K8s should be avoided - If your application works well without being converted into microservices-based architecture & fits correctly in a VM, needs less scaling, have a fixed traffic pattern then it is better to keep away from Kubernetes. Otherwise, the operational challenges & technical expertise will add a lot to the OPEX. Also, if you're the one who thinks that containers consume fewer resources as compared to VMs then this is not true. As soon as you convert your application to a microservice-based architecture, a lot of components will add up, shooting your resource consumption even higher than VMs so, please beware. Kubernetes is a good choice - When the application needs quick scaling, is already in microservice-based architecture, has no fixed traffic pattern, most of the employees already have desired skills.
Macs, macOS, and the appropriate Mac applications really shine in ease of use. Specifically, the system's media-handling features are excellent. The developer frameworks (libraries) are excellent and provide easy programmatic access to the operating system's features. macOS is very stable and is built on a solid foundation of a Unix kernel. The Swift programming language is very approachable, and macOS supports many scripting and programming languages, opening up a wide variety of coding libraries.
Local development, Kubernetes does tend to be a bit complicated and unnecessary in environments where all development is done locally.
The need for add-ons, Helm is almost required when running Kubernetes. This brings a whole new tool to manage and learn before a developer can really start to use Kubernetes effectively.
Finicy configmap schemes. Kubernetes configmaps often have environment breaking hangups. The fail safes surrounding configmaps are sadly lacking.
The Kubernetes is going to be highly likely renewed as the technologies that will be placed on top of it are long term as of planning. There shouldn't be any last minute changes in the adoption and I do not anticipate sudden change of the core underlying technology. It is just that the slow process of technology adoption that makes it hard to switch to something else.
It is an eminently usable platform. However, its popularity is overshadowed by its complexity. To properly leverage the capabilities and possibilities of Kubernetes as a platform, you need to have excellent understanding of your use case, even better understanding of whether you even need Kubernetes, and if yes - be ready to invest in good engineering support for the platform itself
I'm sure I'm biased. I've been using a Mac for 30+ yrs. I am significantly more productive on a Mac than on any other platform. It comes down to some personal preference and familiarity, but I just think the interface is more intuitive and streamlined
macOS tends to be very reliable, and Apple distributes updates as needed to patch known vulnerabilities or issues. It is very seldom that a macOS-based system is unavailable, and if that happens, the cloud-based storage and identity management support make it very easy to slot in a loaner machine while the user's primary machine is repaired.
The Apple Silicon hardware allows macOS to perform very well, with rapid response. Local processing for Apple Intelligence-related items is quite fast, and the response is impressively complete. Our experience with integrations to other enterprise systems is that the other system is usually the bottleneck in the process, rather than macOS.
Most of the required features for any orchestration tool or framework, which is provided by Kubernetes. After understanding all modules and features of the K8S, it is the best fit for us as compared with others out there.
macOS is very easily deployed with central MDM/DDM management systems. There are several of these available to select, depending on the amount and type of deployment needed. We use Jamf Pro to support a "zero touch" deployment model, which makes it almost as easy to deploy 100 endpoints as 10 (other than delivery and unboxing).
