6 ms·

Was the containers hype an industry/tech media propaganda?

• streetcat1 7y ago
  Everything starts as propaganda, simply because only companies (big ones) have the PR budget to push new tech. Also, tech companies need constant change to survive, since with every new change, all the old systems become legacy, and we have a new wave of spending (this is true for hardware as well as software). However, this is not necessarily bad, you just need to play this game correctly. For example, if you are a startup, you can use this change as an entry point when new markets get opened. As an engineer you can also enjoy it if you ride this wave. For example, become a Kubernetes consultant. The holy grail, however, is the actually drive this change as a startup. I.e. use the PR budget of the big tech in order to introduce a competing product.
  • itsmefaz 7y ago
    Thanks for the response. But the problem is it takes sometime to gain expertise and consultant firms. And it is very difficult to foresee a tech disruption as it is primarily driven by big-tech's agenda rather than of introducing new tools and other firms just blindly accepting it as standard.
    • streetcat1 7y ago
      No problem. So it is actually become easier over time, as the IT field concentrates around Google, Amazon, and Microsoft. Basically look for the new announcements in each major conference, and specifically for new beta services, or open-source projects. Also, it takes around a year to become proficient in new tech, so you must allocate some of your time (at work or free time) to such experimental bets.
  • fspear 7y ago
    How does one become a k8s consultant? Certifications?
    • dankohn1 7y ago
      The clearest path is to become a Certified Kubernetes Administrator. There are a number of companies currently hiring CKAs. https://www.cncf.io/certification/cka/ https://www.cncf.io/certification/cka/ https://jobs.cncf.io/ https://jobs.cncf.io/ Disclosure: CNCF, which I run, manages the CKA and the job board. But I really have seen many people get great jobs by becoming a CKA.
• lazylizard 7y ago
  Maybe docker had a little bit of hype? But openvz n lxc have been around for a long time..
  • itsmefaz 7y ago
    Was there a reason why they didn't take off like docker did?
    • znpy 7y ago
      Usability/ergonomic. Docker was/is a lot simpler to grasp. That eases adoption.
    • lowdose 7y ago
      Docker came with the container metaphor.
    • rumanator 7y ago
      IIRC, the main problem was UI/UX. Docker containers in essence are a bit like running isolated Linux processes in a chrooted and cgrouped environment. Chroot exists for decades, and so does cgroups. Yet, Docker came up with a UI and UX which, among other things, let you download and run isolated Linux processes by simply running 'docker run <container name>', thus shoving everything well under the rug and practically eliminating the need to pull any arcane trick to get Linux processes to run in isolation.
      • kazen44 7y ago
        running processes in isolation has been happening for a long time. (jails for instance, have existed for a very long time and freebsd has been used a lot for hosting services in the past). while i agree docker solved the UI/UX problem, it also introducted a massive security risk, as running unverified binaries in production is very easy for developers. Most shops don't have any private repository in use nor do they have the people (anymore) to build proper processes and systems around running code in production.
• nailer 7y ago
  It was an industry propaganda from companies who knew containers had something to offer over VMs (performance gains) but span those genuine advantages into claims that containers were a revolution rather than an evolution. People started doing silly things like run containers on top of their cloud providers VMs (creating a second layer of isolation and massive amounts of engineering burden) and hence Kubernetes became synonymous with wasted engineering effort.
  • rumanator 7y ago
    > People started doing silly things like run containers on top of their cloud providers VMs This assertion is simply wrong. Running containers in a VM is not silly at all. It's a very basic and very important feature. I'm actually surprised how, in HN of all places, this misconception is still mindlessly repeated in this day and age. By firing up a VM you're actually allocating in the cloud the computational resources you need, and by running containers you are using those computational resources as you need. When you need more instances of a service running you replicate a container instance, and if a container instance is idling then you shut it down. If you run close to exhaust the computational resources of your VM instance then you just pick up your credit card and fire up another one to make room to run more containers. You never have to worry about anything because it just works. And Kubernetes is the one responsible for monitoring resources and managing how container and VM instances are initialized or shut down, and how everything is kept up and running and communicating while you worry about nothing.
    • nailer 7y ago
      The full quote is: > People started doing silly things like run containers on top of their cloud providers VMs (creating a second layer of isolation and massive amounts of engineering burden) Regarding your statement: > When you need more instances of a service running you replicate a container instance, and if a container instance is idling then you shut it down. > monitoring resources and managing how container and VM instances are initialized or shut down You're confusing orchestration with isolation. Orchestration has existed far before containers. You are already paying your cloud provider for isolation. Containers are not needed for orchestration. I'm going to take a guess here and say you have been in the tech industry for about five years. And regarding your claim: > You never have to worry about anything because it just works. No. Running a Kubernetes or Docker cluster is a non trivial task. Here's a more likely scenario for running your own container farm on top of the platform your employer already pays for from your cloud provider: you just want to learn Kubernetes and have someone else pay you to do it, despite the lack of business benefit.
• codegladiator 7y ago
  Following that throught process everything will look like a propoganda. I suggest you to read and listen to everything (all propoganda) and make your own choice. For containers, I don't use containers because everyone thinks its great, but because it makes my own life easier. Similarly I could say functional programming is a propoganda, but I haven't picked it up yet since I don't see that much of pros.
