What I learned since the 90ies, is that software engineers don't learn from previous years... let alone from previous decades.

This "microservices are better" argument was made in the 90ies and top dog is still Linux kernel (the one that was on the monolith side of that debate).

So yeah - microservice advocates haven't learned anything since the 90ies, or from the SOA era, etc... (but I suspect they were in secondary/high school then)

An anecdote: When I joined my current company had more code to orchestrate services, than the actual business value generating code in the services. We still produce an inordinate amount of code that exists just to facilitate microservice architecture. (it's also untested code, because we just don't have the money to spend time on testing it)

If you don't have money for testing I hope you're saving up to afford to fix it twice.

While I agree with you, the good part is that each generation is (slightly or significantly) better than the previous one. I remember using static generation in the 90s but the tools we have now are more powerful. Kubernetes is a great piece of software: it is well-designed, easy to work with (at least the managed versions that most companies use; administering the cluster is another thing), it applies a set of simple concepts in a consistent way that makes scaling a breeze. Soin the long run we benefit from the hype, although I can hardly understand folks running k8s for a 3-container setup.

K8s isn't so bad if you use a service like azure. I wouldn't run my own cluster. But k8s does make your life easier. It's basically supervisord on steroids with regards to features. Tho networking and storage is a nasty thing.

Each generation goes through the cycle faster.

> I can hardly understand folks running k8s for a 3-container setup.

Why can't you understand them? I understand them - It's cool, that's why they run it. It's not about rational use of resources, it's about being cool.

Where did I say this? All I said is that it's usually effective to spin up more instances of the system - a conclusion we arrived at long ago.

Regarding your point, most other disciplines gain knowledge over time, such as civil engineering, chemistry or biology and we don't discard results from the past with this kind of strawman argument of there supposedly not being anything to learn since. If things were like that, any progress would be impossible.

And Calculus was invented 300 years ago. It still works.

This attitude is extremely toxic to the development community.

"Its old" is NOT valid criticism.

"Its new" is NOT valid praise.