Why you are better off without a server

vmware AWS Google Cloud Azure

Can you run an application without a server? That is the same as asking if you can cycle without a bicycle. In that respect, “serverless” is not exactly the strongest term in IT circles. Still, this option offers many benefits, especially for your wallet.

How does it work?

The major Cloud providers, such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft, all offer their own option for serverless. For Amazon, it’s AWS Lambda. Google offers Google Cloud Functions and Microsoft has Azure Functions. What they all have in common is that they offer FaaS, which stands for Function as a Service. This runs the logic of an application (on a server), but without saving the data. The price is on-demand -meaning you pay according to consumption, not for the capacity.

Serverless benefits

At first glance, this is not very attractive. If you compare serverless to a VM (Virtual machine) that runs on a server, you quickly pay double for serverless. But if you calculate the full price tag, serverless is often considerably cheaper. This is mainly because all operational costs disappear with serverless. All you need to maintain is the logic and front-end of your application. Everything that has to do with the backend is the responsibility of the provider. That way you can save hundreds of euros per month.

Besides, with serverless you have an (almost) infinite scalability. Developing the app itself is also a lot faster serverless because several standards are used that making development simpler.

Less costs due to economies of scale

Thanks to the enormous scale that Google, Amazon and Microsoft have, you can save a lot on your costs. There is simply no competition with your own server. For every server you would have on-premise you would need someone to maintain it. For a mega server you lose a lot less. Due to this increase in scale and the other advantages mentioned, serverless is a very interesting option when you want to develop a new application.

Standardization

Serverless is fine in 90 to 95 percent of all cases. The reason why that is not 100 percent is due to the standardization of the providers. These offer various “flavours”, but do not cover every situation. So if you really have special or unique functions for your app, serverless might be more difficult and therefore more expensive to realize.

Less control, but safe

Serverless can also be a no go for security reasons. This applies, for example, to financial institutions or governments, which often have internal requirements that the control of sensitive data remains completely in-house. This is not the case with serverless, after all it runs in the cloud -although this does inherently imply that serverless is unsafe -however, the safety also rests on the cloud provider. That being said, the servers of Microsoft, Google and Amazon are about the most protected in the world. Scale also counts in that area.

All in all, serverless is a great alternative for almost all companies or institutions. It is relatively cheap, offers a lot of flexibility and scalability and is safe. Do you want to know more about the possibilities of serverless for your company? Please contact one of our experts for more information.

How can I help you?

Contact Jonathan

Send a mail +31 (0)30 265 0 265
How can I help you?