Mirantis Container Cloud Reviews

We use Docker for the construction of container-based QA environments and the development environments as well.

On Selenium containers, we had about 550 test cases that we ran across 17 browsers and OS combinations. We could have run this on any of the third party products, but what we're able to do is done using Docker containers.

We were able to run a different operating system and browser combination on a single machine of 8 GB. We were able to run all the 550 test cases simultaneously on 16 OS and browser combinations just in the testing.

The required time was around five days for five test cases. With Docker, we were able to reduce it to two days.

The main Docker feature is the repository where you can store images.T he image is available and you can read parts of those images. You can use it for your local development and QAs. That's the most basic Docker basic feature. 

Secondly, we like the footprint that Docker requires to construct an environment. 

The third most important aspect is maintenance. You won't have to rely on third-party support. If you have the full environment control, you will be able to maintain Docker containers on your own. Or you can just destroy them and construct a new container, i.e. add them when you want to, ephemeral and mutable objects.

You need to be aware of the complete networking aspects of Docker across walled communications. That is something that you can simplify. For a developer, it is easy to understand if you have networking knowledge. 

If you are just a developer without networking knowledge, it's very difficult to understand how to communicate across walls using containers. Especially if you're in a call data center. That's the one aspect which I find very difficult.

I'm a coder. I've wanted to see an easy way to integrate seamlessly with other systems. For example, Jenkins has a Docker plugin. If you were to write an integration, you need to explicitly write code, especially for customizations. It's not easy to integrate unless you are a coder. 

If Docker can create some kind of workflow in generic fields, i.e. things that we can integrate with other out of the box tools, that would be great. OpenShift is an alternative to Kubernetes. 

I find Docker easier to use, but I gave it to an inexperienced developer and it took him a lot of time to understand.

Scalability with Docker is another aspect of adoption. Although we are using OpenShift and Kubernetes sparingly, I think we're able to achieve more with Docker. The developers can scale.

Beyond that, Docker requires a lot of discipline and also pushing cultural change. It is technical in that you need to educate people about it. In terms of scale, I find the scalability more of a culture and discipline issue in our environment, rather than a technical issue. 

There are three types of people who are using Docker:

• The developers (those include QA as well), i.e. scrum teams.
• The business analysts.
• The product owners.

We have product roles: an implementation team and the architects. Those are the types of people who are using the Docker solution.

For every 30 people, we have around three people supporting the pipeline. This makes sure that the Docker files are up to date. They're the gold standard. If we are using Docker Compose, Docker Compose will supply it. 

We use Docker a lot. With any required file, they just need to make sure that the changes are up to date and there are no conflicts. 

We started with one team. Now able to scale it. In the current project, we started eight months back. We started with a six-member team. Now, there are eight plus 64 members using this platform. 

We have plans to increase usage to 3000 developers.

It's tough. We're not there yet for the Docker technical support. Docker's technical support is a struggling area. We're still not able to progress in that area.

We were not using a different solution. We were using the VM-based solution from VMware in the data center for pipelines and Jenkins pipelines without container-based environments. 

Those are VM-based and the footprint is high. They're not maintainable. We need to rely on somebody else to maintain those environments. 

They are not self-contained or self-sufficient environments. That's the reason why we switched out to container-based solutions.

The setup of Docker was very straightforward. Maybe for a beginner, it may be difficult. If you are in a Windows 7 environment, it's very difficult. Some of our systems are in Windows 7. As soon as we ran Windows 10, it was easy. If Docker was run on Linux, Mac, or any Unix product, it was pretty straightforward.

The entire pipeline is for eight teams. If you're pushing all the way through, it takes about four and a half hours including the test execution. There are around 100 test cases, including the unit tests, that need to be done for a simple change. That was taking about three days.

We were able to push through in four and a half hours by including NetWare. For our implementation strategy, we used a Docker-based continuous integration/continuous delivery pipeline.

What is demonstrated on the laptop with Docker, we have full control of in the data center. When you translate to implementation, half the things don't work. 

In spite of the expertise, that's the problem with SIs, i.e. the promises versus what is delivered. That's one aspect that we're still struggling.

Docker is fairly stable because you just carry the artifacts, but in DEV it is highly unstable. There's a lot of discipline that we need to enforce on the developers. 

