and which was often, especially once decontextualized, not particularly in-line with the original principles.
It's now gone on and attracted a whole bunch more of its own lore the same way, arising out of somewhat different contexts.
I feel like you could just google SOA and Microservice architecture, pick up a book, and answer that for yourself.
Your link:
> Sam Newman provides a succinct definition of microservices in Building Microservices: “Microservices are small, autonomous services that work together.”