5 ms·

It's shameful that this product was once free is now going to be charged, even if it's only for larger businesses. I wonder how sustainable it is for docker to

It's shameful that this product was once free is now going to be charged, even if it's only for larger businesses. I wonder how sustainable it is for docker to be like other open source entities and rely on consistent donations from major corporations to rely on income. I also wonder if this will impede on docker adoption in the coming months. I guess time is the only one that can tell

andrewmcwatters 5y ago
Shameful? What's shameful about it? Software entitlement is outrageous. It's the only field where people expect professionals to keep doling out labor for free and then complain about the free stuff. If it isn't already abundantly clear to you: free software isn't sustainable. It's built on the backs of people who provide it for whatever reason they choose. This be a beggar so I can continue to have free stuff mentality has got to go.
- raman162 5y ago
  Shameful may have been a harsh word , disappointing is more appropriate. The disappointing part is that a product that was once free and distributed in abundance is now requiring licensing starting immediately for small businesses. There is a transition gap but the policy is effective starting today. There were no added features of value, it was just a random change of price from nothing to something. I think the new enterprise features that they are boasting about which is probably where they would end up making most of their money could have been suffice as this new policy is going to be difficult for them to enforce. I'm sure docker desktop originally being free contributed to them being this popular. It made using containers for development super easy on windows and Mac. Now that they have the huge user base, they're in a good position to dictate terms in their favour whether we like it or not.
  - andrewmcwatters 5y ago
    The only thing you’re saying here is that you don’t recognize its value and you don’t want to pay for it. No, wait, you don’t want businesses—fully capable organizations who can pay—to pay for it. You should be ashamed. There’s nothing random about it. A tech business is finally realizing giving products away for free isn’t a business. What a surprise. > Now that they have the huge user base, they're in a good position to dictate terms in their favour whether we like it or not. No one is forcing you to use docker. Grow up. Better yet, you try building a product, giving it away to choosing beggar developers, and figure out how to run a business where you pay six-figure engineering salaries to qualified employees off the cash flow of “donations.” What a joke.
    - raman162 5y ago
      > The only thing you’re saying here is that you don’t recognize its value and you don’t want to pay for it. No, wait, you don’t want businesses—fully capable organizations who can pay—to pay for it. No, I communicated my point clearly that I find it disappointing for the shift. I understand that a business needs to be viable but I'm commenting on the fact that they probably wouldn't have the mass adoption that they have now if Docker Desktop had the licensing structure today that it had from the beginning. The whole internet basically runs on Linux which is largely supported by monetary donations and companies making source code contributions so let's not forget that alternative altogether.
    - dang 5y ago
      If you continue to break the site guidelines like this, we will ban you. We've warned you multiple times before, and this is seriously not cool—regardless of how right you are or feel you are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

andrewmcwatters 5y ago

Shameful? What's shameful about it? Software entitlement is outrageous. It's the only field where people expect professionals to keep doling out labor for free and then complain about the free stuff. If it isn't already abundantly clear to you: free software isn't sustainable. It's built on the backs of people who provide it for whatever reason they choose. This be a beggar so I can continue to have free stuff mentality has got to go.

raman162 5y ago
Shameful may have been a harsh word , disappointing is more appropriate. The disappointing part is that a product that was once free and distributed in abundance is now requiring licensing starting immediately for small businesses. There is a transition gap but the policy is effective starting today. There were no added features of value, it was just a random change of price from nothing to something. I think the new enterprise features that they are boasting about which is probably where they would end up making most of their money could have been suffice as this new policy is going to be difficult for them to enforce. I'm sure docker desktop originally being free contributed to them being this popular. It made using containers for development super easy on windows and Mac. Now that they have the huge user base, they're in a good position to dictate terms in their favour whether we like it or not.
- andrewmcwatters 5y ago
  The only thing you’re saying here is that you don’t recognize its value and you don’t want to pay for it. No, wait, you don’t want businesses—fully capable organizations who can pay—to pay for it. You should be ashamed. There’s nothing random about it. A tech business is finally realizing giving products away for free isn’t a business. What a surprise. > Now that they have the huge user base, they're in a good position to dictate terms in their favour whether we like it or not. No one is forcing you to use docker. Grow up. Better yet, you try building a product, giving it away to choosing beggar developers, and figure out how to run a business where you pay six-figure engineering salaries to qualified employees off the cash flow of “donations.” What a joke.
  - raman162 5y ago
    > The only thing you’re saying here is that you don’t recognize its value and you don’t want to pay for it. No, wait, you don’t want businesses—fully capable organizations who can pay—to pay for it. No, I communicated my point clearly that I find it disappointing for the shift. I understand that a business needs to be viable but I'm commenting on the fact that they probably wouldn't have the mass adoption that they have now if Docker Desktop had the licensing structure today that it had from the beginning. The whole internet basically runs on Linux which is largely supported by monetary donations and companies making source code contributions so let's not forget that alternative altogether.
  - dang 5y ago
    If you continue to break the site guidelines like this, we will ban you. We've warned you multiple times before, and this is seriously not cool—regardless of how right you are or feel you are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html