[heeey]

This is a bait and switch of whale proportions.

Docker used to be the open source part. Now that's being moved out of the way so when you search for Docker you get the paid offerings. The goal is to confuse the people who haven't been following this into thinking Docker is a thing you pay Docker (the company) for.

It's brilliant.

[matt4077]

Brilliant! Brilliant! I was just searching for "Docker" after reading a tutorial, and now I spent my inheritance on Docker Enterprise Edition, even though there's also a Community Edition, on the same website, which will continue to exists, and this theory is obviously insane, and nothing of this makes any sense, but why start with goodwill, when conspiracy-fuelled hate will do, and when literally the future of the free world is at stake.

Brilliant! Brilliant! Bravo!

[stephenr]

> The goal is to confuse the people who haven't been following this into thinking Docker is a thing you pay Docker (the company) for

Following the first thing they google without actually understanding what's involved, all the way to handing over money sounds about what I expect from someone who thinks Docker is a viable platform to use for anything worth handing over money for.

[heeey]

That's not quite how it works.

- Decision maker googles and finds there's this Docker company that will solve their problems. Heard good buzz about Docker in the news, how open it is, and how many companies use it.

- Decision maker to engineer: "Hey can we use Docker software to solve problem X"

- Engineer: "Sure, the software is actually called Moby now though"

- Decision maker: "Meh, I don't care what it's called, I just want problem X solved. Docker solves it?"

- Engineer: "Yeah I guess"

- Decision maker: "Ok here's your budget. Pay Docker to solve problem X."

- Engineer: "Alright"

[stephenr]

Is that how VC companies "work" ? "Decision makers" make unilateral decisions about technology and "engineers" just say "yeah I guess" when asked about using new tech?

What fucking problem does Docker solve that a "decision maker" can understand it enough to get a result telling them to use Docker, yet s/he can't understand the concept of "open core" software.

Docker's status seems entirely driven by me-too cool kids cargo-culting the bejeezus out of it because they heard it can run their nodejs react app better.

If you work for a company where your described situation could happen, fucking leave.

[sotojuan]

A lot of devs seem completely fine with being pushovers and yes-men to the MBAs.

[HankB99]

I'm between jobs at the moment at least partly becaue I pushed back.

[mdekkers]

Docker's status seems entirely driven by me-too cool kids cargo-culting the bejeezus out of it because they heard it can run their nodejs react app better.

:thumbsup:

[unit91]

Would you really want to work at that company anyway? Here's how it goes where I work:

- Boss: here's the business-level problem I want solved

- Engineers: here's what we think it'll take to do it, and the technical path forward

- Boss: either (1) cool, what can I can do to help you get started? or (2) yikes, that's a bigger problem than I thought. What's the 80% solution?

[matt4077]

- Decision maker: "Also, do you really think I'm some sort of walking caricature of doofus management? And if so–what, exactly, is, in your estimation, the overlap of 'has absolutely no clue' and 'has heard of Docker'. Because sure as hell the CEO doesn't know anything about Docker. And while I'm the CTO, it happens that I, like quite a few of these decision-makers, came through the technical ranks. I compiled kernels when you weren't even born! So just once, I would wish you wouldn't attack some ridiculous straw-man of an argument, but the strongest possible argument which I could make. That's what I try to do, and it's why I'm the CTO, and yes, playing golf right now. Cheerio!"