  • rumanator 7y ago
    > For containers, I don't use containers because everyone thinks its great, but because it makes my own life easier. This. Containers solve a whole bunch of problems so well that they essentially eliminate them as problems. - containers solve the problem of having to develop installers for applications because containers already come with the whole dependency graph resolved, deployed, and up-and-running. - containers solve the problem of deploying applications because they run out of the box in isolated processes. - containers solve the problem of configuring deployed applications to talk with each other safely because they enable developers to configure the network settings for the specific application that is supposed to be applied when the app is deployed, in a way that can be overwritten without any impact on deployment. - containers enable you to download and run any application effortlessly, even tracking semver. - etc etc.
  • zzzcpan 7y ago
    > Following that throught process everything will look like a propoganda. Almost everything is. In tech industry and tech media in particular. PR is essentially another name for propaganda, because propaganda got bad name at one point and propaganda firms had to rename it to continue those practices. Evangelist and advocate roles are essentially people employed to spread propaganda. Even just the idea of startup growth is deeply tied to propaganda. > For containers, I don't use containers because everyone thinks its great, but because it makes my own life easier. That's not really true. They help a bit with certain problems, introduce other problems, and container-based technology implementations pile on so many problems and look so incompetent, it's hard to even take any of it seriously.
    • 7y ago
• NotZachari 7y ago
  The media's job is not to inform you at this point. Their job is to get eyes on their product. That's no secret. However, the logic behind your approach is flawed. Why? Money is king in every industry. Sure, hype exists. I had one instance where I felt exactly like you, and guess what hot new flavor of the month that was? React. It didn't take long to realize who the idiot was in that situation (me). It was hot because it was the next logical step, and no amount of being frustrated because I had just gotten comfortable with Angular could change that. Containers aren't some snake oil racket. It's pretty easy to see why if you take off the tinfoil. They are cost and resource efficient, and they provide a large cushion for less than optimal situations. Containers are smaller than VMs and less resource intensive so they allow you to do more with less hardware. Sudden rush of people because Reddit or HN fell in love with you? Provision a few more with almost zero effort knowing exactly what you'll be getting. Working on bug fixes or improving shit? Cool. There's no difference between the local instances and what hits production. I mean, it's kind of like the folks who get real passionate about only using basic code editors because all the extra tools are "cheating". Time is money, and it's the only thing we can't get back. If containers significantly reduce cost in terms of resources, man hours, or money for you or the company you work for, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why it'd be pushed so hard. I understand being cynical in this industry, but let's be realistic. Companies are only pushing what they believe will be good for their bottom line. No one's pushing containers because of some shitty agenda, just as they weren't when Node.js was blowing up to the same screams of "this is all manufactured hype". There are definitely cons to using containers. You're pushing a bunch of shit with root access all sharing the kernel out there, and if a single one is compromised, they're all compromised by definition. That's a legitimate concern, but if I'm being honest, this sounds more like you haven't been in a situation where containers were the proper solution more than a tech industry scam to push an agenda.
• Jonnax 7y ago
  What is eating you alive? You're likely working for an organisation trying to push their software or services onto other people. Open source adovocacy has the same kind of ideas from another perspective. There isn't some magic ideal of an engineer. You solve problems. Those problems are generally driven by the agenda of whoever is paying for it. Unless you're running your own business then it's your agenda you're pushing. If you don't want to use containers, then don't use them. VMs or bare metal haven't disappeared. Any application that's container deployable should be deployable outside of a container. "I see no point in studying any technology, tooling than the toolings my organization" That's a fine perspective to have. Keeping up with technology can by very time consuming, and we work to live rather than live to work. However if you want to be involved in decision making processes. You should have an understanding of the solutions that you don't want to recommend. Saying "I don't like how the press have been pushing it everywhere and I think there's an agenda" is not an acceptable argument if you're asked about the possibility of contsinerising your company's application.
  • bfung 7y ago
    > "I see no point in studying any technology, tooling than the toolings my organization" My personal take on this is that the opposite should be done -- study and understand the fundamental problems tech orgs have and know the tools that solve those problems. That's the way to cut through the media BS vs. valuable news. Containers became popular because they bring value to tech orgs/teams -- removing the need for a LOT of communication/coordination between infra teams and dev teams where skills are generally different.
• ramtatatam 7y ago
  I worked for a startup roughly when docker started gaining proper momentum but at the time I felt it's still not mature enough to use it in production. We was using (I believe) less secure chroot jails to package our app and, well, it was a bit of a nightmare. I was in need for containers technology and once we decided to move to docker I never regreted this move. Now I use podman for I'd prefer not to have to run containers as very privileged user and I don't see better alternative. There was good press around docker but I also heard lots of stories about problems from my colleagues who decided to use it earlier than me, but I'd not call this propaganda. Docker solves real problem and that's why it got so much attention.
• blahneverdies 7y ago
  Just sit and watch the trends roll in, and fizzle out. Choose your wave. (HN-driven decision-making has existed since nearly the beginning as well.)
• darkhorn 7y ago
  Some news in media are published with money. You send your story and pay some money, then they publish it as a news.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• RantyDave 7y ago
  Yes, this is pretty much how it is. The best solution will be passed over time and time again if there is a better marketed alternative. To make things worse you have management adopting product X because they know engineers want to work on it, and engineers adopting product X because they know there aren't any nasty-arse legacy maintenance projects using it. This is but one of the mechanisms that keeps our industry as the expensive, buggy, under performing mess it is. To articulate the problem: The tech industry is made of people, and people's actions are based on all sorts of not-all-that-logical incentives. Principally tribalism. We evolved this way and it's not going anywhere.