This looks more like an advertisement than a useful blog post.
Also:
> Consider also that Docker relies on Linux kernel-specific features to implement containers, so users of macOS, Windows, FreeBSD, and other operating systems still need a virtualization layer.
First, FreeBSD has its own native form of containers and Windows has its own native implementation. Docker != containers.
I really don't see how Docker (or containers as we mostly know them) relying on kernel-features from an open source operating system in order to run Linux OS images as something to even complain about, and there is nothing preventing Mac from implementing their own form of containers.
Also:
> Consider also that Docker relies on Linux kernel-specific features to implement containers, so users of macOS, Windows, FreeBSD, and other operating systems still need a virtualization layer.
First, FreeBSD has its own native form of containers and Windows has its own native implementation. Docker != containers.
I really don't see how Docker (or containers as we mostly know them) relying on kernel-features from an open source operating system in order to run Linux OS images as something to even complain about, and there is nothing preventing Mac from implementing their own form of containers.