@eliseo01 @silhouette @SuperDicq

>Organizations and companies that have a dedicated budget with dedicated administrators can cope with redundancy overhead if they scale VMs and when you wanna run so many services you will want to start virtualizing anyway,

I like VMs much more than containers. Mainly from a security standpoint, because the container maintainers are the project developers and developers don't have a good track record with updating vulnerable libraries. And when you set up a container, there is more dependencies that what the project depends on. Give the typical developer a chance and they will happily use a library that hasn't been updated in 5+ years. If you are running everything "natively" in a VM, you can be reasonably sure that everything is patched after running apt update && apt upgrade / dnf update. Unless the vulnerable piece of software is written in Rust or Golang. Then good luck recompiling it, because static linking is awesome.

Containers are a security nightmare mostly used by inept developers that write software that is hardly packageable by normal means. The only place reasonable uses for them is making system packages, reproducible builds and scalability with a few exceptions in other places. To be honest the FreeBSD approach with jails, where they behave much like a normal isolated system with easy updates, is much better than Docker/Podman/systemd-machined.