On the deployment front, we saved about six developers worth of effort for every 64 people. Six developers worth of effort for two months in a six-month project of 64 people. That's the ROI that we easily got once we stabilized.

We did not evaluate other options because the only one that we knew was Docker.

I recommend using Docker. The most important thing is that you review your internal capability building before using this product. 

• Look at what kind of skill sets are currently in the organization. 
• Make sure that everybody understands what Docker means before implementing. 
• Up-skill them and make sure that everybody understands why Docker is important in the scheme of things. 

Some organizations may think that Docker doesn't fit their culture. In general, I think that Docker is a good fit for 80% of the organizations that I've seen.

Internal capability building is the other thing that is very important in the setup. You need to make an architectural runway before actually starting to implement Docker Compose, especially in a distributed environment. 

For security aspects, we need to make sure that the security and monitoring for Docker are always in operation. 

I would rate this product a 7.5 out of ten because it solved many of my problems. If you're a developer, it's easy to understand. It is the way a developer should develop and deploy in the current environment, especially in a container-driven world.

What I like most about Docker is that it is straightforward and easy to use, yet powerful. The graphical interface is very user-friendly and reporting is fast and effective.

Sometimes it is difficult to access the quality of information on Docker. I also feel that it is not a 100% secure product and I'd say there is room for improvement in the security area and functionality. I would also like to see more features inside Docker as well as more integration with different solutions.

The solution isn't always that stable.

I believe Docker is scalable.

I like their technical support but I mostly use their external documentation.

The initial setup was really easy and the deployment was fast and straightforward. I did everything myself.

We use the free version of Docker.

I don't use any other software, given that Docker is our solution.

My advice to others is to just do it. It is a no-brainer. I really recommend this solution and on a scale from one to ten, my rating is a nine.

We use the hybrid version of solution with public and on-premises. Our primary use case for Docker is to make it easier for us deploy and maintainon our applications. 

Well dockerized application are much easier to maintain, at a fewer cost.

Manage complex application architecture and installation procedure in simple text files.

Dynamic port association on active containers.

I think the solution is stable enough.

The solution follows scalability of the application it handles. A monolite application will not become scalable as soon as it is dockerized without architecture change. 

Good support, really active community.

Initial setup of docker itself is very simple.

We implement docker y ourself.

We use the free version of this solution.

We did look around for other options but nothing could compare to this solution.

My advice to others would be to start simple. On a scale of one to ten, I will rate Docker a nine. It is a compact, complete solution that performs well.

We use this solution for the virtualization of monolithic apps, providing a better scalable and agile solution.

This solution has improved our organization with the agility, microservices approach, and scalable solutions for distributed systems.

The most valuable features of this solution are scalability and agility. It is easy to manage and deploy.

The orchestration and tracing should be improved.

My experience with Docker is in helping to provide solutions for my clients. Specifically, this involves continuous integration and continuous deployment for my clients' workflow.

We are using Docker for a client that we currently have in India. They are building a solution for the medical industry. Docker is very helpful for taking the code from development and applying it to the end user.

The most important thing that my clients focus on is rapid deployment. In this regard, Docker wins hands-down.

It would be very nice to have a GUI that can be used by any administrator, and not just people who have experience with Docker.

The stability of this solution is perfect. Five stars.

This solution scales very well, and it can be scaled to the entire infrastructure when required.

Three of my clients are currently using Docker, and all of them are involved in software development. One of my clients is in the process of scaling up, moving from ten to one hundred and fifty developers within the next six months.

The documentation for this solution is excellent. So far, all of the problems that I have faced have been solved by looking at the documentation.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The setup was very straightforward. I just followed the documentation on the Docker website, and it went smoothly.

Implementation for the client was not very big. It was eight to ten developers, and it took between one and two days to complete. The most important thing on our end was to get our client's infrastructure up and running with Docker.

One person can handle the deployment and maintenance of this solution.

We implement this solution for our clients using our in-house team.

I am using the community edition, rather than the enterprise edition because I am operating on a very small scale at the moment. The community edition does not require a license and is completely free.

We did not evaluate options other than Docker.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to read the documentation very carefully. That can give a lot of relief when the client needs a solution.

If Docker had a graphical user interface then it would be a perfect solution.

I would rate this solution and eight out of ten.

