Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Docker

computer.rip

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 145 posts

Re: Docker

#81

Post by Dalewyn »

sirius87 wrote: post #44

In its weird death spiral, if Docker Inc. were to be bought out by Microsoft, I shudder to think how much of the dev ecosystem would yet again depend on Microsoft's good graces to shoulder the burden of storage and data transfer costs for building products. They already do npm and Github (+ Github Container Registry) so they have some standing in being stewards in this space. On the plus side, it would perhaps give e…

>Microsoft, the famed supervillain of open communities.

FOSS: "Never thought I'd die fighting side by side with Microsoft."

Microsoft: "What about side by side with a friend?"

FOSS:

Re: Docker

#83

Post by akvadrako »

G3rn0ti wrote: post #50
soneil wrote: post #6

The narrative seems quite clear to me. They released the tooling and the services to become the defacto solution, and then Swarm was supposed to be the cashcow that turned that into cashflow. And then k8s happened. They've raised a tonne of capital, and it probably looked sane at the time. And now they're grasping at straws trying to figure out how else they can turn this into revenue. A lot of the recent narrative h…

> then Swarm was supposed to > be the cashcow that turned > that into cashflow. And then > k8s happened. We are still using Docker Swarm in production. It seems to be working fine so I always wondered why it never took off. But I am not a Devop. Can sb please give some insight on why kubernetes took off instead and why Dock Inc. failed with its cloud product?

k8s is basically a standard interface for cloud providers, where you can define load balancers, persistent volumes, certificates, etc. in addition to jobs and services. It has a well thought out declarative language that maps well to how ops runs things at scale.

There are quite a few optional tools built on the k8s model, like service meshes or tools to orchestrate a postgres cluster.

Swarm is a small piece of that, the scheduling system, and you have to run it yourself. It's really not comparable.

Re: Docker

#84

Post by EntrePrescott »

8n4vidtmkvmk wrote: post #70
BossingAround wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if Docker Inc. were to be bought out by Microsoft... You can always use Podman. We already have fully OSS solutions in the container space.

podman runs or builds containers? as far as i understand it docker desktop does 2 or 3 different things and i haven't managed to untangle that yet because it hasn't fully broken my workflow yet. getting more and more tempting to remove it but i need something for my weird windows+wsl setup

> podman runs or builds containers?

It does… in the same sense that docker (the program/tool) does, that is: both are not container runtimes (such as containerd which docker uses, or runc and crun which are the options typically used with podman) but a container management tool that control a container runtime. So you would indeed use podman to create a container just like you would with docker.

As for building images, buildah is the tool most used in the podman community for that. and yes, both podman and docker can handle containerfiles (what is/was called "dockerfiles" in the docker world)

> need something for my weird windows+wsl setup

oh, well, uhm, my condolences for that. Luckily I never had to use that for containers, but a quick look on the podman homepage tells me that they also offer a virtualized WSLv2-based distribution for Windows users: https://podman.io/getting-started/installation.html#windows …And of course, there is Podman Desktop if you want something more click-UI-based than the command line podman (never really tried it though, so I can't really say if it's good or not): https://podman-desktop.io/

Re: Docker

#85

Post by syspec »

mmtmn wrote: post #62
G3rn0ti wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then Swarm was supposed to > be the cashcow that turned > that into cashflow. And then > k8s happened. We are still using Docker Swarm in production. It seems to be working fine so I always wondered why it never took off. But I am not a Devop. Can sb please give some insight on why kubernetes took off instead and why Dock Inc. failed with its cloud product?

[flagged]

Clearly written by chat gpt

Re: Docker

#86

Post by koito17 »

BossingAround wrote: post #53
sirius87 wrote: post #44

In its weird death spiral, if Docker Inc. were to be bought out by Microsoft, I shudder to think how much of the dev ecosystem would yet again depend on Microsoft's good graces to shoulder the burden of storage and data transfer costs for building products. They already do npm and Github (+ Github Container Registry) so they have some standing in being stewards in this space. On the plus side, it would perhaps give e…

> if Docker Inc. were to be bought out by Microsoft... You can always use Podman. We already have fully OSS solutions in the container space.

