- DS1019+ : DS216+II : DS118 : DS120j : APC Back UPS ES 700 — Mac/iOS user
I agree with this, but as you edited, later on, this is something that is open source and self-hosted. Also, with docker running platforms, I can move bare metal appliances as much as I want and I'm still not locked in with a specific app/"brand".Starting to use another 3rd party app feels kind of counter-intuitive
Maybe I should first look into Docker a bit deeper then, because I absolutely do not like it! But I am the first to admit that is 100% because I totally don't understand it and couldn't get anything to work on it. Seeing its popularity it MUST be good, it's just my lack of understanding that makes it unpopular with me.So yes, Docker all the way, and use DSM to a minimum, that's my current mind set atm.
Just open a topic on the matter (or app that you wanna run) and we will make it run .t's just my lack of understanding that makes it unpopular with me.
I agree. But, a logical move from Synology regarding their DEV management for both platforms.The only thing I ever used with Docker was DockerDSM before Synology killed that. I liked it better than VirtualDSM because it shared resources with the host rather than reserving resources you might never use.
Nope. For them, they are going forward just in the form of VMM support for DSM. This way they can focus all efforts for multi-tenant DSM scenarios only via VMM side and not Docker as well. Also, with DSM running via Docker, you would have to update that DDSM instance as soon as your would the host DSM. With VDSM this is not the case. So in DDSM they would have to be sure to get it out the door as soon as DSM bare-metal version is ready. With VDSM they don't have to.Isn’t that going backward!