I've been using CoreOS & Docker for about 3 months now in production (stable channel on AWS). At the moment I have a "cluster" of 2 machines on AWS and 1 simple CI server on DigitalOcean, also on CoreOS & Docker. It wasn't easy for me to get used to "the docker way" of doing things, but I think I'm quite fluent in using Docker & building containers now. Setting up everything is very easy & productive, they have a great documentation (example: <a href="https://coreos.com/docs/running-coreos/cloud-providers/ec2/" rel="nofollow">https://coreos.com/docs/running-coreos/cloud-providers/ec2/</a>). If you're interested, you can setup a test VMs using Vagrant, this takes like 5 minutes: <a href="https://coreos.com/docs/running-coreos/platforms/vagrant/" rel="nofollow">https://coreos.com/docs/running-coreos/platforms/vagrant/</a><p>However, I don't really feel comfortable with Docker security and I will probably switch to rkt - more focus on security and better approach to containers imo. CoreOS is incredibly good product, these people see the future. Full disclosure: I'm very happy user of CoreOS products.
The title is slightly misleading but not entirely. Docker was, at first, a container technology. However, after it received its funding it has tried to convince the community and investors that it can be more and started to provide container orchestration tools, i.e Swarm, Machine and so on. Docker has received most of its momentum and attention because of the work they did around the container format. Docker build, run, stop, encapsulates most users experience of Docker.<p>Docker wants to be known as a platform providing container management tools and it needs to do this quickly because Mesosphere and Kubernetes provide this type of functionality at a more mature level, albeit using somewhat different philosophies. The container format part of Docker is ultimately replaceable.<p>Google (Ventures) backing Tectonic is significant because Tectonic will provide a commercial enterprise-ready distribution of Kubernetes supporting Rocket. Rocket doesn't need to reach feature-parity with Docker to be a notable replacement because Docker already does too much. All Rocket needs to do is provide the much needed enterprise features that Docker is lacking and integrate well with Mesosphere or Kubernetes. If this happens before Swarm and Machine mature, we could be wondering 6 months down the road what the hype around Docker was all about.<p>If Tectonic succeeds in the enterprise marketplace then Google will have stealthily marginalised Docker using community efforts through rkt and kubernetes and not had to fight them directly.
Does the article read like a smoke screen, designed to push a specific agenda? Given that Kubernetes supports Docker too?<p>I love Rocket and Docker, but I don't love misleading sensationalism in tech reporting. Maybe my mistake is thinking of wired as tech reporting?
Headline: Google backs alternative to AngularJS, the web's Last Next Big Thing. Google reveals the entire AngularJS project is a ruse designed to ruin countless weekends of aspiring web dev's! No backward compatibility, no human-readable documentation and no implementation of their own technology in their own core product line! In fact, Google states, AngularJS is their first experiment with using their "considerable weight" to trick engineers into learning a technology which is completely useless and unsupported in the long run.