I use Docker during both development time when I write new applications and for production where we deploy our applications on platforms such as Kubernetes and Mesos.

Now it is easier to set up the development environment and also to test the applications on the pipelines.

The most valuables features are its ease of use and ease in setting up environments.

The solution would benefit in improvements made to the storage, cleaning up information from the disk, and reading logs.

I am using this as a lab costing application. It is pretty fast.

You can easily deploy it in different platforms and cloud providers. You are actually deploying container to container. 

The commissioning is very fast. 

I think this solution needs better security due to rising threats from the outside world. 

The product is stable. 

I am not scaling it very much at this time. I only have about 20 users at present. The roles of the users are information users, managers and middle managers.

The tech support is pretty good. 

It was straightforward for us. 

The pricing and licensing really depends on what your needs are. You could be paying $100 a month to $100,000. It depends on the needs you have from the solution, and the agreement you make.

Our primary use case for this solution is for electronic commerce.

It took us 30% faster to implement the solutions that we used to have with other platforms, and the flexibility has increased by 50%.

The most valuable aspect is the excellent support. In addition, the billing system is really easy to understand.

Sometimes the basic support is a bit difficult if you have a firewall and cloud servers behind the firewall and then try to implement the backup solution, it can be a bit difficult to do by yourself. If you have a Rackspace engineer, it is easier, because they know the procedures, but that service is not cheap. It can be an extra $500 for that extra service, per month. It would be nice to see that cost decrease.

The product is stable. Any problems that we have noticed have been with the customer doing something wrong. For instance, they may have two versions of the application that do not match, which will cause errors. But, we can never blame Rackspace Docker for this. It is an internal problem. 

The scalability is a bit difficult. Rackspace has beautiful tools to make scaling pretty easy. Usually, it is our customer that is afraid to scale too fast. At times, we have to convince our clients to move towards the cloud, because the cloud function is very different from the on premise solutions. Once they understand this, they are eager to jump to the next level. 

We currently have two customers that have 8,000 users connected to the solution. They are in the automotive industry. The users are a combination of sales people, service representatives and executives.  There is a tremendous ability for Docker to support a lot of users.

The customer service is good. 

The setup was very easy, but if you get into something with the backup agent or the API, that is when you may begin to stumble. Sometimes this causes a slower time for implementation and ultimate deployment. 

Our standard procedure is to look at the requirements, set of a pilot, do some testing, and then release the solution. It can take several weeks, and it depends on understanding our customers' needs. We have our own staff who complete the process.

At times, my customers are upset with the cost of the product. Other solutions seems inexpensive, in comparison. But, I tell my customers that once you start putting the solution together, will you realize that it will cost more than Rackspace Docker. 

We looked at VMware and Hyper-V, as well as Amazon. But, we stayed with Rackspace Docker becuas ewe already know that this is doing the best in terms of what it is offering.

My advice is in regards to the security. Many of my customers do not care enough about security, they have a disbelief that once you are in a cloud, you are automatically secure. This sis not the case at all. You need to understand that nothing is guaranteed if you do not follow the right rules. You need proper monitoring tools to keep the work-site safe and secure. It may cost the customer more, but it is worth every penny.

Using Docker for most of the environments that I worked for. As an expert, I am working on different environments each time depending on the customer requirements. Development, staging, pre-production and production, each one of them having at least 25 servers implemented on different solutions sometimes like VMware, AWS, Azure and Oracle Cloud. 

Docker allows me to automate everything for these environments which saves a lot of time to sync the environment with each other and keep them up to date anytime. 

By using Docker and introducing this tool to different organizations, it provides repeatable development, build, test, and production environments, and allows every team member to work in a production parity environment, include to that, app isolation, simplicity, and faster configurations. And the most important benefits for most organizations is continuous deployment and testing.

Different features, but the most valuable is Docker images that allows you to build your own image and upload it to a repository, and use it again anytime. 

Another feature which is Docker scaling using a docker-compose file: It's very simple and easy to use in preventing any human interaction.

The last one is Docker Swarm that manages a cluster of Docker Engines.

• I would love to see if more supported applications could be used under Docker.
• Improving scalability, technical debt, and making it easier to troubleshoot and monitor.
• One last thing which is the performance tuning issue.

Using this solution for a production environment that should be working 24/7 is the biggest proof of stability.

