Containers are lovely, in case you haven't heard. They are a nice and clean way to get a reliable and guaranteed deployment, no matter the host system. I don't have any concerns that it won't run. It'll run, and run well. Containers are happening and you should be looking hard at them for your deployments. Historically on Windows, however, Linux Containers run inside a Hyper-V virtual machine. This can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what your goals are. This is nice for Servers but less so for my laptop. With the latest version of Windows 10 or 10 Server and the beta of Docker for Windows, there's native Linux Container support on Windows. That means there's no Virtual Machine or Hyper-V involved unless you wantso Linux Containers run on Windows itself using Windows 10's built in container support. The word on the street is that this is just a point in time thing, and that Docker will at some point support running Linux and Windows Containers in parallel. That's pretty sweet because it opens up all kinds of cool hybrid scenarios. I could run a Windows Server container with an. I could then put them all up into Kubernetes in Azure, for example. Once I've turned Linux Containers on Windows on within Docker, everything just works and has one less moving part. I can easily and quickly run busybox or real Ubuntu although : More useful even is to run the Azure Command Line with no install. I can even run nyancat. Sponsor: Why miss out on version controlling your database. Also, by definition, a container is an isolated group of processes, running on top of the host kernel. I installed the Edge Release of Docker for Windows and enabled this new feature but it still pops up with a message if I do not have Hyper-V enabled. Is there something I am missing. Serious point, I could switch to HyperV for everything if Microsoft would update the HyperV Linux video driver so that it supports resolutions higher than 1080p. Docker windows image on linux HyperV unless it's changed in the last 12 months I need to edit a config file and then only gain support for relatively low resolutions. I think both those two also support screen scaling, i. That would also be an acceptable compromise and actually more useful in some cases. Great blog as usual : Greetings to dark matter developers. I have honestly not collected enough reasons to start working in docker yet. But do you see my wording. docker windows image on linux Is something wrong with me. I feel like docker might be response to some of my deep concernes, and I feel like it is a future for me and our team, but I am not able to advocate the added complexity for me now. And I am patiently waiting. You have my trust even though I plan to stay behind a bit. I'm guessing when running a Linux container, it's running each container inside its own shim. I use virtualbox for work all the time, and they don't work together at all. I really don't care for this type of optimization on a dev box, I just need them to run. Richard Vondráček I too would like a compelling reason to use docker or any container on Azure. I really can't see it. With Docker I need to maintain my images, I need to deploy to a docker image store and then maintain it. So, I wonder if this is still yet possible with Server 1709. I like the idea of docker containers in general. Haven't explored it that in depth yet ; but I like less pain, less overhead. Reading some responses, looks like there is a Hyper-V requirement there, but I disagree they do not work together. I, too, have used VirtualBox, and it does work well enough. I've even hosted a Hyper-V image on VirtualBox before one one contract I was on, troubleshooting the disk image locally. You can paint yourself in a corner if you choose more proprietary disk image types, but if you stick with the commonly known image types, you're fine. Choose the best path that meets your needs.
