That's like saying a single server running Apache or IIS isn't a web server because its not flexible and cannot handle a large number of requests without performance degradation.
I dont even know what to say about that statement - a web server is just that, a web server
There are technologies that you can employ to ensure the website's performance and reliability
Like what? I have a dual quad core Xeon server running an active forum, and its about reached its capacity. Even with caching, more memory, and everything else, the server is about due for an upgrade. So maybe you can tell me something to help performance?
but a web server is a web server is a web server.
All web servers are not the same.
A couple of weeks ago I moved my forum to a cloud based service, and the site went down with a big crash. Instead of getting 3,000 - 4,000 post a day, the forum only got 125 post a day. After 3 days the DNS was changed and we went back to the old server. The new hosting provider was told in detail about the amount of traffic the forum got, number of database queries, number of page loads, unique ip addresses daily,,,,,, everything.
I was told this was a real cloud service that could grow with the needs of the site. Instead of having to change servers, we just add more resources. Well guess what, it did not work. But things did not work as described and the service was canceled.
When someone mentions "cloud service" or "cloud hosting", a lot of hosting providers are trying to jump on those buzz words to get customers. And its the customers that are paying the price with downtime.
Single web server - does not make a cloud
Virtual private server - does not make a cloud
Clustered services - makes a cloud
But just as someone else said, the term "cloud" is abstract and means different things to different people.
To me, the term "cloud" means that my websites and online businesses can grow, and without the worry of server downtime for repairs, or upgrades.