KuberDock and Docker Blog

End-of-sale & end-of-life announcement for KuberDock

End-of-sale & end-of-life announcement for KuberDock

We at CloudLinux strive to provide our partners and customers with the most valuable and dependable solutions available. Unfortunately, at this time, we have decided to end sales and support for one of our products, KuberDock. After an extensive research, speaking with our customers, and re-evaluating the technology and the market, we have decided that additional investment into KuberDock’s development is not viable.

The decision to discontinue KuberDock did not come lightly and was based on several factors. Docker technologies still show significant momentum, but despite this high potential, its adoption in the hosting industry was considerably lower than expected. Prepackaged Docker applications have not proven to be easily understood and consumed by the typical end-user. We have seen this across all of our KuberDock customers - marketing new applications to their customers proved to be a much more difficult task given the state of this mature and competitive industry. We understand that you have invested resources in offering KuberDock-based solutions, and we apologize for this inconvenience.

Please note important dates for this EOS/EOL process:

Technical Support:

In order to help you manage the end-of-life transition, we will continue full 24x7 support of KuberDock until January 31st, 2017. After that date, and for the next three months until April 30th, we will provide limited support with response times of up to 2 business days.

Sales and Ordering:

As of Thursday, January 26th 2017, KuberDock will no longer be offered for sale. The ability to try and/or purchase it will be removed from our website and the CLN shortly. 

Software Development:

We are stopping the development of the KuberDock platform effective immediately. The product is now free for the current KuberDock customers and can be used indefinitely (without support beyond the next 3 months). We are tentatively planning to make the platform available on GitHub as an Open Source solution sometime in February. All our KuberDock developers will be transitioned to various teams to continue improvement of our flagship products, CloudLinux OS and KernelCare, as well as rapidly expand the development of the new Imunify360.

Again, we apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused you, but we hope you understand why we had to come to this difficult but necessary decision. Please feel free to contact us at sales [at] cloudlinux.com with any questions you may have.

Sincerely,
Igor Seletskiy
CloudLinux CEO

Topic: KuberDock & Docker Blog

20108 people viewed this

Comments (26)

 
by Guest - János / Thursday, 26 January 2017 18:02

Hi,

Did you planning to convert this panel for general VPS (LXC, KVM, etc) panel? Maybe thats a bigger market.

Hi, Did you planning to convert this panel for general VPS (LXC, KVM, etc) panel? Maybe thats a bigger market.
by Igor Seletskiy / Thursday, 26 January 2017 21:54

No. We believe there are already good solutions for that on the market. Instead we will channel our focus into improving CloudLinux and Imunify360

No. We believe there are already good solutions for that on the market. Instead we will channel our focus into improving CloudLinux and Imunify360
by Guest - leon / Thursday, 26 January 2017 19:17

That's a shame really i was going to try it but was put of by the price of it, you should keep it going but drop the price right down. That way people will take it up.

That's a shame really i was going to try it but was put of by the price of it, you should keep it going but drop the price right down. That way people will take it up.
by Igor Seletskiy / Thursday, 26 January 2017 21:53

We had enough direct customers. The problem was that our customers couldn't attract customers to use the platform. We did evaluate the possibility to change pricing, but we didn't think it would change aforementioned problem.

We had enough direct customers. The problem was that our customers couldn't attract customers to use the platform. We did evaluate the possibility to change pricing, but we didn't think it would change aforementioned problem.
by Guest - Erno Rasanen / Friday, 27 January 2017 09:35

This is really an shame. I selected KuberDock for us simply because I had outstanding support from you guys earlier with CloudLinux.

As I understood you're going to make KuberDock open source which means that we might be able to continue with it. However, if any one has any ideas of similar platforms for hosting providers, I would be more than eager to know. Having commercial support behind product is big plus.

In mind of new business ideas like Docker hosting, we're always very patient. Nothing good ever happens in a snap.

This is really an shame. I selected KuberDock for us simply because I had outstanding support from you guys earlier with CloudLinux. As I understood you're going to make KuberDock open source which means that we might be able to continue with it. However, if any one has any ideas of similar platforms for hosting providers, I would be more than eager to know. Having commercial support behind product is big plus. In mind of new business ideas like Docker hosting, we're always very patient. Nothing good ever happens in a snap.
by Igor Seletskiy / Friday, 27 January 2017 13:07

We decided to stop KuberDock because we felt that our customers cannot gain their own customer. There was just no traction - and we felt we don't want to get more and more hosts down the road where they will face it.
Our product wasn't that well positioned for pure docker hosting. Docker, Amazon, Google, etc... all much better positioned for that.
Even OnApp platform, in my opinion, is better positioned for pure docker or pure kubernetes hosting. They recently rolled out support for k8s & docker which is much more native then what we were doing.
We wanted to target packaged applications hosting using docker ... and we realized there is no market for that.

We decided to stop KuberDock because we felt that our customers cannot gain their own customer. There was just no traction - and we felt we don't want to get more and more hosts down the road where they will face it. Our product wasn't that well positioned for pure docker hosting. Docker, Amazon, Google, etc... all much better positioned for that. Even OnApp platform, in my opinion, is better positioned for pure docker or pure kubernetes hosting. They recently rolled out support for k8s & docker which is much more native then what we were doing. We wanted to target packaged applications hosting using docker ... and we realized there is no market for that.
by Guest - Erno Rasanen / Friday, 27 January 2017 13:29

Igor, my hat rises for you honesty.

