501–510 of 585 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's definitely an air of desperation here. It's not going to work but they have to try it anyway.
I am really interested in this case, as I cannot imagine any commercial benefit from this decision. Free users will not pay tens/hundreds of thousands for just binary files. Obviously this will slow down the adoption of the AGPL version, against which the growth of the paid version potentially will look better in Excel reports for VCs, but something tells me that this is unlikely to be the real reason.
Sad to say but this isn't true. This is a failure to understand the pricing model of this kind of enterprise software.
What happens is the free version is used in some product somewhere. Then product's company gets acquired by HugeBigCo. Product company brain drain happens and HugeBigCo looks at poorly understood free software dependency as a liability. It's cheaper/better-on-the-balance-sheet to pay for a license and a support contract than to move off of that dependency or hire competent people to look after it...For a few years, anyway -- until that business unit is worth investing resources in.
That's how a company like Neo4j can charge a half-million bucks a year for one production cluster and get HugeBigCo as label that they can use to try to convince other companies that this pricing is even remotely reasonable.
Anything enterprise data-storage SaaS related is looking to charge at least a quarter-million a year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pure anecdata: the fact that this is happening at all has us (at work) looking for alternatives. Once we finalize on the best one we'll swap out MinIO permanently. I can't imagine we're the only ones, but who knows?
If you use this tech, perhaps you could explain what the real issue is behind dropping Docker? I mean, it's still AGPL licensed — why can't you use it from source? In other words, what is the significant difference for your team that's worth changing the stack and navigating through the uncertainty of an alternative product?
It's hard to feel good about remaining hitched to a horse that continues to send out red flags, especially when there are other good options out there for us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you use this tech, perhaps you could explain what the real issue is behind dropping Docker? I mean, it's still AGPL licensed — why can't you use it from source? In other words, what is the significant difference for your team that's worth changing the stack and navigating through the uncertainty of an alternative product?
Ease of setup and certified working solution. And yes, people should pay for certified working solution. But not when they use it the first time itself
However, I also understand that for any organization it is very painful to change their existing stack, thus I'm trying to understand what is gained between AGPL sources without Docker and switching technology to something different with Docker except 'ease of setup'.
I'll let docker's security team know that an insecure, obsolete docker image is being served and the maintainers have officially acknowledged they will no longer support it. Best to get insecure and vulnerable software out of the hands of those who may not be familiar with this CVE or their change in policy that has not gotten a press release in any way.
You're letting docker's security team know that they're serving Ubuntu 14.10? https://hub.docker.com/layers/library/ubuntu/14.10/images/sh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spot on. The number of people who are seemingly completely lost without a free DockerHub build is terrifying. Maybe it explains why software quality has degraded so much over the last several years.
are you saying there's a bunch of human centipedes bopping around here who are both the people who would do the minio rug pull as the ones who complain about not getting free services?
To everyone who gets blocked by this: I prompted Haiku 4.5, Anthropic's cheapest current model, in Claude Code with "Read this github issue: https://github.com/minio/minio/issues/21647 I need a new docker image for the latest minio version. Make it so.". It wrote a Dockerfile, I asked it to build it (not only am I incapable of finding and downloading the Dockerfile from the repository myself, I'm even incapable of re…
I'm trying to be charitable here, but you're being incredibly obtuse in your response. The issue here is very much not that someone has to build a Docker image. There's already a Dockerfile in the repo that works to build it, you didn't even need some LLM to do that for you. That's not the issue. The issue is that their existing Docker image has billions of downloads and they simply stopped publishing updates unilate…
The time line is rather short (the README announcing source only releases got updated a week and half ago) but it's not like Docker will let you email everyone and say "you're using one of our products, read this post about our new distribution model", probably for good reason. I can only imagine the "vulnerability" warnings flooding the world if every pulled container opened an avenue for emails.
I wouldn't buy their weird AI product off them after they behave like this, but this is software they've been maintaining and giving away for free, for years. Unless you have a contract with them where they promised maintenance, I don't see why this is on them, really.
The company can go bankrupt tomorrow and you won't even be able to pay them to update their images. Maintaining your dependencies is your responsibility, especially if you're not paying them a dime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's definitely an air of desperation here. It's not going to work but they have to try it anyway.
I am really interested in this case, as I cannot imagine any commercial benefit from this decision. Free users will not pay tens/hundreds of thousands for just binary files. Obviously this will slow down the adoption of the AGPL version, against which the growth of the paid version potentially will look better in Excel reports for VCs, but something tells me that this is unlikely to be the real reason.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am really interested in this case, as I cannot imagine any commercial benefit from this decision. Free users will not pay tens/hundreds of thousands for just binary files. Obviously this will slow down the adoption of the AGPL version, against which the growth of the paid version potentially will look better in Excel reports for VCs, but something tells me that this is unlikely to be the real reason.
> Free users will not pay tens/hundreds of thousands for just binary files. Sad to say but this isn't true. This is a failure to understand the pricing model of this kind of enterprise software. What happens is the free version is used in some product somewhere. Then product's company gets acquired by HugeBigCo. Product company brain drain happens and HugeBigCo looks at poorly understood free software dependency as a…
You mean, having MinIO through Docker is like auto-pilot, and without it requires maintenance (that is obviously easier with a commercial license)?