Very easy to use, all you need to have is the basic knowledge with Docker Compose.

Since I've begun using Docker EE, I have full access to Docker's enterprise technical support team. I can manage cases, and view entitlements using the Docker support site.

I started using Docker more than five years ago and before that, LXC (Linux Containers), also Google Kubernetes as I mentioned before. It all depends on the customer requirement and what they want from the application, and which features they will use. 

Depends on the environment and what you need to use. Most of the features have full online documentation with live examples.

We are the vendor, so technically we are providing the solution for the client each time: different client, different requirements and different infrastructure. 

You will notice a big difference for sure. Also, the below link will allow you to calculate the ROI.

https://www.docker.com/roicalc....

For the features and benefits of using Docker, the price is very reasonable, but the licensing is not easy. But to be honest this is a very promising technology, include to that a very fast growing technology. So within the next five years, the licensing will not be an issue. 

Google Kubernetes.

I recommended the tech guys that haven't used it so far, or if their company is still using the transitional infrastructure, they should give it a try. 

The most valuable feature of Docker is by far is creating your own image. By creating your own image, you can have an environment for whatever you are working on that is exactly how you want it.

The idea that you can create a machine this quickly, use it, destroy it if you want, build upon it, take things out, and rebuild very quickly is very useful.

For example, you could add a command that installs a certain tool to your Dockerfile and build that image. Your image now has that tool. If you want to get rid of that tool, you just get rid of the line from the Dockerfile, rebuild the image, and it’s like you never installed that tool.

It gives you a feeling of complete control. By comparison, doing the same thing with something like Vagrant would take a lot of time. With Docker, building an image is so fast that it’s practically disposable.

Docker has allowed me to have pre-defined working environments that can be moved to the cloud and I know they will be exactly the same. Something can be deployed to the cloud, but the overhead of running a virtual machine is wasteful. This is especially the case since on most clouds, an account is already contained by a virtual machine. Running a virtual machine within a virtual machine is possible, but not ideal.

Docker is already aware of how faulty their file system volume mounting technology is on the Mac. I see that they are making improvements in that area, but there is still a long way to go.

On the Mac, Docker is far from perfect. The program has issues communicating with the file system and receiving events. As a result, Docker’s volume features are very slow on the Mac. However, there is a workaround called Docker-sync. Docker sync goes around Docker’s weak volume support on the Mac by syncing files through the network using unison and rsync. Still, I would only give Docker a 10 if their volume experience were as good on the Mac as it is on Linux. I have used this product in a Mac environment as well as Linux.

I have been using Docker since November, 2016. I started using it to see what all the talk was about. The initial learning curve was somewhat steep. What Docker does is simple. However, understanding what Docker does is important and not obvious. That’s why I took Lynda’s course on Docker. This course gave me a good practical understanding of Docker. After understanding the basics, the documentation actually became useful to read.

In my experience, Docker has been very stable.

There have been no scalability issues. As a matter of fact, Docker itself can be used to help you scale up by allowing you to create a new environment quickly when you need more power, or if you want to deliver an instance closer to a customer.

In term of technical support, the Docker community is very helpful and active. There are already a lot of answers to common questions on stack overflow.

I previously used Vagrant. I switched because of Docker’s speed, ease of creating images, and its low overhead.

The initial setup of Docker on the Mac is simple. There is a very friendly GUI installer. If you already have Homebrew installed, you can simply run “brew cask install docker”.

Installing Docker on Linux is a different story, since the versions supported by the default package manager sources are out of date. It’s necessary to follow somewhat lengthy instructions from Docker’s website.

The Docker community edition is free. I don’t have any experience with their paid versions. I have not felt the need to upgrade.

I tried Docker because there was a bit of hype around it. I had been using Vagrant. I did not know about things like LXD before starting to experiment with Docker. If anything, I have learned about alternative container technologies that I might evaluate later.

I think that Docker is the best among its peers. Creating, downloading, uploading, and sharing images is faster than doing the same on something like Vagrant.

When using Docker on the Mac, I only used it to create a local development environment. I also have a Docker installation running in production on a production environment being used as the backend for an iOS app.

I would advise people to take the Lynda course on Docker. In my experience, the documentation only becomes useful after understanding the basics and the general idea.