Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Docker Raises $23M

docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 281 posts

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#111

Post by pjmlp »

filleokus wrote: post #76

It feels like Docker (Inc) is becoming less and less "relevant" for each year that passes. At least from my perspective, they led the popularisation of containerisation and the whole cattle-not-pets approach of deploying apps. They created big and long lasting change in the industry. But they seem to have lost the production environment race to Kubernetes, at least for now. They are the biggest player in the dev-mach…

I was already doing containers with HP-UX Vaults in version 11 back in 1999.

Just like any tool that doesn't offer more than an abstraction layer over OS features, eventually it becomes irrelevant as OS tooling improves.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#113

Post by Nullabillity »

polyrand wrote: post #13
dgellow wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t they drop Swarm ~1 year ago when they sold their enterprise offering? I thought they decided to instead focus on k8s. All of this becomes so confusing.

Now there's something called Swarm mode built directly into the main Docker engine. I think that was the "replacement" of the classic Docker Swarm.

That migration was way before the acquisition. The Mirantis deprecation is about Swarm Mode.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#114

Post by duxup »

libria wrote: post #4
alexellisuk wrote: post #2

Interesting to see this called a Series B. Did Docker hit reset after the split? Here's a separate thread for "Docker Series B: More Fuel To Help Dev Teams Get Ship Done" - with a bit more info on what the plan is from Scott. Interesting to see this news on the same day that "We don't need Docker" was also on the front page of Hacker News. I think we absolutely still need Docker in 2021. https://news.ycombinator.com/…

> "We don't need Docker" was also on the front page of Hacker News. I read it as a typical "We don't need [Complex Tool] because we don't have [Complex Tool Solutions] problems". Not trivializing it, I think those articles are valuable hype-free analysis of the latest tool-of-the-day. "They don't need Docker" and "We absolutely need Docker" are non-contradictory.

A lot of those articles and posts are what I think of 'exploratory' someone doesn't want / need a thing,t hey present their way of doing things and we can all learn something from them... even if we don't do things like they do.

God knows how much "don't need JavaScript" gets posted...

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#115

Post by systemvoltage »

mvzvm wrote: post #62
systemvoltage wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Someones gotta pay for the free container registry all my sideprojects depend on!

You are all over this thread being snarky, and commenting in what seems to be bad faith. Please stop, this is not reddit.

I’m sorry if it came across this way. The snarky comment highlights pretty well that we magically expect almost without a second thought that GitHub is free.

Support SourceHut and pay for hosting git if people want to break away from ostensibly free services. Or pay for Github. SourceHut is also open source.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#116

Post by KronisLV »

LeSaucy wrote: post #106
dpkrjb wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d imagine that some of their valuation was based on the future success of docker swarm and what they would monetise around it

Was there ever a technical reason why swarm never won out in the market? I've still got a couple of multi-node swarms that work great and are WAY easier to configure than k8s. I never really understood why it didn't take off.

I'd also like to know more about this, since for smaller to medium sized deployments (think 1-100 nodes, maybe running between 1-1000 containers) Docker Swarm does seem like a pretty reasonable solution, especially with tools like Portainer ( https://www.portainer.io/ ) for a web based UI to manage it.

I guess some of the reasons for the popularity of Kubernetes could be:

  - Kubernetes had Google as a big name behind it, so there was a lot of development resources put into it and eventually, lots of learning resources available, in addition to overall publicity; for example, i don't think anything like this exists for Docker Swarm https://www.katacoda.com/courses/kubernetes
  - in addition to the marketing and PR, it got picked up as a solution for many managed offerings by cloud hosts (managed Docker Swarm has almost none), a bit like what happened with serverless and AWS Lambda
  - Kubernetes allows for CRDs, has a pretty good API and has a large ecosystem built around it, to help manage its complexity (even distros like K3s and MicroK8s could be mentioned), as well as many to implement additional functionality (Istio + Kiali come to mind)
  - this further snowballed into turn-key offerings like Rancher and OpenShift that had financial incentives behind them, the idea of building a new distro that vendor locks clients into a particular company's offering, resources, support etc.
  - almost everyone (oftentimes incorrectly) believes that they need to be able to scale a lot and therefore chased the hype
  - FOMO further motivated a whole bunch of developers to use Kubernetes for their projects, instead of looking at the alternatives like Docker Swarm or Nomad
  - however, knowing Kubernetes can help to be more easily onboarded and to work with deployments in many different companies (except for when it isn't), the skills carry over nicely
Of course, some of these may be my subjective views and not at all accurate.

