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

Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

blog.docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#21

Post by dsp1234 »

terom wrote: post #13
dsp1234 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main windows server 2016 page has pretty clear guidance on this[0]: --- OSEs/Hyper-V containers DataCenter: Unlimited Standard: 2 ---- Windows Server containers Datacenter: Unlimited Standard: Unlimited --- [0] - https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/window...

What about running Docker containers on desktop/laptop machines during development? It's a major part of the Docker usecase. Trying to keep track of Windows licensing compliance across multiple versions and deployment models is confusing enough as it is. Different sources will give different answers to the same questions when interpreting licensing scenarios, and you can never know unless you get audited (?)

Different sources will give different answers to the same questions when interpreting licensing scenarios

1.) Containers are not available on desktop SKUs. So there is no licensing consideration for Windows 10. If they later add containers to Windows 10, then they'll release licensing rules at that time.

2.) If you are running a server OS for your desktop, then the licensing is pretty clear. Hyper-v VM containers follow the same rules as normal hyper-v VMs (1 physical + 2 virtual for standard then each additional VM requires a license, unlimited for datacenter). For Windows Server Containers (which are not hyper-v based), it's even easier, it's unlimited regardless of edition.

3.) As always, the host OS must be licensed fully in order to have the appropriate rights (2016 is moving to core licensing, with a minimum of 8 core licenses per processor, and a minimum of 2 processors).

All in all, it's one of the easier features to understand the licensing for since it doesn't directly deal with CALs or internal/external usage rights.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#22

Post by untog »

userbinator wrote: post #12
toyg wrote: post #5

The only drawback of the current onslaught of Microsoft activity is the fact that most "enterprise" businesses and software products are completely unprepared or unwilling to move in step. As an integrator, I've barely started seeing Win2012 in production last year, so it will be another 5 years before I can start playing with these new toys. Hell, some people are still chugging along with 2003sp2... and I'm talking…

Hell, some people are still chugging along with 2003sp2 I'd think this is for the same reason XP lasted so long --- it's a good stable platform free of all the hassles and complexities of the ones that came after it. A lot of home users are already quite disturbed by the privacy implications of Windows 10, and if anything big businesses would be even more cautious of the same for its server counterpart.

I'd be interested to see a survey of home users with regards to privacy. I think a lot fewer care than we'd hope.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#23

Post by tammer »

CrLf wrote: post #6
toyg wrote: post #5

The only drawback of the current onslaught of Microsoft activity is the fact that most "enterprise" businesses and software products are completely unprepared or unwilling to move in step. As an integrator, I've barely started seeing Win2012 in production last year, so it will be another 5 years before I can start playing with these new toys. Hell, some people are still chugging along with 2003sp2... and I'm talking…

And one might argue they are taking the sane approach to the upgrade treadmill. It's easy to forget technology is supposed to solve real problems and that there's no economic incentive to use new toys to solve already solved problems, possibly introducing new issues with less well-known solutions. The fact businesses are extending the life of systems not because they are unwilling to invest in upgrades but because th…

Absolutely. I'm involved in systems design & IT strategy for a very large institution. By and large we've found literally zero advantages imparted to end users by Windows 10, besides being forced to deply it by MS deciding to early end-of-life Win7. Some cool features in Server 2016, but nothing that will affect a user's workflow in the slightest.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#25

Post by CrLf »

illumin8 wrote: post #18
CrLf wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And one might argue they are taking the sane approach to the upgrade treadmill. It's easy to forget technology is supposed to solve real problems and that there's no economic incentive to use new toys to solve already solved problems, possibly introducing new issues with less well-known solutions. The fact businesses are extending the life of systems not because they are unwilling to invest in upgrades but because th…

Windows 2003 is end of support life and you aren't receiving security patches unless you're paying Microsoft a huge amount of money for extended support. One might argue that it's insane to run a 13 year old OS that is not getting security updates any more at your business.

Windows 2003 is EOL because Microsoft wants to push customers to the latest version. Customers have been pushing back at this for a while now, but Microsoft (and other vendors) makes more money selling the new shiny than extending their products' lifecycle.

In an ideal world, operating systems (server and desktop alike) would already be on a 5-year release cycle with just yearly incremental upgrades in between (as much as the vendor can manage in a service-pack model).

