I use Docker primarily for backend services to containerize applications or for API communications.

The most valuable feature is the simple containerization. I can specify what I need to install in a shell to ensure the application runs. It's a straightforward and easy-to-use feature. I also use it with CI/CD tools, finding it a good solution for integration.

In terms of communication between services, perhaps the configuration within networks between containers could be improved.

I have been working with Docker for about six years.

The stability is excellent. I would rate it ten out of ten.

By using Kubernetes, scalability is simple and can be done without issues.

Some developers might use virtualization solutions like VMware, however, Docker is much better because it is simple.

Overall, the setup is simple.

I consider Docker's pricing to be affordable.

Some developers might consider virtualization solutions like VMware.

I would recommend Docker for a wide range of users, from 50 to five million users, as it is simple to configure. 

I rate the overall solution ten out of ten.

I used Docker to Dockerize Java code. We had a code base, and I needed to create a Docker image from it so that it could be deployed. At the time, we used Docker Compose, which is somewhat similar to Kubernetes.

Docker allows virtualization at a higher level without the need for a host machine. You can have a few libraries in the image, and it will run on any machine, making deployment easier. This approach reduces the number of headaches compared to traditional methods.

Docker provides another level of virtualization where you don't need the host machine. The ability to use an image with the software built into it, rather than just the software, is beneficial. It allows the software to run on various machines without compatibility issues, saving a lot of time.

Docker is a time-tested, proven solution with industry-wide applications. There can be challenges with port mapping, however, that's not related to Docker itself.

I started using Docker when I began my career in cloud computing. It has been approximately five or six years since I last created a Docker image.

Docker is fairly old, and there are existing GitHub repositories for any issues that arise. We can often resolve these issues ourselves through online resources.

Docker is highly scalable. Without the need for physical hardware, you can run multiple images on your server. Previously, only one or two applications could run on a server, but now it can handle hundreds of applications, scaling up or down as needed.

I have never had to contact Docker's support team.

Positive

The initial setup is not difficult, especially with Docker Desktop. It allows you to manage images easily without having to run commands if you prefer not to.

Docker is well-established in the market. Most people in DevOps or IT are familiar with Docker or creating Docker images. It is easy to use.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I work with startups and companies looking to build products from scratch to production. I handle deployments from various teams and use AWS. My experience includes deploying applications, setting up APIs, adding load balancers, and managing traffic. Docker is essential for this work, allowing me to create sandbox environments to run applications. Essentially, Docker helps manage clusters of applications and maintain the cloud environment.

The tool's most valuable feature is its sandbox environment. It makes it very easy to run and test applications without needing configurations, which is the core advantage of containerization. Kubernetes and Helm are helpful as they provide high-level metrics, making tracking the status of all the containers and applications running easier.

One of the challenges I face with Docker is debugging containers within the infrastructure. It can be tricky to debug applications inside containers, which is a common issue among developers. If easier tools or methods were available to debug applications within Docker containers, it would be very beneficial.

I have been working with the product for two to three years. 

I have never contacted support since documentation is available on the issues. The community is huge, and the documentation is pretty good. Additionally, there is information online that I can refer to.

Overall, setting up the Docker environment is quite easy. Many methods exist, such as using Docker Compose and Docker networks to communicate between containers. The main challenge lies in designing the architecture and integrating different frameworks and microservices.

I would rate the ease of setting up the tool at around nine out of ten. The time it takes to deploy depends on the scale of the system. For the early-stage startup I'm currently working with, it doesn't take much time. It's just me handling the deployment. In our early-stage startup, we have a couple of teams with around four to five backend APIs and two front-end services. Deploying these doesn't take much time. My focus is more on minimizing costs due to our lean startup structure.

Using the solution containers saves a lot of time compared to deploying on EC2 instances. It simplifies deployment and greatly reduces the deployment time. So, the internal ROI is quite good, making Docker a very valuable tool for us.

Regarding pricing, we primarily use AWS for our deployments since we have funding for it. We don't spend much on Docker-specific services, just the containerization product. Docker Hub isn't particularly expensive either, so overall, the pricing is pretty reasonable.

I'm a backend engineer and handle major deployments—I'm the only one on the team who does this. I help deploy and configure the product and expose endpoints for other teams. If a service stops working, they contact me to address the issue. I also maintain the deployed environments, including building, testing, and development.

I rate the overall product a ten out of ten. 

