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

171–180 of 281 posts

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#171

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#172

Post by systemvoltage »

evanelias wrote: post #166
systemvoltage wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter. $10M initial round to offer free product to get users aboard. The key point is to get users addicted to free. Uber did this by undercutting the entire taxi industry at a loss . Ever wondered why your rides were so cheap!? Jio did the same in India, offer free unlimited internet on their phone service and wipe out the competition.

Their initial product was a platform-as-a-service (dotCloud), which wasn't free, aside from the early beta. Docker was essentially a pivot. I see no evidence that the company was founded as a nefarious scheme to get users addicted to a free product.

You just made my point. The reason why I’ve never heard of dotCloud and literally everyone knows Docker.

Docker is popular because it’s free. A lot of people would be upset if they take down their free hosting repositories.

As a user, I want to pay for stuff to sustain companies. They can still be open source.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#173

Post by mvzvm »

systemvoltage wrote: post #115
mvzvm wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In what way is Github not free?

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#174

Post by wongarsu »

katsura wrote: post #84
wongarsu wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker's implementation is instant if you accept, but takes an eternity if you only want essential cookies. That seems in violation of the ePrivacy directive which according to the official website [1] requires that you "Make it as easy for users to withdraw their consent as it was for them to give their consent in the first place." I guess it's for the courts to decide if requiring the same number of clicks but lett…

The problem is that it takes so long because they make a bunch of requests to the opt out endpoints of different services, which takes time. Of course, it is questionable why those requests are essential, but the point is that there is a reason to this madness.

But why do they block user interaction while doing that? You can call those in the background.

And why call an opt-out endpoint at all, after all there has to be a mechanism that prevents setting the cookie before the user sees the cookie banner. Just continue using that mechanism (e.g. gtag's consent default denied).

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#175

Post by qeternity »

cletus wrote: post #164
qeternity wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I am normally critical of the unicorn pizza-kitchen-on-wheels type of excess, I think this is only true in hindsight and has a lot to do with Docker lacking a commercially minded founder. Open source isn’t a business model. There are very synergistic business models that go hand in hand with OSS but that distinction is important. Github does not really have a defensible moat. I think the network effects there a…

Github is a good comparison here because obviously anyone can run a Git server but Github did create a lot of value adds and the UI helped build a network effect for the ease os use, cloning, PRs and so on. What's more, Github became the engine for dependency management. Go springs to mind here. I actually thought this was a terrible system (eg putting repo owner names in import strings) but it speaks to ubiquity of…

> I'm really not sure what Docker could've done differently here.

Completely agree, it’s trickier than GitHub. But this is why founders of these companies can potentially make billions: if it were easy, everyone could do it.

I think they realized the CI/CD potential far too late. In another universe you push to GitHub, Docker builds and tests your images and deploys to your provider of choice. Their potential was probably not directly tied to containers but tied to their position in the engineering process between commit and before deploy.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#176

Post by halfmatthalfcat »

caymanjim wrote: post #140
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…

Kubernetes is so much more than most people should want or need. It's far too complicated and heavyweight for smaller or simpler deployments. In AWS, most people should use ECS/Fargate instead. There are other competing container environments as well. Your point still stands; Docker popularized containerization and are in danger of becoming irrelevant because they ceded the container execution environment to others.

I beg to differ. The jump from learning Docker (and containers generally) to learning Kubernetes is not “hard”. Sure it’s a different paradigm of application deployment but I’ve seen far too many posts on HN that completely undermine its value in the name of difficulty.

You can use it if you’re not “at scale” completely fine and reap all the benefits as if you were.

Idk it’s because people hate Google, so they hate Kubernetes, whether they’re “get off my lawn” DevOps heads who want to maintain their complicated walled garden deployments they hand-rolled to maintain job security or what but it’s frankly embarrassing.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#177

Post by cjaybo »

pram wrote: post #124
LeSaucy wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is kind of reductive. You could ask the same for nomad, mesos, and lots of other things. It wasn't just swarm vs k8s

> It wasn't just swarm vs k8s

I'm not seeing anything in their comment that would imply this.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#178

Post by spullara »

rusk wrote: post #150
sombremesa wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It pretty much is. A lot of people still use Git GUIs and automatic transmission has handily beaten manual transmission in the US - not everyone understands or even wants to understand the tech they use.

Interesting analogy vs car transmission. I always find auto frustrating because it doesn’t give me the love of control I’m comfortable with ...

There was a huge uprising against its removal from Porsche cars until they finally relented and added the option back starting with the GT4 but now it is also in the 911s.

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#179

Post by ColdHeat »

IceWreck wrote: post #120

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. * Docke…

I mostly agree here but I'm not really sure that Podman has replaced Docker. I'm also curious how you're determining that Podman is superior to Docker?

Re: Docker Raises $23M

#180

Post by dbt00 »

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.

Kubernetes had necessary features first, was more stable, and had many more options that enabled other teams to hang more features off the runtime. Flexibility on networking runtime and rbac both made a huge difference.

That and, unfortunately, the cloud vendors could fully deploy k8s for free because swarm was a hybrid enterprise product.

Post reply on HN