"Rather nebulous"? What's nebulous about leveraging your position on the market to drown out competitors with a free browser bundled with your operating system?
If Amazon redirected all search results of a product to their own version of it, omitting all others - would that be nebulous as well?
The real reason Netscape failed was their browser stunk. I know because I used both of them. Netscape crashed constantly. Explorer crashed too, but not nearly as often.
That's why people switched to Explorer. Netscape ran crying to the government.
That whole shtick about Explorer being uninstallable was ludicrous and irrelevant. Nothing stopped a user from installing another browser and using it. These days, a free browser is included with about every device.
Non-technical users leave defaults on all the time - do you really think there wasn't a sense in some people IE _was_ the internet? Don't you think MS wanted it that way? The "Connect to the Internet" icon on Windows 98's desktop had the IE icon on it!
And this wasn't "these days" when "a free browser is included with every device", it was 1998.
Microsoft included a number of utilities with its operating system - like a text editor - that operating systems have included since the beginning. There's no magic line that says a browser cannot be included.
I don't understand how running a single command to start either a single container or a stack of them with compose, that then gets all the requirements in a tarball similar and just runs is seen as more complicated than running random binaries, setting values on php.ini, setting up mysql or postgres, demonizing said binaries and making sure libraries and the like are in order.
You're going to be setting all that stuff up either way, though. It'll either be in a Dockerfile, or in a Vagrantfile (or an Ansible playbook, or a shell script, ...). But past a certain point you can't really get away from all that.
So I think it comes down to personal preference. This is going to sound a bit silly, but to me, running things in VMs feels like living in an apartment. Containers feel more like living out of a hotel room.
I know how to maintain an apartment, more or less. I've been living in them my whole life. I know what kinds of things I generally should and should not mess with. I'm not averse to hotels by any means, but if I'm going to spend a lot of time in a place, I will pick the apartment, where I can put all of my cumulative apartment-dwelling hours to good use.
Yes, thank you for answering on my behalf. To underscore this, the decision is whether to set up all of your dependencies and configurations with a tool like bash, or to set it all up within Docker, which involves setting up Docker itself, which sometimes involves setting up (and paying for) things like registries and orchestration tools.
I might tweak the apartment metaphor because I think it's generous to imply that, like a hotel, Docker does everything for you. Maybe Dockerless development is like living in an apartment and working on a boat, while using Docker is like living and working on a houseboat.
There is one thing I definitely prefer Docker for, and that's running images that were created by someone else, when little to no configuration is required. For example, running Postgres locally can be nicer with Docker than without, especially if you need multiple Postgres versions. I use this workflow for proofs of concepts, trials, and the like.
I suppose like anything, it's a preference based on where the majority of your experience is, and what you're using it for. If you're running things you've written and it's all done the same way, docker probably is just an extra step.
I personally run a bunch of software I've written, as well as open source things. So for me docker makes everything significantly easier, and saves me installing a lot of rubbish I don't understand well.
After 20 years of various things breaking on my (admittedly franken) debian installs after each dist-upgrade, and spending days troubleshooting each time, I recently took the plunge and switched all services to docker-compose.
I then booted into a new fresh clean debian environment, mounted my disks, and:
cd /opt/docker/configs; for i in *; do cd $i; docker-compose up -d; cd ..; done
voila, everything was up and working, and no longer tied to my underlying OS. Now at least I can keep my distro and kernel etc all up to date without worrying about anything else breaking.
Sure, I have a new set of problems, but they feel smaller.
Like, legit, this is the whole point of docker. Application/service dependencies are no longer tied to the server it is running on, mitigating the worst parts of dependency hell.
Although, in your case, I suppose your tolerance for dependency hell has been quite high ;)
> Application/service dependencies are no longer tied to the server it is running on, mitigating the worst parts of dependency hell.
Until you decide to optimise for resources, and do crazy things like “one postgres instance, one influxdb instance” instead of “one instance per microservice”, and then you get back into hell pretty quick.
Winds me up how massive tiny applications become, and how my choices are to throw money (RAM) at the problem, or money (time) at the problem. I wonder when someone will do the math and prove that developer laziness is having a substantial drag on global efficiency. The aggregate cost bourn by users has to be orders of magnitude larger than the cost savings made by developers at this point.
