4 ms·

Dead? Really? TLDR - author disapproves of Docker's management & monetization strategy. However, offers no evidence for a "dying" docker. ClickBait.

tjbiddle 9y ago
Seriously. At the least, re-title to "Docker, Inc." because the technology is FAR from dead.
- cmurf 9y ago
  The argument is Docker is the company, and that company is in the best case going to be acquired (go away gracefully) or melt away. The technology is immortalized in Moby. The article doesn't make a concluding prognostication about Moby vis-à-vis Kubernetes but very clearly thinks the momentum is behind Kubernetes because of the incoherent strategy behind Moby (other than as a means to throw the technology a life line beyond the fate of Docker).
- y4mi 9y ago
  The technology is not "docker" but containerisation.
  - LaGrange 9y ago
    No, technology is "docker." Containerisation is a family of technologies, but things like runc or - especially - LXC are quite different.
    - dvanduzer 9y ago
      Thank you, I didn't realize LXC wasn't the only interface to cgroups used by Docker. TIL.
    - y4mi 9y ago
      And projects like rkt don't exist in your world? while it's been a while since my last brush with kubernetes, didn't they use kubectl? So yeah... it's containerisation, not docker.
      - LaGrange 9y ago
        Rkt is functionally different enough from Docker to be called a different tech, and Kubernetes is, like, a totally different category. Are you also calling bicycles, cars and motorbikes the same technology, because they all use the technology called "wheel" somewhere?
- notatoad 9y ago
  isn't that the point? Docker is just the company now, because docker spun out their technology into moby. there's still a binary on my computer called docker, but it seems that docker, inc wishes that weren't so.
dvanduzer 9y ago
The author offers some reasonably strong evidence to discuss: 1) rapid adoption of Kubernetes 2) shiftless response strategy 3) aspects of the response strategy that imply internal *recognition* the company won't last 4) changes to organizational structure / personnel (I suspect, as other commenters have pointed out, that you are conflating Docker with LXC. This is understandable! Docker-the-company was/is very good with branding!)
- Stratoscope 9y ago
  Mobile friendly list: 1) rapid adoption of Kubernetes 2) shiftless response strategy 3) aspects of the response strategy that imply internal recognition the company won't last 4) changes to organizational structure / personnel (Don't use code formatting for lists, use a blank line between each item.)
frik 9y ago
Typical for HN, the article got hidden. It's well known YC alumni have some additional HN mod permissions and Docker is YC S10 (Summer 2010 batch of YCombinator).
- dang 9y ago
  This comment was killed because the commenter is banned for serial abuse of HN. I'm going to unkill it because I don't like to leave smears unreplied to. Moderators didn't touch this article or affect it in any way; users flagged it. YC alumni do not have HN mod permissions or any ability to demote articles beyond the flagging ability all users get (once their karma passes 30).

tjbiddle 9y ago

Seriously. At the least, re-title to "Docker, Inc." because the technology is FAR from dead.

cmurf 9y ago
The argument is Docker is the company, and that company is in the best case going to be acquired (go away gracefully) or melt away. The technology is immortalized in Moby. The article doesn't make a concluding prognostication about Moby vis-à-vis Kubernetes but very clearly thinks the momentum is behind Kubernetes because of the incoherent strategy behind Moby (other than as a means to throw the technology a life line beyond the fate of Docker).
y4mi 9y ago
The technology is not "docker" but containerisation.
- LaGrange 9y ago
  No, technology is "docker." Containerisation is a family of technologies, but things like runc or - especially - LXC are quite different.
  - dvanduzer 9y ago
    Thank you, I didn't realize LXC wasn't the only interface to cgroups used by Docker. TIL.
  - y4mi 9y ago
    And projects like rkt don't exist in your world? while it's been a while since my last brush with kubernetes, didn't they use kubectl? So yeah... it's containerisation, not docker.
    - LaGrange 9y ago
      Rkt is functionally different enough from Docker to be called a different tech, and Kubernetes is, like, a totally different category. Are you also calling bicycles, cars and motorbikes the same technology, because they all use the technology called "wheel" somewhere?
notatoad 9y ago
isn't that the point? Docker is just the company now, because docker spun out their technology into moby. there's still a binary on my computer called docker, but it seems that docker, inc wishes that weren't so.

dvanduzer 9y ago

The author offers some reasonably strong evidence to discuss: 1) rapid adoption of Kubernetes 2) shiftless response strategy 3) aspects of the response strategy that imply internal *recognition* the company won't last 4) changes to organizational structure / personnel (I suspect, as other commenters have pointed out, that you are conflating Docker with LXC. This is understandable! Docker-the-company was/is very good with branding!)

Stratoscope 9y ago
Mobile friendly list: 1) rapid adoption of Kubernetes 2) shiftless response strategy 3) aspects of the response strategy that imply internal recognition the company won't last 4) changes to organizational structure / personnel (Don't use code formatting for lists, use a blank line between each item.)

frik 9y ago

Typical for HN, the article got hidden. It's well known YC alumni have some additional HN mod permissions and Docker is YC S10 (Summer 2010 batch of YCombinator).

dang 9y ago
This comment was killed because the commenter is banned for serial abuse of HN. I'm going to unkill it because I don't like to leave smears unreplied to. Moderators didn't touch this article or affect it in any way; users flagged it. YC alumni do not have HN mod permissions or any ability to demote articles beyond the flagging ability all users get (once their karma passes 30).