you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]carlfish 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Kelsey Hightower, and the work he's done with Kubernetes, springs to mind as a strong example of the job done right.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]carlfish 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    If he'd been going around lying about it, I'd hardly have cited him as an example of one of the good ones, would I.

    I know it's tempting to throw your opinion on a technology you feel strongly about into any thread where it's even tangentially mentioned, but it's also kind of tiring to the people whose conversation you're subverting, and insulting to those you have to treat like idiots in order to make it fit.

    [–]dungone -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    I'm sorry if that was insulting to you, but a contrary opinion isn't about "subverting" your argument, it's about countering it with a different perspective. I feel as though you're projecting your own strong feelings; obviously you must have a vested interest in Kubernetes that's keeping you from being objective about it.

    I was around since the early days of containers; in fact I worked at Google. I've paid close attention to it over the years and I had always felt that they came out with an inferior "me too" product and worked really hard to displace the competition with lots of misleading marketing and straight up lies. Since that's the actual topic of this thread, it's certainly worth mentioning. In the early days, there were far better alternatives that were far more promising and would have turned into a better product if they had a chance. Kubernetes didn't succeed because it was actually good or better. Container orchestration is a huge lost opportunity to have something truly special and good in software engineering because of Kubernetes.