281–286 of 286 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sir, this is a Docker, not Dropbox
I'm replacing Dropbox with Unison [0] over ssh, BTW. It's a great piece of software (multiplatform, and it even has a GUI). [0] https://github.com/bcpierce00/unison
BTW, Rclone has bisync now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arrogance was what actually killed them. They picked fights with Google and RedHat and then showing up at conferences with shirts that said "we don't accept pull requests" tipped the scales so that RedHat and Google both went their own way and their technology was now pushed out of 2 of their biggest channels.
> "we don't accept pull requests" Any posts on the internet archives to understand the history ?
(I don't know of any T-shirts saying "we don't accept pull requests". That sounds made up. We very much did accept pull requests... a great many of them).
Docker started as a simple, opinionated UX around Linux containers and became a product company wrapping an ecosystem that moved on without it. The original breakthrough wasn’t containers themselves (LXC already existed), but the combination of: a reproducible image format, layered filesystem semantics, a simple CLI, and a registry model that made distribution trivial. That unlocked a whole workflow shift. What happe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows is the problem, not Docker. Just try wsl2 and you’ll see…
That's a very naive take. The issue is Docker Desktop, a buggy mess. I have plenty of well-functioning, complex Windows applications with detailed troubleshooting utilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am painfully aware of that narrative. All I can say is that it is a false narrative, deliberately pushed by Red Hat for competitive reasons. There was a deliberate decision to spend marketing dollars making Docker look bad (specifically less secure), at a time where we were competing directly in the datacenter market. Ask yourself: how many open source projects reject PRs every day because of design disagreements?…
If it is pure marketing, I wonder why docker couldn't play the same game and be better at it? E.g. for your most damning example: If docker published this story, blogged about it, made noice in places like HN, it is exactly what the press would love: RH breaks docker security while claiming to be more secure! The Emperor has no clothes! If you take security serious, accept no fake substitutes!
Very few companies can match that.