61–70 of 148 posts
It'd be nice if Visual Studio tooling could let you hit F5 and your app could Compile, Deploy to an On-Desktop Container after running a dockerfile, Start Debugging from a 'remote' debugger.
Good feedback!! Something for us to look at...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the clarification. I at first assumed they'd bring OS level virtualization, apparently I'm not the only one. But it's basically just minimal images of windows in regular VMs then... A step in the right direction but still disappointing imo. Linux and BSD are still miles ahead.
Microsoft is doing OS-level containers and they are also going to allow running containers in VMs.
> Hyper-V Containers, a new container deployment option with enhanced isolation powered by Hyper-V virtualization.
Everything written tells a different story. "Hyper-V virtualization" means virtual machines, making it not a container. They just try to make that sound like a feature.
Or do you have more information than I do?
THE STORY OF THE CONTAINER GOLDRUSH As seen by a verbose, presumptuous 22 year old. OPEN SOURCE MOVEMENT lays foundation for containerization: - linux kernel gains mainstream adoption, becomes standardized across distributions - kernel matures to support containerization (i.e., namespacing critical OS operations) - lxc project takes advantage of kernel support, builds tooling around namespace containerization DOCKER…
Others "realised" the value of this later and started improving upon the ideas contained within.
Although I'm sure many might argue that this is the natural conclusion of virtualization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the clarification. I at first assumed they'd bring OS level virtualization, apparently I'm not the only one. But it's basically just minimal images of windows in regular VMs then... A step in the right direction but still disappointing imo. Linux and BSD are still miles ahead.
Microsoft is doing OS-level containers and they are also going to allow running containers in VMs.
THE STORY OF THE CONTAINER GOLDRUSH As seen by a verbose, presumptuous 22 year old. OPEN SOURCE MOVEMENT lays foundation for containerization: - linux kernel gains mainstream adoption, becomes standardized across distributions - kernel matures to support containerization (i.e., namespacing critical OS operations) - lxc project takes advantage of kernel support, builds tooling around namespace containerization DOCKER…
You forgot the part where Solaris did containers first in 2005. Others "realised" the value of this later and started improving upon the ideas contained within. Although I'm sure many might argue that this is the natural conclusion of virtualization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While they are at it, they could create a posix compatible layer for Windows. That would really drive some conversion. edit: after rereading my comment and seeing the downvotes, just to clarify, it was a serious, not negative suggestion. :)
They've done that before and, as far as I know, it was not an extremely popular product.
THE STORY OF THE CONTAINER GOLDRUSH As seen by a verbose, presumptuous 22 year old. OPEN SOURCE MOVEMENT lays foundation for containerization: - linux kernel gains mainstream adoption, becomes standardized across distributions - kernel matures to support containerization (i.e., namespacing critical OS operations) - lxc project takes advantage of kernel support, builds tooling around namespace containerization DOCKER…
You forgot the part where Solaris did containers first in 2005. Others "realised" the value of this later and started improving upon the ideas contained within. Although I'm sure many might argue that this is the natural conclusion of virtualization.
For any component at a given level of abstraction to gain widspread adoption, it needs to beat its competitors. Linux kernel needed to beat FreeBSD and Solaris. That's why I started the story with "linux kernel gains mainstream adoption." Consolidation at the kernel abstraction level is complete. Linux won. Now it's time for consolidation in the userspace abstraction level.
What filesystem backend does docker use on Windows? Doesn't it require a copy on write filesystem to be efficient?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft creating their own version means the technology is viable? I think people have been using 'the technology' for years, without any input from Microsoft. It doesn't need to be anointed by Microsoft to be 'viable'.
For the tech enthusiast and the visionaries, you are correct; It is a very viable technology. However the majority of people that deploy software are rather conservative and unless they see a market leader such as Microsoft with a solution they don't deem the technology safe to use. This is well documented in a lot of literature like Crossing the Chasm but can be observed frequently if you work at a larger non-tech o…
This will open a TON of doors for everybody.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've done that before and, as far as I know, it was not an extremely popular product.
It was not an extremely functional product. It was largely there to get government contracts where one of the requirements was POSIX conformance, even if they weren't using it.