Docker focuses on converting applications into containers, which reduces their footprint. It allows running multiple instances of applications in containers, ensuring high availability and scalability. It is beneficial for cost savings and managing demand effectively. Many are shifting to Docker for improved budget management and performance, although not all applications are suitable for Docker. Trying it out is necessary to understand its benefits fully.

Kubernetes is the primary container orchestration tool I use with this solution. Docker provides a complete solution for deploying and managing workloads across multiple nodes. Container orchestration has significantly impacted my workload by automating tasks and streamlining operations. The availability of systems like Kubernetes is crucial for planning and managing complete clusters and computing environments. Every client's needs are different, and not one solution fits all.

As for improving Docker, I would like to see enhancements in its user interface and documentation to make it even more user-friendly and accessible. I believe Docker will expand its scope and reduce limitations to support more applications, both online and offline. For instance, in scenarios like deployments on ships or during upgrades, Docker can continue to offer software services and container-based intelligence. 

I have been using Docket for the last year.

It is scalable product.

The support from Docker has been excellent in my experience. I've never encountered any major issues or challenges with their support.

The setup is quite simple. Containerization makes it easy, requiring minimal lines of code to run Docker instances. The configuration varies based on your specific application needs, but overall, it's straightforward. Once you automate the environment, deploying workloads becomes seamless.

Using Docker provides immense value and benefits. One major advantage is the ability to provision environments quickly, reducing the time needed for setup. Additionally, Docker allows applications to run efficiently on smaller hardware, making it cost-effective in terms of infrastructure. The return on investment with Docker is substantial due to these benefits.

Overall, I would rate the solution ten out of ten.

I recommend using Docker for newer applications and complex ones as well. It's beneficial in bridging the gap between monolithic and serverless platforms, making it easier to scale and manage applications.

The solution would simplify various areas of AI-driven projects. AI is a vast field with different focuses such as generative AI. As AI continues to evolve, it holds the potential to handle more tasks efficiently, which could greatly benefit AI-driven projects.

Instead of building images for underwriting systems, we pull pre-existing standard images. This allows us to quickly set up the necessary environment for development. For example, if I need a database instance, I simply pull the Docker image and create it, rather than going through a full installation and build process. We also leverage these images to create small, stackable components for building solutions. This streamlines our workflow and enhances our ability to upgrade and adapt quickly.

Docker setup itself is a useful thing because Docker itself is running your environment in a separate isolated box. So, it's not that things will be deployed or installed on your local system. Things (as in the development environment) will be separate. 

Then, the development environment can be segregated from the local underlying hardware. Your instances can be separate, or whatever you build, the application itself can be covered in one single Docker image at the end of it. All these things can be done. It saves part of the configuration and installation time of the initial local setup of the development team. 

So whenever I'm developing something, the time required to set up the local environment and the time required to set up other developers' environments will be radically reduced. So that is a great thing that we have.

TL;DR, Docker helps to reduce the time to set up the environment.

Important features for CI/CD workflows:

For CI/CD pipelines, instead of building separate deployable files, we package our solutions as Docker images. This allows us to compose the entire solution using Docker, which improves our deployment process. 

We create Docker images for each build and push them to a registry. These images are then pulled and deployed in our environments, streamlining the entire process.

Docker volumes. When I integrated volumes, I faced challenges. I have not essentially used add volumes to the existing instances. Maybe, I am not familiar with adding volumes to the existing Docker images. That might be a challenge, but it should be fairly straightforward. I'm just not aware of it. So just for me personally, it is a challenge.

Docker has all the major support already. They should publish all the build images of Docker on an open-source resource like Github. They should support all the stuff.

For example, now Docker supplies all these standard images, like database images or whatever image that the standard application is related to. Whenever there is Docker Compose information available on an open-source community project, that image should also be maintained and supported by Docker itself instead of the dev team doing it. Docker should take an interest in building those images and maintaining them for the public community projects that are hosted.

I have been using it for more than four years now. 

There were some issues with Docker images. In the Alpine image, I downloaded the one. There were some packages that you are not able to deploy on specific Docker-based images.

It is not directly a problem with Docker itself, but with the base image that it is starting. Like the Alpine image, the Linux image being used as a base for Docker. That was not compatible and had some package issues, which prevented us from deploying our solution on top of it. All the libraries we had were not going clean on it.

There needs to be a support matrix to identify which Docker base image can support which packages. The package team should tag these things to those base images, indicating which base images are supported. Once they have this matrix, both the package and the Docker base machine should have it.

It is difficult for a developer to understand and see a problem at the end once you develop and deploy. You stumble upon these problems, then you fix them. It takes a lot of time. You need to upgrade, rebuild, and rearrange. That is the only issue I want to clarify.

