3 ms·

Generally, this pattern has a name: bait and switch. I'm not saying that the company shouldn't make money, but I'm saying that it's widely recognized that provi

Generally, this pattern has a name: bait and switch. I'm not saying that the company shouldn't make money, but I'm saying that it's widely recognized that providing something free and changing your mind later will inevitably degrade your users' trust in you. So don't be surprised when there's backlash and migration away from your services and tools if you decide to try to turn formerly free services and tools into paid versions with no additional incentive.

yunohn 5y ago
I know that HN loves calling everything a bait and switch, but this is not that. It’s a useful product - despite so many here that apparently use it but insist that it’s useless. Docker wants to grow their revenue and is going to start charging companies (who also presumably have some revenue) a fee for the product. Absolutely normal business strategy.
- andrewstuart2 5y ago
  I haven't said it's useless, and I don't think I've seen anyone's comments calling it useless. But the reality is, what docker does is not complicated. It was not replaced because there wasn't a real reason to. If you built a docker competitor that was also free but did exactly the same things, you'd have been asked "why?" Now, the answer to that question exists. It's no longer free, which was the primary reason anyone just kept using it when (especially today) it doesn't offer much over alternatives.
  - yunohn 5y ago
    Why is the goalpost “Docker” suddenly? That’s still fully free. This whole thread is about the convenient GUI, which is what everyone is complaining about lacking features or purpose.
    - andrewstuart2 5y ago
      Docker Desktop, I mean. I personally haven't ever used the GUI except to deal with their new autoupdate prompts. I, and many others, just need something to set up the VM and orchestrate things so that `docker` in my terminal does as expected when I'm using my work-issued Mac. On Linux this is a non-issue, yes.

yunohn 5y ago

I know that HN loves calling everything a bait and switch, but this is not that. It’s a useful product - despite so many here that apparently use it but insist that it’s useless. Docker wants to grow their revenue and is going to start charging companies (who also presumably have some revenue) a fee for the product. Absolutely normal business strategy.

andrewstuart2 5y ago
I haven't said it's useless, and I don't think I've seen anyone's comments calling it useless. But the reality is, what docker does is not complicated. It was not replaced because there wasn't a real reason to. If you built a docker competitor that was also free but did exactly the same things, you'd have been asked "why?" Now, the answer to that question exists. It's no longer free, which was the primary reason anyone just kept using it when (especially today) it doesn't offer much over alternatives.
- yunohn 5y ago
  Why is the goalpost “Docker” suddenly? That’s still fully free. This whole thread is about the convenient GUI, which is what everyone is complaining about lacking features or purpose.
  - andrewstuart2 5y ago
    Docker Desktop, I mean. I personally haven't ever used the GUI except to deal with their new autoupdate prompts. I, and many others, just need something to set up the VM and orchestrate things so that `docker` in my terminal does as expected when I'm using my work-issued Mac. On Linux this is a non-issue, yes.