Live data from Hacker News

Containers for Windows

blog.spoon.net

1–10 of 44 posts

Re: Containers for Windows

#2
As someone who has had a hell of a time setting up and consistently getting running certain programming language environments, this appeals to me greatly. It was countless headaches getting Clojure to work, and I still can't update cabal for Haskell without breaking everything.

Re: Containers for Windows

#4
> Because containers are built on the Spoon virtualization engine, rather than simply providing an interface to container support in an underlying operating system, Spoon can containerize applications across multiple operating systems and provide advanced virtualization primitives.

That means it's not containerization, but virtualization. This hardly compares to the Docker world which offers a intermediate build system (edit: Spoon has a build system however), rich command line tools (edit: it does provide some command line tools) to work with images and containers, fast spin up times, and an ecosystem of container management tools.

Oh, and also this:

> Spoon.net is free to use with public repositories. Private repositories, automated testing, legacy OS and browser emulation, and other advanced features are available in paid subscriptions starting at $19 per month.

And.... that it isn't open source.

-- It does however supporting composing of build images, which is kind of nice. I've learned to like mounting volumes as a form of composing though within Docker.

Re: Containers for Windows

#5
post #2

As someone who has had a hell of a time setting up and consistently getting running certain programming language environments, this appeals to me greatly. It was countless headaches getting Clojure to work, and I still can't update cabal for Haskell without breaking everything.

I don't understand what's so hard to get clojure to work. You only need Java and lein, and that's about it.

Af for Haskel cabal hell, just use "cabal sandbox" and be happy.

Re: Containers for Windows

#8
I was interested in how they got containerization working on a kernel which to my knowledge lacks the required primitives.

What I found was marketing looking to treat containerization as nothing more than a buzz word. The article is tone deaf. It talks about running foreign OSes and legacy support proud in itself because docker cannot. Yet blind to the reason docker cannot: Docker is containers!

Any VM can do what this is doing. This is boring and I feel taken advantage of. They promised Containers can gave fast deployment VMs. On their own that is cool, but not when wrapped in a lie.

Re: Containers for Windows

#9
Could we make a complaint to whatever the US version of Trading Standards is? They're misselling themselves. Containers are a relatively well defined concept as distinct from virtualisation, and they're misleading people.
Post reply on HN