There should be a mechanism to identify which images should be supported.

Docker is quite stable. I don't see an issue there. I never saw a Docker image going down.

I don't see any issues. At least from my experience, I don't see anything going wrong with an image that I have used.

For stability, I mean it is up and running for a long time without any issues on the Docker side.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

Docker is very good at scaling up applications. There is no problem with scaling. I'd rate it a nine out of ten. It's good. 

In my earlier company, almost the entire team used Docker. The last team I had a year ago had eight members, and we all used Docker images for our development.

There is a good amount of documentation that quite helps. Every question that I had is addressed in the documentation or on the forum. I've got all the answers I needed. 

I didn't have a chance to raise a specific issue or interact with support directly. Everything is documented, and there's a lot of information available, so I didn't need to raise a support ticket.

The initial setup is quite easy. I don't find it difficult. 

For Windows, it can be a bit confusing, but for Linux, it is quite easy. Both Linux and Mac can do it very easily. However, for Windows, I did face some challenges, it doesn't work as smoothly on Windows.

For Linux and Mac, I would rate my experience with the initial setup as a nine out of ten, with ten being easy. For Windows, I'd give it around six to seven.

• Deployment model: Mostly, everything is on-premises only. We have not used anything on the public cloud.

• Deployment time: That depends upon the application setup and the dependencies. Generally, Docker itself does not take much time. It’s purely based on the application and its dependencies. So, it should not take more than a few minutes. Two minutes, maybe a maximum of sixty seconds. It's quite fast.

ROI is there in terms of efficiency. Adding the development time setup or the build time required is quite easy, and we always eliminate the environmental differences between one environment and another. 

For example, the underlying machine can have anything, and the developer can have anything, but still be able to run the application or whatever is being developed. It eliminates issues with the underlying hardware or operating system.

The offering and service are quite free. We have used only the free instance, and we are also on-premises only. So there's nothing that we have had to pay for.

Docker is the most prominent one. I didn't see any other choice there. But after Docker, Kubernetes started kicking in, and we are using some Kubernetes as well. However, we still use Docker images. 

Docker and Kubernetes are not parallel but complementary. We are ramping up with Kubernetes and understand how we can orchestrate it. 

It is a quite mature technology. People can simply use the existing features available, which will really help their development and make it much easier. Definitely, it will have all these benefits built along with it.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

When we are developing an application, we try various libraries. It is better to isolate one application from the other because if they install one library and then it doesn't work on the other end or while using a driver, then it doesn't work on the other driver. There is always this conflict that is bothering us, and that is where Docker separates containers to build applications.

Docker is a useful tool that we just implement and use directly.

It is a perfect solution for me stability-wise. Owing to a few shortcomings in its stability, I would say that its stability can be improved. It is important to note that I am not an expert to speak about what needs improvement.

In the future releases of Docker, we should be able to isolate a couple of applications. It should also be possible to isolate an environment.

I have been using Docker for one or two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have a couple of users in our organization using Docker since it's just a test system right now.

We don't have plans to increase usage.

We haven't contacted the technical support of Docker. We did search for the details of Docker's support team on Google.

We have used the virtual machine named VMware previously. We switched to Docker because VMware was very clumsy when we tried to build a lot of virtual machines using it. VMware is best suitable as a business solution.

The initial setup of the complete environment is complex, but Docker is easy to set up.

If you want to set up a complete environment, it will take a week, depending on the applications.

We don't do the deployment since we only look into the PoC phase. The company we work with does the deployment, and then they worry about the environment, infrastructure, and other things.

We do the deployment by ourselves because we need to test or develop some applications and do the PoC phase.

Docker is perfect for what I do, though it is really limited as a tool.

Overall. I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use Docker to build, run, and ship any application.

The solution's most valuable feature is container registry interface.

They should provide proper documentation to understand the solution's cgroup and other processes.

The solution is stable. Although, it consumes a lot of battery and RAM to create virtualization on macOS.

We have ten solution users in our organization. Its scalability for multiple VMs needs improvement.

The solution's customer service is good.

Positive

We were using VMware as well. In comparison, Docker is easy to use, consumes fewer resources, and takes less time to complete the process.

The solution's initial setup process is easy. It takes less than an hour and requires one person to execute. Also, it is easy to maintain because we can see logs.

I use the solution's open-source version.

I advise others to use JPT to create docker images. They should know the basic process for it. I rate the solution a ten.