I am neither a Docker expert nor evangelist, and I have my own gripes and frustrations with it, but this article is full of misinformation and FUD. To wit:
> CoreOS is an operating [system] that can only run Docker and is exclusively intended to run Docker.
No, it isn't. (Maybe if you substitute "Docker" with "containers.")
> First, the main benefit of Docker is to unify dev and production. Having a separate OS in production only for containers totally ruins this point.
No, it doesn't. Completely the opposite, in fact: Docker makes it possible to not care about OS differences between dev, test, and prod.
> Docker on Debian is major no-go
> Docker is 100% guaranteed suicide on Debian 8 and it’s been since the inception of Docker a few years ago
> Debian froze the kernel to a version that doesn’t support anything Docker needs and the few components that are present are rigged with bugs.
rubs temples It's Linux. It's Debian. You can run any kernel you want. There are plenty of repositories out there with binary kernels, including Debian's own back-ported 4.9 kernel, or you can build one from source. Because, you know, open source. I've run many instances of Jessie on Linode with their 4.8 and 4.9 kernels and it's no problem. Hundreds of companies are running Docker in production on Debian and Debian-derived systems.
> I am not aware of any serious companies than run on Ubuntu.
Just because you are not aware does not mean they do not exist. How about Netflix, Snapchat, Dropbox, Uber, and Tesla for starters?
> I cannot comment on the LTS 16 as I do not use it.
It's been out since last April. If you're serious about this survey, this is a no-brainer.
> I received quite a few comments and unfriendly emails of people saying to “just” use the latest Ubuntu beta
What? No. Just use the latest LTS.
> I am moderately confident that there is no-one on the planet using Docker seriously AND successfully AND without major hassle.
LOL
> CoreOS is an operating [system] that can only run Docker and is exclusively intended to run Docker.
No, it isn't. (Maybe if you substitute "Docker" with "containers.")
> First, the main benefit of Docker is to unify dev and production. Having a separate OS in production only for containers totally ruins this point.
No, it doesn't. Completely the opposite, in fact: Docker makes it possible to not care about OS differences between dev, test, and prod.
> Docker on Debian is major no-go
> Docker is 100% guaranteed suicide on Debian 8 and it’s been since the inception of Docker a few years ago
> Debian froze the kernel to a version that doesn’t support anything Docker needs and the few components that are present are rigged with bugs.
rubs temples It's Linux. It's Debian. You can run any kernel you want. There are plenty of repositories out there with binary kernels, including Debian's own back-ported 4.9 kernel, or you can build one from source. Because, you know, open source. I've run many instances of Jessie on Linode with their 4.8 and 4.9 kernels and it's no problem. Hundreds of companies are running Docker in production on Debian and Debian-derived systems.
> I am not aware of any serious companies than run on Ubuntu.
Just because you are not aware does not mean they do not exist. How about Netflix, Snapchat, Dropbox, Uber, and Tesla for starters?
> I cannot comment on the LTS 16 as I do not use it.
It's been out since last April. If you're serious about this survey, this is a no-brainer.
> I received quite a few comments and unfriendly emails of people saying to “just” use the latest Ubuntu beta
What? No. Just use the latest LTS.
> I am moderately confident that there is no-one on the planet using Docker seriously AND successfully AND without major hassle.
LOL