So I'm no fan of whiny prescriptivism language complainers, but "serverless" really takes the cake for a pointlessly confusing neologism.
-
-
Replying to @wycats
Ha! I kind of *am* a whiny prescriptivist language complainer, and I like "serverless" … it seems useful and self-evident to me. :-)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @wycats
That you don't have to worry about or administer the servers. (Yes, it's technically incorrect. But I instantly knew what it meant the 1/
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
first time I heard it, and I haven't heard any other term that I think is better.) 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @glv
Why did this feel new and different compared to Heroku? Or would you call Heroku serverless too?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats
The servers are still a bit more front-and-center in Heroku's model. You don't administer them yourself, but you know about & pay for them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @wycats
More so than a lambda. Virtualized, yeah, but still. Maybe my mental model is wrong; I think of it as a server in an elastic scaling group.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
it's a pre-requisite resource you're responsible for spinning up before deploying code. Lambda doesn't have this. Your resource *is* code
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
You have to "deploy" a lambda and it feels not that different to me. But other details (size, framework in the platform) matter.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.