Stepping Back from Kubernetes: Why Teams Simplify

1) The “Kubernetes fits all” era is over

Kubernetes is fantastic for scalability and orchestration, but for simple workloads it can multiply complexity. Even a basic web service may require Deployment, Service, Ingress, ConfigMap, Secret, PVC. The ops layer grows; debugging and observability get harder.

• More files, more concepts, steeper learning curve
• Platform engineering takes center stage
• Unnecessary complexity for modest needs

2) Cost is heavy for SMB and mid-size teams

In small/medium teams, Kubernetes often leads to:

• Higher operational cost (dedicated SRE/DevOps)
• Higher resource overhead (control plane, overlay, sidecars)
• Longer MTTR (multi-layered stack)

In 5–10 servers and 20–50 services, it’s often too much.

3) It’s not “back to legacy”; it’s simple and modern

Many teams are choosing a thinner, more observable, directly manageable model:

Proxmox Cluster (VM/LXC)
Docker Compose or Podman
Nginx / Caddy (reverse proxy, TLS)
Redis / PostgreSQL (managed or self-hosted)
systemd services (simple & stable)
Prometheus + Loki + Grafana (metrics & logs)
Ansible / Terraform (automation)

Great fit for a monolith plus a few services, or a handful of microservices.

4) The EAK model: control, visibility, speed

• No unnecessary orchestration; direct control
• Simple, central logs and metrics
• One-command updates and rollbacks
• Resources go to the app, not the platform

Key question: “Are we really running a thousand-node cluster, or just a core set of services?” Usually the latter.

Conclusion

Kubernetes is powerful for the right problems—but not every problem needs Kubernetes. Our takeaway at EAK is clear: Simpler systems run faster and stay more stable at lower cost.