VMware | Senior Software Engineer - vSAN (Distributed Software Defined Storage System) Backend | Palo Alto, CA | Bay Area, CA | Boston, MA | Full-Time | Onsite
You will be a member of the core development team and will work with architects, product management teams and other stakeholders across different business units spread over multiple geographical locations.
* Would like to work on a hyper growth product within VMware (Also VMware is leading the charge on hybrid cloud initiatives)
* Would like to work at an engineer driven company -- I constantly nudge my team to pursue advanced development opportunities and participate in research tech talks within the company
Lots of examples of how these ideas turning into product and features (and patents).
* Love to solve hard distributed systems (+ systems management) problems
If you're interested, shoot me an email: araghuna@vmware.com
Except that VMware never open sourced VMkernel. That massively contributed to the lack of feature parity between VMware and Microsoft (I'd say VMware was 1-2 years ahead of MSFT). That helps you secure the market in the early years, and what you see as the valuation. Docker Inc is not similar to VMware in that regard.
If by everyone you meant UNIX-derived OSes, it's arguable that they all had containers in one form or another with the exception of Linux which only changed when cgroups [0] were added to the v2.6.24 kernel ~10years ago.
I think that addition to Linux paved the way for containers to enjoy wider adoption than was previously possible with other less popular container tech in OSes like Solaris (zones) or BSD (jails).
Only three (of many) Unix-like families have containers, and while Linux was last "to the punch" the others only had them for a few years more. FreeBSD Jails were ready by 2000[1], Solaris Zones were released in 2005[2], and cgroups were merged in 2007. But OpenVZ's containers technology had already existed since 2005, and I would argue that most of the modern Linux "container" infrastructure came from their experiences (plus that of Google). To be fair, cgroups were nowhere near good enough and it took another few years for namespaces to become good enough to be considered "containers".
But my general point is that people talk about Linux as being out-of-touch when it comes to the history of containers, but if you look at the timeline that simply isn't true.
I'd argue that the key shift (in terms of e.g. configuration management) was from pet to cattle VMs. Application containers are mostly "cattle containers".
