That article seems overly critical about young developers that don't know it any better because they grew up on containers. I guess I am one of those so I got

That article seems overly critical about young developers that don't know it any better because they grew up on containers. I guess I am one of those so I got to ask, is the proposed solution of unikernels something we had before but lost in favor of containers, or is it something completely new anyways? It does look like it might be the latter so why blame developers for using containers due to lack of choice? If unikernels are better and just as easy to use then I am sure people will convert. He blames a lot on marketing and marketing lies but his company (https://nanovms.com/ https://nanovms.com/) seems to make it just as hard to figure out what's going on with the apparently only option being a schedule a demo button. Come on, I remember Docker being that fancy new thing that people at university taught themselves and to each other around ~2014/2015. That hype was well deserved and if you want to compete with that you can't just decide to brush it off as wrong and misguided. At the risk of pointing out that I also might be one of those that the quote above is referring to, I gotta ask: Is there a technical reason why I shouldn't be able to eventually just replace Docker with a micro or unikernel? Same or similar style of image definition, completely different runtime technology? Isn't it up to the kernel and platform developers to build the tools to make that happen comfortably for all of us naive container users?