On my personal computer and projects I always use Podman. There is even a fancy web app if people desperately want a cool icon on their menu bar, though it pales in comparison to Docker Desktop in features. (For instance, it's not able to search for images, whereas Docker Desktop can).

I do not miss Docker at all considering that I can copy paste almost every docker invocation I see online and have it run flawlessly with Podman. Unfortunately my workplace will probably never even consider trying out Podman as a replacement to Docker. I wonder if someone here has a nice anecdote of using Podman successfully at their workplace.

Re: Docker

#87

Post by irusensei »

ghshephard wrote: post #32
berkle4455 wrote: post #14

okay so swarm is dead, but is kubernetes actually that good or is it just ubiquitous and you’re forced to use it today? what about nomad? or mrsk?

Nomad is awesome and works at scale. The engineers continue to battle harden it and it’s a joy to work with. You do have to manage things like service discovery (usually with consul) and traffic routing separately - but the integration with vault is sublime. About the only real negative of Nomad is that it doesn’t have the mindshare that k8s does, so you don’t see the amount of developer engagement in extending it th…

My personal experience is that Consul and vault are too complicated to fiddle it. I can spin a kubernetes cluster in minutes but I gave up on trying a Consul+Vault+Nomad lab around all the setup steps for replication, RBAC and whatnot.

Re: Docker

#88

Post by EntrePrescott »

Dalewyn wrote: post #79
mitchellh wrote: post #10

I’m someone who had a front row seat to the emergence of Docker, and some might say competed with them (I’d disagree on that point). I don’t plan on commenting on their company, business model, or recent decisions. The only thing I want to comment on is the claim Docker was evolutionary, not revolutionary. I disagree, I believe Docker /was/ revolutionary. And I feel like I see heavy technologists make this sort of di…

>The kernel of truth is that the technology itself isn’t valuable; it’s the /humanization/ of a technology, how it interfaces with the people who use it every day. Apple in a nutshell.

Apple even takes it even one step further: they understood (Just like haute couture, cosmetics and luxury watch brands before them) that it's neither the product nor the technology nor even the interface itself that's what's really valuable (in the sense of: monetizeable), but the user EXPERIENCE in the sense of how it makes the user FEEL. Which is Why Apple excels in brand marketing.

If you want a cash cow, you don't want a technology-focused project or a mere company, but something between a luxury lifestyle brand and a cult.

Re: Docker

#89

Post by bornfreddy »

folkrav wrote: post #21
bobleeswagger wrote: post #17

I think we're past the point where key players like AWS have _ran with_ the technology Docker provided and did not pay their fair share in the process. Docker as a company may be a joke, but I don't think the software will be nearly as nice to use without them. I think it's ridiculous that so many asshats are jumping on the hate Docker (the company) bandwagon without understanding how much they have been taken advant…

> Docker as a company may be a joke, but I don't think the software will be nearly as nice to use without them. I think it's ridiculous that so many asshats are jumping on the hate Docker (the company) bandwagon without understanding how much they have been taken advantage of by the big players who can absolutely support them, but choose not to. As much as I do not condone said big player's actions here, the whole sy…

This. FOSS licenses have their problems.

Re: Docker

#90

Post by Datagenerator »

sirius87 wrote: post #73
eastbound wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I shudder to think how much of the dev ecosystem would yet again depend on Microsoft's good graces to shoulder the burden of storage and data transfer costs for building products Does that hint that the model of sending around megabytes-to-multigigabytes of VMs is inherently too expensive to maintain as a backbone for an awesome tool? For the same reason, I wonder why provides Maven Central and NPM repositories, wh…

> model of sending around megabytes-to-multigigabytes of VMs is inherently too expensive Yes. I think automated build pipelines running 24x7 that could request even for the oldest version of a sizable image without caching at their end is part of the issue. There was no limit that I'm aware of on the no. of tags/versions per image or per OSS account on DockerHub, so just like package repositories, effectively every i…

The ISO mirrors of every Linux / BSD* have been successful for decades. Decentralized repositories could solve many problems. Add Bittorrent as acceptable usage pattern like the free AI community is using to solve it even further, the Internet was not designed to be centralized IMHO.
Post reply on HN