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

We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 334 posts

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#191

Post by ericb »

bpodgursky wrote: post #173
ericb wrote: post #7

If they are listening to feedback, first is that a 30 day timeframe sends the message that "we feel our profit is more important than whatever else you are working on, so much that you should either pay us, or if you cannot afford it, immediately halt your other activities to reduce our costs." None of that builds trust. As someone affected, I'm ok with paying. * I don't like feeling tricked * I don't like feeling he…

I can assure you that Docker is not trying to protect any profits. More like... slow the cash hemorrhage.

Docker is over 100 million ARR from what I understand, so that's a strange thing to say.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#192

Post by oofbey »

PhysicalNomad wrote: post #133

I stopped using Docker entirely after the Moby mess, when Podman came around without needing a daemon, and better runtimes became available for Kubernetes. It's been the inferior product for a long time, only kept alive by the dev mindshare they gained early on.

It's synonymous with "containers" for a lot of people. I know a lot of groups that use docker to build containers and other infra to run them.

Too bad the company screwed up turning their technology into a real business, or taking a graceful massive exit when they had the chance. Their VC's doubtless pushed them towards an IPO when they didn't really have a solid revenue plan.

Once they started nagging / forcing / tricking people into paying for what they had offered for free, they company was doomed. The "+WASM" branding all over their website reeks the sad desperation of a has-been coulda-been. Sorry folks, you built cool and important technology, but that's not good enough if you're greedy.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#193

Post by saurik »

Symbiote wrote: post #166
hgsgm wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please share a copy of that email.

Docker is sunsetting Free Team organizations Free Team organizations are a legacy subscription tier that no longer exists. This tier included many of the same features, rates, and functionality as a paid Docker Team subscription. After reviewing the list of accounts that are members of legacy Free Team organizations, we’ve identified yours as potentially being one of them. If you own a legacy Free Team organization,…

This is the exact quote that was already up-thread of here, and they absolutely are not claiming they "never said that"; instead, they are clarifying that "organization data" does not include "public images", and while that's confusing, I can appreciate why they didn't think it would be and--lo and behold--they are publicly apologizing for being so confusing and taking the hit for having done so.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#194

Post by sacrosancty »

vertis wrote: post #139
mikesir87 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(from Docker DevRel team) > Given these statements directly contradict each other Actually... they aren't contradictory. The organization data will be retained for 30 days and is subject to deletion. That data includes the teams, memberships, etc. But, it wasn't clear what we were going to do about the images. Keeping the public images is important as many other images build on top of them. > It feels like they chang…

Deleting 'organization data' absolutely read that they would delete everything. Changing direction and back pedaling with a non-apology is borderline insulting. I understand the need to make money as a company, but it really is biting the hand that fed messing with open source maintainers

[dead]

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#195

Post by eternalban »

wholinator2 wrote: post #179
eternalban wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that like a service like Github saying 'you will maintain access to any of your public projects' as in administrative access to one's own projects . After that period, you are no longer the owner of that repo and you no longer have "access". So I can still clone your github project but alas you no longer can commit to it. https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/orgs/ https://hub.docker.com/orgs

Doesn't sound like it to me. If they meant "administrative access" they should have said "administrative access". They didn't, they just said "access" which unambiguously means just "access". Would've been very easy for them to make a one word correction somewhere in the dozen or so people who should have read this before it went out. But they didn't, they just said "access". If they wanted unambiguous meaning, they…

Well, methinks otherwise. Lack of access does not mean files deleted. Organization data deleted means account deleted. Contention here was the claim that they have done a uturn but they never said they will delete images. This entire somewhat useless thread is about whether lack of access actually meant images deleted. (Administrative is a word that I used in my comment and a red herring to pick on, quite frankly.)

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#197

Post by solarkraft »

WWLink wrote: post #13

Ah, good ole Docker. When they did the "it's not free anymore" rugpull on Docker Desktop, I couldn't use it at work anymore since they wouldn't invoice us for less than a 50 seat license. Unfortunately, a lot of businesses won't buy things without invoicing for legal reasons. It really upset me because I had a pretty solid workflow with docker desktop on a mac. Now I can't use that anymore. I am not surprised they co…

What's the workflow? What more is Docker Desktop than a way to get the Docker CLI on non-Linux machines?

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#198

Post by manifoldgeo »

> This impacted less than 2% of our users.

I think they mean it impacts less than 2% of user _accounts_. Not every account is created equal. If you were an open-source org with millions of image downloads a month, having your org deleted would have an outsized effect on the community. Many more Docker Hub users than 2% stand to be affected by these changes, even if the nominal value of 2% of user accounts is accurate.

Also, this "apology" does not feel even 2% apologetic. "I am sorry you misunderstood us" is not an apology. They're running the seldom used "docker pull gaslight:latest" command.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#199

Post by bleuchase »

dheera wrote: post #66
afarrell wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the difficulties of public relations is communicating to multiple audiences at once. One of Docker’s audiences are the paying customers who outside that 2% and would want some assurance that if docker makes errors, those errors are smaller in magnitude. This statement seems like it is aimed at assuaging the worries of that audience. Is it good practice? I do not know.

> One of the difficulties of public relations is communicating to multiple audiences at once. Why not just release multiple statements and links? "Click here for customized PR statement if you are a open source developer" "Click here for customized PR statement if you are a closed source developer" "Click here for customized PR statement if you are an executive who can't code" "Click here for customized PR statement…

Is that a serious suggestion? Who on earth would take the time to look through all of those to see which one best fits them? Companies have enough trouble getting press releases read already.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#200

Post by evrflx »

r00fus wrote: post #72

They say that their separate "open source program" (DSOS) is completely better than Free Teams. Why didn't they just migrate everyone on Free Teams to DSOS and then worry about the qualifications for those migrated afterwards (and less stringently)?

And why don't they answer for nearly a year after submitting a request, only to THEN ask to resubmit the request with an improved form or something. After which everything goes back to silence?
Post reply on HN