back to article Windows Server 2016 Preview 3 brings containers at last

The third technical preview of Windows Server 2016 is here, and with it, Microsoft takes another step forward into the much-hyped world of cloud native computing. Most importantly, this build gives us our first look at Windows Server Containers, which were conspicuously absent from the previous build that shipped in May. …

  1. thames

    "a collaboration with Docker to enable the same tools to manage containers on both Windows and Linux."

    If I understand this correctly, it's just that you can use Docker management tools on Windows, not that you can run any of the actual standard Docker container packages. I suppose that makes sense, as Microsoft hasn't done anything that would enable the actual containerised packages run on Windows.

    So, it remains to be seen how many people will bother to make, test, and debug container packages for Windows Server as well as for Linux.

    1. Nate Amsden

      never having used docker (but I do use LXC in limited form) I would of thought the "images" would include the base operating system to some extent? e.g. I wouldn't think someone would try to run a docker image built for ubuntu on a redhat system. Poking around for a couple minutes implies this is the case.

      If so the barrier to making a container for linux and windows is already pretty high since they are of course radically different systems(even though you can run things like apache etc on both). So myself I wouldn't expect a lot of people making images for both, but I could see people making images for windows specific things.

      Not that I have any use for Docker etc.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        While they do have different base operating systems, you weave together the container micro-services. Then it's a matter of selecting which goes where for optimal performance. Personally I'm following CoreOS on the Linux side as that base OS. Naturally enough, unless you have some functionality above and beyond, Nano will be the optimal choice on the Windows side. Both will be available on-site and running Linux on Azure is a done deal. Shielded for both could be a major plus for Microsoft as it becomes "press the button, out pops a banana" simple. Which is actually very nice as security is usually hard.

    2. P. Lee

      >So, it remains to be seen how many people will bother to make, test, and debug container packages for Windows Server as well as for Linux.

      It's probably more for commercial providers - "Runs on AWS, also on Azure and your private cloud."

      It might also be the way MS deploys services in the future.

      It will be interesting to see how the licensing pans out.

      1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

        Intersting point

        It will be interesting to see how the licensing pans out.

        This is the rub. As with everything from MS, the licensing model will make or break this.

        If they want CALS for every connected user via a container as well as CALS for the apps in the container then this is a dead duck but that is probably the worst case scenario.

        What bothers me is their focus on everything running in Azure. Lots of businesses can't (or won't) put their data off site let alone in a nebulus cloud somewhere. If they get his in the pocket for going down this route then they will start to look for alternatives.

        We have seen Server 2003 clinging on for dear life in many places. What is to stop Server 2008-R2 and Server 2012-R2 platforms from carrying on for another 10 years?

        Then there is the USP for using the MS Offering. I don't see one yet. Perhaps it will come but at the moment the alternatives look far more compelling.

        Watch this space?

        1. TheVogon

          Re: Intersting point

          "If they want CALS for every connected user via a container as well as CALS for the apps in the container then this is a dead duck "

          Microsoft would currently want CALs for most connections to a Windows Server. Details of when that's required are here:

          http://blogs.technet.com/b/volume-licensing/archive/2014/03/10/licensing-how-to-when-do-i-need-a-client-access-license-cal.aspx

          This does not of course normally apply in Azure, where the licensing is included in the cost.

    3. TheVogon

      " it's just that you can use Docker management tools on Windows"

      Which are not the greatest. Presumably Microsoft are working on bringing container management into System Centre. So that in future you can manage your hybrid cloud, your VMs and your containers all in one place.

      "not that you can run any of the actual standard Docker container packages."

      Windows Containers are standard Docker containers. Microsoft have been working with Docker to ensure all Microsoft's needs are addressed in a single container format. Docker containers will load and run on Windows Server 2016 if the binaries are Windows compatible.

  2. kryptylomese

    Linux really is the obvious choice for businesses wanting to run applications especially with a container architecture.

    Nano is huge compared with a minimal Linux installation and Linux is far more performant and scales better.

    Honestly, why would a business run Windows servers unless it was so poorly managed that they failed hire skilled administrators because the management team were oblivious to the benefits (or were given a back hander by Microsoft)?

    1. David Austin

      The Right Tool for The Right Job

      They'll be times when Linux is the right tool, other times where WinServer is the more obvious choice, and probably a few where it'll be a mix of the two, and having a unified way to manage them will make your life easier.

      And whichever you pick, you'll have more tools in the arsenal to achieve what you want. Sounds like a Win-Win to me.

    2. phuzz Silver badge
      Gimp

      "why would a business run Windows servers?"

      Because they have applications that only run on Windows? The example I'm thinking of is one of our customers who run Sage .Is there any equivalent software for linux?

      Getting them onto aversion of windows released in the last decade was hard enough, how are we supposed to move them to a whole new OS?

      (We run their websites and associated databases on linux mind you).

    3. TheVogon

      "Nano is huge compared with a minimal Linux installation"

      By huge you mean a few hundred MB of difference at most. That's peanuts in disk space. And if they are using a Windows Server or other modern disk storage with deduplication then it will have almost no disk cost.

      "and Linux is far more performant and scales better"

      Not in this space - Hyper-V scales better than say KVM - and has a proven higher throughput capacity for IOs per VM. Also you can get Hyper-V Server which is a standalone hypervisor version but completely free and with all features, whereas Linux based hypervisor solutions are a bolt-on to the full kernel. Linux focused cloud solutions like Google and Amazon also don't have an out of the box Hybrid Cloud option, whereas Microsoft does. Microsoft's solutions also generally have a lower TCO and are much easier to use and have more capable management tools. Also there are historically far fewer security patches to have to evaluate / install for Hyper-v Server versus any commonly used competing option.

      Hence why KVM has only about 1% of this market, and Hyper-V which has about 30% - behind VMware but catching up fast. See http://www.thomasmaurer.ch/2014/07/hyper-v-is-eating-vmwares-lunch/

  3. Mikel
    Go

    At last Microsoft has invented containers

    Now they can become popular!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: At last Microsoft has invented containers

      Hadn't you heard, they invented virtual desktops in Windows 10 too! Its amazing - you can just click and your windows are magically replaced by other windows! Why hadn't anyone thought of this , say , in the 80s??

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Shielded VMs?

    "Shielded VMs," which further isolate VMs from the underlying host."

    Right. With all the holes appearing in x86 system management mode good luck with that. The only way for any VM to be truly secure is for the whole thing to be encrypted and be decrypted on the fly and only then if the key in memory can be hidden from an attacker.

    1. TheVogon

      Re: Shielded VMs?

      "Right. With all the holes appearing in x86 system management mode good luck with that."

      The processor level one were fixed years ago. System firmware bugs will be patched as they are discovered - and most corporates patch firmware on a regular basis...

      "The only way for any VM to be truly secure is for the whole thing to be encrypted and be decrypted on the fly and only then if the key in memory can be hidden from an attacker."

      No need to do that. Just encrypt / decrypt your data at the client.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like