Personally, i think something between Docker Swarm, Nomad and K3s would be the sweet spot for containerized app deployments and orchestration, but personally i just like the Docker Compose manifests more than i do Kubernetes' and it feels like the popularity of Helm (or Kustomize) supports this line of reasoning.

Ideally we wouldn't even need containers and something like FreeBSD jails with a user friendly API around it would be sufficient. But the popularity that Docker gained seems to highlight that perhaps something was missing from those older technologies.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#117

Post by tw04 »

paxys wrote: post #27

Considering how entrenched Docker has been in global tech infrastructure for so many years, I automatically assumed that the company was worth billions already, but guess not. I wonder why they haven't been bought out by Microsoft or Google, if nothing else then just for the talent.

>I wonder why they haven't been bought out by Microsoft or Google, if nothing else then just for the talent.

Because they received an insane valuation years ago and probably aren't even worth break-even on their funding rounds. Google already has far more K8s knowledge internally than anyone at docker, so what would be their gain?

MS did try to buy them back in 2016 but Docker pulled an Jerry* Yang and said no [1]. I don't see why MS would bother at this point, they are also headed down the k8s path, and anything they needed from an expertise perspective they likely already received through their partnership agreement [2].

[1] https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/news/sources-microsoft-t...

[2] https://www.docker.com/blog/docker-microsoft-partnership/

*I incorrectly said Andrew Yang initially, my apologies for my bad memory and any confusion it may have caused. Thank you Hexcles for the correction.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#118

Post by justicezyx »

pjmlp wrote: post #111
filleokus wrote: post #76

It feels like Docker (Inc) is becoming less and less "relevant" for each year that passes. At least from my perspective, they led the popularisation of containerisation and the whole cattle-not-pets approach of deploying apps. They created big and long lasting change in the industry. But they seem to have lost the production environment race to Kubernetes, at least for now. They are the biggest player in the dev-mach…

I was already doing containers with HP-UX Vaults in version 11 back in 1999. Just like any tool that doesn't offer more than an abstraction layer over OS features, eventually it becomes irrelevant as OS tooling improves.

From [1]

> This is a Virtual Vault release of HP-UX, providing enhanced security features. Virtual Vault is a compartmentalised operating system in which each file is assigned a compartment and processes only have access to files in the appropriate compartment and unlike most other UNIX systems the superuser (or root) does not have complete access to the system without following correct procedures.

It's cgroup + chroot, in the closest form.

I took it as a very technically incorrect implication with "I was already doing containers with HP-UX Vaults in version 11 back in 1999." Docker is an development product that removes OS as the core concept from application development process. This is at least a milestone as fundamental as VMware's VM tech.

The commercial failure of Docker container is unfortunate.

But if the technology community cannot appreciate its significance, and let the VM-driven mindset belittle it, that's a true tragedy that puts off the drive to innovate.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-UX

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#119

Post by GordonS »

endisneigh wrote: post #3

I hope they work on Docker Swarm. “Docker compose” for multiple machines needs working on!

I'm still using Docker Swarm in production, and it's great! You write Compose files (which are succinct compared with k8s), with an optional smattering of just a few extra functions (such as for configs and secrets). You can easily specify how many replicas you want, constrain them to certain nodes with labels, use health checks for auto restarts etc.

If you can write Compose files, you can do Docker Swarm - it's so wonderfully simple!

I am increasingly nervous about Swarm support staying in Docker though, and plan to at least look into Nomad for my next project.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#120

Post by IceWreck »

Does the Docker company even do anything to stay relevant?

* The popularized containers but their core tool has been replaced by superior alternatives like Podman.

* They sold their enterprise registry which wouldve earned them actual money.

* The consumer registry has tons of free/cheaper alternatives like github's container registry, something from gitlab and on the enterprise side, there is Red Hat's quay.

* Docker Swarm is dead compared to Kubernetes.

Post reply on HN