31–40 of 334 posts
It's almost becoming a cliche for companies to release damage control follow-ups like this after they pull a bait and switch. It's always "we're sorry that we didn't communicate our bait and switch effectively". Not we're sorry that we pulled a bait and switch. We're sorry you didn't understand the value in this bait and switch. It's your fault, actually. But we're sorry you're angry. Now stop giving us negative atte…
It's almost becoming a cliche for companies to release damage control follow-ups like this after they pull a bait and switch. It's always "we're sorry that we didn't communicate our bait and switch effectively". Not we're sorry that we pulled a bait and switch. We're sorry you didn't understand the value in this bait and switch. It's your fault, actually. But we're sorry you're angry. Now stop giving us negative atte…
Ah, but there’s no such thing as negative press. Look how many people are talking about Docker now!!
The third sentence in their apology is "This impacted less than 2% of our users." What is that supposed to convey? It feels like a handwave. 'We're sorry we mistreated you, look how small you are to us.'
> 'We're sorry we mistreated you, look how small you are to us.' They could choose not to share any data, which is what most companies default to. You're complaining about something so small as if they aren't handling this entire thing beautifully at this point. They noticed their mistake, and corrected it swiftly to keep the community from bifurcating. What else do you want, exactly?
There's a world of difference between "This impacted less than 2% of our users." and "This impacted about 2% of our users."
The first implies that they have up to 2% of users which they don't respect, and undermines their apology.
I agree that it's good that they responded quickly, and I know there's a tradeoff between fast and perfect.
Not sure how this changes anything. Their open source program [1] only grants a free 1-year Docker Team subscription. After which time the whole system is unusable. And most of those features aren't what open source teams even need which is surely just basic multi-user access. They really should have just tightened the entry criteria for their open source offering if they were so concerned about it being misused. htt…
(Docker DevRel team here) For clarification, the program grants one year of access, but is indefinitely renewable as long as the program is still compliant with current criteria.
Docker's on the other hand is none of that, and full of corporate PR red flags:
- "This only impacted less than 2% of our users" signals that they're not really sorry. It tells me they see this as a 'loud minority' problem
- "This does not affect [list of 6 other types of subscriptions]" -> signals the post is partially being used to promote the other subscriptions. Reinforced by the "what are the benefits of a Docker subscription" at the bottom.
- It's still unclear (to me) what is the actual implication for some of the non-official open source projects here. On the one hand they say: "Public images will only disappear if the maintainer decides to proactively delete it from Docker Hub". Further down they mention "we will defer any organization suspension or deletion while the DSOS application is under review". Clearly they do intent to suspend organisations, but maybe let old images remain? Then the problem remains, as it prevents future updates.
Despite what it tries to say in words, (for me) this post just reinforces the initial signal of both not understanding and not caring about the open source usage.
Migrating to a free personal account will work for many small open source projects. That's what we're planning to do.
In all areas of the business, everyone should first be thinking, how does this impact the people using this thing? Have I talked to them? Do they understand what's happening? Do they have concerns? Have I fully addressed them? Is this going to make their lives harder, or will this be scary, or confusing?
It's my biggest pet peeve. Both as a user and an employee. If you don't take the time to care, it's really obvious, and an easy way to piss people off and inconvenience them. From a business perspective that drives customers to your competitors and makes employees quit. From a personal perspective, it's just a dick thing to do.
I don't care much of the business decision, it's their house.
I care for the persons I support whom use docker and I dont see a way to prepare them without sounding like a crackpot and looking like a fool if they after making noise turns out they aren't impacted.