Is it insane to run systems without any security updates? Even within the lifecycle of the product many businesses never even patch after the initial install. I personally know people that live by this: never patch anything unless presented with proof that it's necessary to do so (I don't completely agree with this, but money has been lost catering for low-impact security updates and people tend to learn a few lessons from it).

Security is more about risk management than being free of vulnerabilities. The issue isn't going by without security updates, is doing so without assessing the risk.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#26

Post by duncans »

tammer wrote: post #23
CrLf wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And one might argue they are taking the sane approach to the upgrade treadmill. It's easy to forget technology is supposed to solve real problems and that there's no economic incentive to use new toys to solve already solved problems, possibly introducing new issues with less well-known solutions. The fact businesses are extending the life of systems not because they are unwilling to invest in upgrades but because th…

Absolutely. I'm involved in systems design & IT strategy for a very large institution. By and large we've found literally zero advantages imparted to end users by Windows 10, besides being forced to deply it by MS deciding to early end-of-life Win7. Some cool features in Server 2016, but nothing that will affect a user's workflow in the slightest.

I was a bit of a Windows 7 stalwart until recently. I upgraded my parents' Vista machine to Windows 7 ... very sluggish. Thought I really needed to get them an SSD at some point. Then I upgraded it to Windows 10 on a whim - incredibly snappy. No need for SSD yet.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#27

Post by pjmlp »

toyg wrote: post #5

The only drawback of the current onslaught of Microsoft activity is the fact that most "enterprise" businesses and software products are completely unprepared or unwilling to move in step. As an integrator, I've barely started seeing Win2012 in production last year, so it will be another 5 years before I can start playing with these new toys. Hell, some people are still chugging along with 2003sp2... and I'm talking…

Still doing .NET 4.0 and Java 7 for production code here, exactly because of these type of issues.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#29

Post by riskable »

newjersey wrote: post #11
patates wrote: post #3

If this starts utilizing the "Ubuntu on Windows"[0], I think, with minor modifications, most of the images should already work; which is great. I can't wait to see how containerization (and tools built for orchestration of those) will evolve in the coming years to help dev/devops. [0]: https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/03/30/ubuntu-on-windows-the...

Paul Thurrott quoted a Microsoft person that Ubuntu on Windows is a client side thing. It may be possible to use it on Windows server but I believe that is not the meta. I would say it is easier to just spin up an Ubuntu instance than to use Ubuntu on Windows on the server. What are some use cases that you're thinking of? Am I missing something?

The use case is being able to run all the zillions of existing Ubuntu-based Docker images on Windows Server. If the Ubuntu-using Dockerfile is mostly made up of 'RUN apt-get install' commands along with a few commands like `RUN cd /tmp; wget https://ourhost.foo/some.config -O /etc/someapp/some.config` then it just might work with the Ubuntu-on-Windows thing.

Re: Docker on Windows Server 2016 Technical Preview 5

#30

Post by riskable »

dsp1234 wrote: post #21
terom wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about running Docker containers on desktop/laptop machines during development? It's a major part of the Docker usecase. Trying to keep track of Windows licensing compliance across multiple versions and deployment models is confusing enough as it is. Different sources will give different answers to the same questions when interpreting licensing scenarios, and you can never know unless you get audited (?)

Different sources will give different answers to the same questions when interpreting licensing scenarios 1.) Containers are not available on desktop SKUs. So there is no licensing consideration for Windows 10. If they later add containers to Windows 10, then they'll release licensing rules at that time. 2.) If you are running a server OS for your desktop, then the licensing is pretty clear. Hyper-v VM containers fol…

Contrast that with the license considerations running Docker on Ubuntu:

1.) Containers are available on both desktops and servers because they're fundamentally the same OS (but with different sets of packages installed by default).

2.) As always, the server and desktop versions of Ubuntu available for unlimited use with zero licensing costs. Completely free.

I'd also like to add that the "base" Windows Server container image is 9.3 gigabytes while the base Ubuntu container image is 120 megabytes. Put it all together and you wind up with vastly greater costs to run Docker containers on Windows.

Having said that, if your application only runs on Windows then putting inside a container might not be a bad idea.

Post reply on HN