5 ms·
The problem for Docker wasn't that per say, Docker itself was the free part that got everyone interested it's just that their paid for tier went head to head wi
by raiyu 6y ago
The problem for Docker wasn't that per say, Docker itself was the free part that got everyone interested it's just that their paid for tier went head to head with Kubernetes and lost.
Had Kubernetes not existed they would be doing just fine economically as they would be the dominant platform.
They got beat by competition.
- edjrage 6y agoHonest question as an outsider: What did Docker introduce that wasn't better addressed by other technologies? E.g. wasn't reproducibility the main point and already properly solved by nix? By the way, it's "per se"
- SSLy 6y agoYou don't have to use the nix lang, Dockerfiles are much easier to get started working with.
- isogon 6y agoDockerfiles are far simpler than the Nix language. Likewise, sure, FreeBSD had jails first (and for a long time!), but they are more difficult to set up. Docker allowed reproducibility to be accomplished by a person who likes the idea of it, but will shelve it if it doesn't work within an evening. This describes me, for example. I think it took off for that reason.
- nendroid 6y agoNix has a multitude of drawbacks the biggest being learnability.
- pbronez 6y agogod yes. Friggin' Nix is such a great idea, but such a pain to start using...
- b0afc375b5 6y agoI mean you could say the same for vim, but I still learned it and am now reaping the benefits.
- dwaltrip 6y agoYes, but most people don’t bother.
- freedomben 6y agoIMHO, it was the whole package: One tool that could configure and wrangle all the various kernel namespaces in order to make containers work. They also benefited significantly from the splash they made and the tech excitement factor. I still run into people in my consulting work that are fairly new to containers, but brand recognition on Docker is through the roof. Everybody has heard of them even if they don't know what it can do for them.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rodgerd 6y agoAs Apple have spent the 21st century demonstrating time and time again, a more usable form of a well-established idea is better.
- freedomben 6y agoDisclaimer: I work for Red Hat on OpenShift so I'm biased, but this is just my opinion. Yep I agree. I recently helped a customer to move from Docker EE to OpenShift. They were frank about the pain points they experienced and why they were moving. It really came down to competition. K8s solves the problems they were having in a better way. Now with so much momentum behind K8s, nearly everybody is re-platforming their offerings on top of K8s.
- rodgerd 6y agoEven prior to k8s, Red Hat and Cloud Foundry (amongst others) were pitching better container orchestration tooling that Docker offered (e.g. OpenShift 1 wasn't based on k8s).