Earlier quoted context omitted.
> on MacOS
brew install docker
That installs Docker Desktop, which is exactly what we are talking about
Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
71–80 of 334 posts
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#72I remember everyone had written Docker off for dead when they announced their updated pricing plans, but they really made perfect sense, and I am happy to see the company recover. A large chunk of the tech world today relies on their products, but they were making next to nothing for it. It is definitely worth it for large companies to throw a few dollars their way considering the massive amount of value they are get…
Great move by them to introduce a license requirement for 250+ seats but not waste resources enforcing it (as far as I can tell). Those who will pay, will pay. Those who won’t, will switch tools no matter how painful. They stayed relevant by keeping all their users, even those technically breaking the license, but also collected some cash.
I have a product that has zero reduction in functionality if your license or trial runs out, just constantly nags you when you do useful things with it. Eventually, the workers at the company insist on the company buying it. Sometimes takes 6 months hah.
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#73Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#74The problem I see with their business model is that the technology has long been commoditized, and alternatives are often better. It's a pretty tough spot to be in. Anecdotally, I use Colima on my Mac, and it is better than Docker Desktop in pretty much every way I can think of. I'm sure I'm not alone. Generally, a company like Docker would sell support agreements (ie: how Red Hat does it), but selling support to dev…
This issue was brought up in the initial hacker news thread, when Docker was moving towards this pricing model. Here we are, $120M ARR later. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28369570
I think it will be interesting to see the next few years. There were quite a few orgs that jumped as the pricing was introduced, detachment from k8s etc that was a side effect, a bunch of new options in (free) market. Just from my perspective out of the orgs I know of that bought into the pricing, every one of them has active projects to get off in the next year.
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#75The problem I see with their business model is that the technology has long been commoditized, and alternatives are often better. It's a pretty tough spot to be in. Anecdotally, I use Colima on my Mac, and it is better than Docker Desktop in pretty much every way I can think of. I'm sure I'm not alone. Generally, a company like Docker would sell support agreements (ie: how Red Hat does it), but selling support to dev…
This issue was brought up in the initial hacker news thread, when Docker was moving towards this pricing model. Here we are, $120M ARR later. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28369570
They have LONG way to go before they can prove sustainable in the long run and justify their valuation.
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#76I remember everyone had written Docker off for dead when they announced their updated pricing plans, but they really made perfect sense, and I am happy to see the company recover. A large chunk of the tech world today relies on their products, but they were making next to nothing for it. It is definitely worth it for large companies to throw a few dollars their way considering the massive amount of value they are get…
I'm surprised by this as well, but maybe it was the HN bias that made that impression. My company received the memo from Docker to upgrade to paid version, and I helped many to move on to Podman. However there were teams for which getting a Docker Desktop license was easier than the Podman move. I am sure there are many more companies that can easily afford the convenience of Docker Desktop for a trivial fee.
What I don't understand is that devs that get paid 200k+ complain about getting any software license
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#77I remember everyone had written Docker off for dead when they announced their updated pricing plans, but they really made perfect sense, and I am happy to see the company recover. A large chunk of the tech world today relies on their products, but they were making next to nothing for it. It is definitely worth it for large companies to throw a few dollars their way considering the massive amount of value they are get…
I'm surprised by this as well, but maybe it was the HN bias that made that impression. My company received the memo from Docker to upgrade to paid version, and I helped many to move on to Podman. However there were teams for which getting a Docker Desktop license was easier than the Podman move. I am sure there are many more companies that can easily afford the convenience of Docker Desktop for a trivial fee.
At work, I developed step by step instructions for using Docker on WSL2, the normal CLI way. People liked it, but figured they liked the GUI better. They also argued that they may as well stick to the GUI because there was a team somewhere else in the company that really insisted they need Docker Desktop, so the company will be buying licenses anyway.
(I was already working on those instructions when the pricing change reached our attention, so it became a viable free alternative only by coincidence, but still.)
One other thing I learned: HN crowd is biased towards people who want to learn and understand their tools to a degree. Workplace use of Docker has large component of people who don't know what Docker is for and don't really care, but they need it for some task, so they want a hassle-minimizing option they can use to get their job done, and then forget about.
I bet it's a huge market, not just for Docker, but any other software tool. One that's somewhat alien to the HN audience.
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great move by them to introduce a license requirement for 250+ seats but not waste resources enforcing it (as far as I can tell). Those who will pay, will pay. Those who won’t, will switch tools no matter how painful. They stayed relevant by keeping all their users, even those technically breaking the license, but also collected some cash.
I have a product that has zero reduction in functionality if your license or trial runs out, just constantly nags you when you do useful things with it. Eventually, the workers at the company insist on the company buying it. Sometimes takes 6 months hah.
WinRAR?
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#79For the many here who have moved to an alternative (colima, Rancher, podman, etc), other than cost, is there a compelling (ie technical) advantage to these options? (on macos specifically)
Re: Docker 2.0 went from $11M to $135M in 2 years
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a product that has zero reduction in functionality if your license or trial runs out, just constantly nags you when you do useful things with it. Eventually, the workers at the company insist on the company buying it. Sometimes takes 6 months hah.
WinRAR?
And mIRC.