I'm doing exactly the same thing. I started to do everything on Synology with Doctor Compose and got rid of most Synology apps: through open source applications.
At some point I moved individual containers to other machines and they work perfectly. VPS, NUC no matter what.
Yea, in same boat and I'm wondering if there is big contingent of devs out there that bristle at Docker. Biggest issue I run into writing my lab software is finding decent enough container registry but now I just endorse free tier of Vultr CR.
I just use the github registry, but I've been paying for their personal pro subscription for years now so it wasn't really an "additional" cost for me.
I think a lot get pushed out for not going with the plan. It's like this in a lot of organizations. The other problem is morality is based on an individuals view. Most of the most egregious actions were likely deemed morally fine by those that perpetrated it. It's messed up. Working in the IC can be amazing and also nerve wrecking. Many bad decisions start out more as a Bad choice 1, bad choice 2, or bad choice 3.. and that's the only real options out there.
The CIA have been cowboys.. and I suspect that the modern CIA still has this going on.
I don’t know about the veracity of that claim. But I presume it is talking about DB2 LUW (Linux/Unix/Windows), which began life as OS/2 Extended Edition Database Manager (although support for OS/2 was dropped a long time ago, that’s the platform on which the code base started.) The original DB2, DB2 for z/OS, is predominantly written in PL/X, an IBM-confidential PL/I dialect, not C++-although it wouldn’t surprise me if nowadays it contained some components written in C and/or C++, from what I’ve heard the bulk of it is still written in PL/X. DB2 for VSE and VM is mostly PL/X and assembler. Parts of DB2 for IBM i may be written in C++ too, but I suspect the bulk of it is IBM-confidential PL/I dialects (not PL/X; PL/MI and PL/MP), with a small chance it may even contain a bit of Modula 2 (I believe some bits of IBM i are still Modula 2 code, probably not anything to do with DB2, but not 100% sure)
There is no downside to MS's increasing enshittification of Windows.
If people keep using it, cool. If not, they'll release Windows 12 "now with zero ads and bloat!" and people will come flocking back from their year or so of Linux frustrations (there will be more than a few).
I, for one, would love to see the rise of AI as the killer of rote memorization education and the enabler of general and critical learning. But I doubt we'll be that lucky - the current industry, methods and expectations are too engrained.
I posit there are two types of people who want to kill rote memorization.
1) Those to whom memorization comes easily without much drilling, so such experiences in the classroom was an exercise in pain and drudgery.
2) Those to whom rote memorization is nigh impossible or only happens with herculean effort. Such experiences in the classroom was an exercise in pain and drudgery.
Both want to eliminate this pain for future generations. I will put forth that both camps are severely wrong.
I don't like it don't get me wrong. Especially in subjects like math or coding where it really makes no sense to purely memorize without understanding - but the practice is absolutely necessary for understanding and mastery.
Take the study of history. The sequence of events and causal relationships are what is important, not the exact dates and times.
Research (in prepublication right now) done by my wife has shown that students are more engaged with the study of history the less it has to do with Jeopardy questions and the more it has to do with situating their life experiences, goals and passions into the flow of humanity through time, often letting them choose to focus on aspects of history that are traditionally ignored, like fashion, household labor, just to name a few.
There is extensive literature on how rote memorization is counter to many of the goals of education, which I can point you to if you have access to an academic digital library (and after consulting with my wife and her peers as this is not my area of expertise).
Higher education recognizes the unimportance of memorization in that the frequency of open-note and open-book exams increase through undergrad to graduate education.
You would be incredibly surprised at how much better of a conversation I am having on this topic with my wife, an academic education researcher, than on these forums.
There are a hundred outfits out of Shenzen doing what they do, but Raspberry Pi's move a lot of units because they have backwards compatibility, good support and that has fostered a healthy ecosystem over the years. If even a single Chinese outfit got the memo, they'd be out of business quickly - but they don't.
I don't understand why customer support is so hard to get right for these Chinese companies. The pervasive mindset seems to be beating others on price is enough. For the maker market Pi's are aiming for, it really isn't.
reply