It is fact that if people are looking for simple installation of apps, Installatron and Softaculous do their job very well. One option for us is to start marketing those as alternative for Docker. For nerds, Docker still is the way to go as they want to do simple things hard way - but still easier than managing their own VPS's. :-)

Igor, my hat rises for you honesty. It is fact that if people are looking for simple installation of apps, Installatron and Softaculous do their job very well. One option for us is to start marketing those as alternative for Docker. For nerds, Docker still is the way to go as they want to do simple things hard way - but still easier than managing their own VPS's. :-)
by Guest - Nazar Hotsa / Friday, 27 January 2017 18:23

Any plans to release the code as open source?

Any plans to release the code as open source?
by Igor Seletskiy / Friday, 27 January 2017 18:28

Yes, we are planning to rip out license checking code and release it to github as GPL2 or GPL3.
This should be done within next two weeks.

Yes, we are planning to rip out license checking code and release it to github as GPL2 or GPL3. This should be done within next two weeks.
by Guest - Nazar Hotsa / Friday, 27 January 2017 18:41

That's actually very cool. Appreciate your decision.

That's actually very cool. Appreciate your decision.
by Guest - S Stewart / Friday, 27 January 2017 23:53

Have you considered the MIT license also?

Have you considered the MIT license also?
by Igor Seletskiy / Saturday, 28 January 2017 15:45

Yes, we did consider MIT & BSD licenses, but we decided to go with the more copyleft license. It sounds more 'right' -- though I don't know why. Feel free to voice the reasons behind going with MIT license instead.

Yes, we did consider MIT & BSD licenses, but we decided to go with the more copyleft license. It sounds more 'right' -- though I don't know why. Feel free to voice the reasons behind going with MIT license instead.
by Guest - Sam Supportlobby / Sunday, 29 January 2017 02:18

I was excited about this product and did talk to many of our customers about it. I truly believe that you can come up with something to work it around .

I was excited about this product and did talk to many of our customers about it. I truly believe that you can come up with something to work it around .
by Guest - Sergio / Tuesday, 31 January 2017 20:42

Can you provide Docker hosting inside cPanel server with CloudLinux? (Like Plesk). I think that will be great!

Can you provide Docker hosting inside cPanel server with CloudLinux? (Like Plesk). I think that will be great!
by Igor Seletskiy / Tuesday, 31 January 2017 22:49

At this moment I am not sure there is a mrket for that.
Can you explain some of the use cases? How would customer use it? How would you charge for it?

At this moment I am not sure there is a mrket for that. Can you explain some of the use cases? How would customer use it? How would you charge for it?
by Guest - Richard / Wednesday, 08 February 2017 19:29

We were looking forward to providing multiple mysql/postgre versions, with private cache etc as well as mongodb, beanstalkd, solr etc. No need to have them on a remote server though, just automatic setup, updates and virtual user network security.

Most of our current customers dont' request these, but some do and we believed that there could be a market for it. However I do agree, I wasn't sure about charging extra for these services but more including them, making our hosting appeal more to developpers.

Ruby, Python, and the future Nodejs selector will help for this but will not help for adding multiple mysql versions or services like beanstalkd, elastic search or mattermost. We would love to be able to have app capability inside the cPanel user's CPU limits.

We were looking forward to providing multiple mysql/postgre versions, with private cache etc as well as mongodb, beanstalkd, solr etc. No need to have them on a remote server though, just automatic setup, updates and virtual user network security. Most of our current customers dont' request these, but some do and we believed that there could be a market for it. However I do agree, I wasn't sure about charging extra for these services but more including them, making our hosting appeal more to developpers. Ruby, Python, and the future Nodejs selector will help for this but will not help for adding multiple mysql versions or services like beanstalkd, elastic search or mattermost. We would love to be able to have app capability inside the cPanel user's CPU limits.
by Guest - Sergio / Wednesday, 08 February 2017 19:39

Yes, that's what I meant.

Yes, that's what I meant.
by Igor Seletskiy / Wednesday, 08 February 2017 21:55

The question is -- what kind of UI is needed for the end user to manage that.

The question is -- what kind of UI is needed for the end user to manage that.
by Guest - Richard / Thursday, 09 February 2017 13:44

That's a good question. How to make it simple and yet have enough options to make it usable.

In a similar way to what kuberdock did there could be a list of programs in cPanel (not necessaraly PHP applications, maybe only applications that users can't run on shared hosting…). Some applications like for example Mattermost could have an option to choose a URL, others like mysql might not need any options and just provide credentials when installed.

If it is technicaly possible it would be good if the application could run inside the user's container limits and sore user configurable files on that user's account…

We would gladly pay an annulal licence on a per server basis for this. We would not charge our customers more for it and would include it in our existing hosting plans. It would be a bit like offering Ruby / Python / Nodejs selector.

This would allow us to keep most customers satisfied on shared hosting an remove the need to have a VPS for specifiy software.




That's a good question. How to make it simple and yet have enough options to make it usable. In a similar way to what kuberdock did there could be a list of programs in cPanel (not necessaraly PHP applications, maybe only applications that users can't run on shared hosting…). Some applications like for example Mattermost could have an option to choose a URL, others like mysql might not need any options and just provide credentials when installed. If it is technicaly possible it would be good if the application could run inside the user's container limits and sore user configurable files on that user's account… We would gladly pay an annulal licence on a per server basis for this. We would not charge our customers more for it and would include it in our existing hosting plans. It would be a bit like offering Ruby / Python / Nodejs selector. This would allow us to keep most customers satisfied on shared hosting an remove the need to have a VPS for specifiy software.
by Guest - Sergio / Thursday, 09 February 2017 13:53

https://docs.plesk.com/en-US/onyx/administrator-guide/web-hosting/using-docker.75823/

https://docs.plesk.com/en-US/onyx/administrator-guide/web-hosting/using-docker.75823/
1 2

Leave your comment

Guest, Wednesday, 18 October 2017

Captcha Image