<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Containers on Brave New Geek</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/tag/containers/</link><description>Recent content in Containers on Brave New Geek</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2018 14:04:18 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://bravenewgeek.com/tag/containers/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Multi-Cloud Is a Trap</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/multi-cloud-is-a-trap/</link><pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:16:09 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/multi-cloud-is-a-trap/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;It comes up in &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; of conversations with clients. We want to be cloud-agnostic. We need to avoid vendor lock-in. We want to be able to shift workloads seamlessly between cloud providers. Let me say it again: &lt;em&gt;multi-cloud is a trap&lt;/em&gt;. Outside of appeasing a few major retailers who might not be too keen on stuff running in Amazon data centers, I can think of few reasons why multi-cloud should be a priority for organizations of &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; scale.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>