When matching customer requirements with migration use cases to IBM Cloud, which scenario best fits a lift-and-shift migration?

Question

Options

• AApplications that require major re-architecture before migration
• BLegacy applications that cannot be modified and need to move as-is
• CApplications that are already cloud-native and require no changes
• DWorkloads that require transformation into microservices before migration

• A
  2% (1)
• B
  76% (39)
• C
  14% (7)
• D
  8% (4)

Explanation

Lift-and-shift means moving an application to the cloud exactly as it exists - no modifications, no refactoring - which is precisely what B describes: legacy applications that cannot be modified must be taken "as-is" to a new hosting environment.

Why the distractors fail:

• A is wrong because applications needing major re-architecture require a refactor or re-platform strategy, not a simple lift-and-shift.
• C is wrong because cloud-native apps already fit the cloud model; they don't need migration at all in the traditional sense - they'd just be redeployed.
• D is wrong because transforming workloads into microservices is a re-architect migration pattern, the most complex kind, which is the opposite of lift-and-shift.

Memory tip: Think of "lift-and-shift" like physically moving furniture - you pick it up exactly as it is and put it somewhere new. If you're rebuilding or redesigning anything, that's renovation, not moving.

No community discussion yet for this question.