Cloud Digital Leader Practice Question: Planning a cloud migration and wants to…

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

• ✗

  Lift and shift uses containers; cloud-native uses virtual machines.

  Why it's wrong here

  This is backwards. Lift-and-shift typically replicates the existing on-premises environment using virtual machines (VMs) on cloud IaaS, retaining the same OS, middleware, and dependencies. Cloud-native applications, in contrast, are commonly designed as microservices running in containers (e.g., Kubernetes), or using serverless functions and fully managed services, rather than relying on VMs as the primary compute abstraction.

• ✓

  Lift and shift moves applications to the cloud with minimal changes; cloud-native re-architects applications to leverage cloud-specific features and managed services.

  Why this is correct

  Lift-and-shift migrates applications to the cloud with minimal or no changes, often copying VMs or servers as-is to IaaS, which is fast but fails to fully utilize cloud capabilities like autoscaling, managed databases, or serverless. Cloud-native, in contrast, re-architects applications using microservices, containers, and managed services to maximize scalability, resiliency, and operational efficiency. This is the fundamental strategic distinction: minimal relocation versus intentional redesign to leverage cloud-specific features.

• ✗

  Lift and shift is only possible for new applications; cloud-native is for existing applications.

  Why it's wrong here

  This statement reverses the actual relationship. Lift-and-shift is a migration strategy specifically for existing on-premises applications, moving them to cloud IaaS with minimal code modifications to accelerate initial migration. Cloud-native is an architectural approach that can be used for entirely new applications or for existing applications that undergo re-architecture to fully exploit cloud capabilities, so it is not limited to existing applications.

• ✗

  Lift and shift costs more long-term; cloud-native costs more short-term due to licensing.

  Why it's wrong here

  This conflates cost timing with the core strategic difference. While lift-and-shift may incur higher long-term operational costs because it does not take advantage of cloud-native optimizations like autoscaling or managed services, cloud-native short-term costs are primarily from refactoring and development effort, not licensing. The fundamental distinction is about the degree of architectural change and cloud leverage, not merely cost or licensing, which is why this option misses the key strategic question.

Go deeper

Related to this question