[TZubiri]

There's several use cases to virtualization. You might be under the illusion that you use docker for the same use cases, but you will probably find 3 or 4 use cases if you talk with other users: Deterministic testing, automated deployments, external dependency installation (docker run psql).

Besides the semantic usecases of Docker which can be infinite, technically docker is a virtualization and isolation mechanism. So whatever you do with docker can also be done with type 1, 2 virtualization or even processes and users (hint that's what docker is actually built on). There's plenty of junior programmers that learn to docker run something to isolate it without learning how to isolate with basic user permissions.

So the use case isn't really relevant when I say that you can live without docker.

In general if you ever find yourself complaining about your free stuff, I recommend that you uninstall it to show yourself you don't need it. And then you can reconsider to come back to it again from a place of gratefulness instead of demanding neediness.

[orf]

> There's several use cases to virtualization

Containers are not virtualisation.

> So whatever you do with docker can also be done with type 1, 2 virtualization

This statement is redundant. Whatever you do with docker can also be done with a Turing machine built using magic the gathering[1].

> There's plenty of junior programmers…

And there are plenty of junior programmers who think containers = virtualisation :)

1. https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.09828

[TZubiri]

>Containers are not virtualisation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software)

>Docker is a set of platform as a service (PaaS) products that use OS-level virtualization to deliver software in packages called containers.[5]

https://lwn.net/Articles/179361/

>"Virtualization" is the act of making a set of processes believe that it has a dedicated system to itself.

>Full virtualization and paravirtualization are not the only approaches being taken, however. An alternative is lightweight virtualization, generally based on some sort of container concept.

https://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/pdfdocs/papers/jail.pdf

>To this end, we describe the newFreeBSD ‘‘Jail’’facility,which provides a strong partitioning solution, leveraging existing mechanisms, such as chroot(2), to what effectively amounts to a virtual machine environment.

> And there are plenty of junior programmers who think containers = virtualisation :)

At least we do agree on one thing, there is one and only one subpar engineer among us.

[orf]

> At least we do agree on one thing, there is one and only one subpar engineer among us.

Indeed, the one who thinks containers are nothing but Docker.

Or better yet, the one who cites a PDF from 2000 or an article from 2006, both before ec2 even launched, to say virtualization is synonymous with containers as if the meaning hasn’t shifted since then…

Or, at the very least, the one who thinks “ssh apt-get install” is equivalent to a container image.

[TZubiri]

Your reading comprehension might be quite bad

>Indeed, the one who thinks containers are nothing but Docker.

I just cited papers talking about jails, zones and chroot..

>to say virtualization is synonymous with containers

I said containers are virtualization, not that virtualization is synonymous with containers. That is container ∈ virtualization, not container = virtualization.

No offense but that's a highschool level reading comprehension error right there.

>Or better yet, the one who cites a PDF from 2000 or an article from 2006,

At least I cited stuff.

Go ahead and submit something to wikipedia with sources if you think containers are no longer virtualization.

Otherwise I'm out.