5 ms·

> Shame you started charging for commercial entities. Is that how it works for commercial license? Commercial license come with extras than what personal-use/f

> Shame you started charging for commercial entities. Is that how it works for commercial license? Commercial license come with extras than what personal-use/free licenses have. You are whining that Docker is charging for commercial license that the company you works for is a commercial entity. Docker provides an platform and they are not free for commercial to use. Personal use is a drop in the bucket for them because personal users are not overwhelming their servers or pulling huge data daily. Commercial entities is a deluge in the bucket for Docker because entities use their servers more often than personal user do. Commercial uses consumes more data than personal use and you want Docker to accept that and eat the costs for commercial entities? If Docker does this, then Docker will not last a year without commercial pricing. You, sir, have a strange ideology of this.

hedora 5y ago
All commercial entities I have worked for wanted to locally host docker hub for cost, resiliency and security reasons. Third parties even produced patches to do this but upstream rejected them. They wanted a monopoly on burning server and network time on CI jobs. Now they have it, and I'm not sympathetic if it wastes their money. I'm more concerned that it wastes my time.
- Isthatablackgsd 5y ago
  My take of this is that those commercial entities are not raising hell over this. Commercial entities have the buying power (not the individuals nor the single developer(s) of the company) and they are complicit with it. The reason why Docker haven't change stance on the pricing because those entities haven't/don't attempt to use their buying power to sway Docker to change their stance. Yes, developers are raised hell over it but their power as a developers in the commercial entities are not equal. Developers does not run the company, the board of director/CEO/founder/owner does as they please. They just accepts it. That is not the fault of Docker, that is on those commercial entities who have the money continue to pay for those. It is too late to change the stance on this because entities have been paying for Docker support for YEARS and YEARS and YEARS, even way before that last year pricing tier changes.
MandieD 5y ago
Docker Hub was part of why we declined Docker for Business and instead came up with our own WSL-based workaround. Docker Hub is an anti-feature for large enterprises; we had been blocking direct access to it for a while before all this and instead providing images via internal Artifactory once we’d had a look at them. Another major part was SSO being merely on the roadmap at the point we would have had to begin the purchasing process with our licensing service. “Well, just slap down a credit card!” That is not how large enterprises work, and Docker appears to have fallen down on their market research when they didn’t set up a way to deal with purchase orders.

hedora 5y ago

All commercial entities I have worked for wanted to locally host docker hub for cost, resiliency and security reasons. Third parties even produced patches to do this but upstream rejected them. They wanted a monopoly on burning server and network time on CI jobs. Now they have it, and I'm not sympathetic if it wastes their money. I'm more concerned that it wastes my time.

Isthatablackgsd 5y ago
My take of this is that those commercial entities are not raising hell over this. Commercial entities have the buying power (not the individuals nor the single developer(s) of the company) and they are complicit with it. The reason why Docker haven't change stance on the pricing because those entities haven't/don't attempt to use their buying power to sway Docker to change their stance. Yes, developers are raised hell over it but their power as a developers in the commercial entities are not equal. Developers does not run the company, the board of director/CEO/founder/owner does as they please. They just accepts it. That is not the fault of Docker, that is on those commercial entities who have the money continue to pay for those. It is too late to change the stance on this because entities have been paying for Docker support for YEARS and YEARS and YEARS, even way before that last year pricing tier changes.

MandieD 5y ago

Docker Hub was part of why we declined Docker for Business and instead came up with our own WSL-based workaround. Docker Hub is an anti-feature for large enterprises; we had been blocking direct access to it for a while before all this and instead providing images via internal Artifactory once we’d had a look at them. Another major part was SSO being merely on the roadmap at the point we would have had to begin the purchasing process with our licensing service. “Well, just slap down a credit card!” That is not how large enterprises work, and Docker appears to have fallen down on their market research when they didn’t set up a way to deal with purchase orders.