I have run docker in production at past employers, and am getting ready to do so again at my current employer. However I don't run it as a native install on bare metal. I prefer to let a cloud provider such as Google deal with the infrastructure issues, and use a more mature orchestration platform (kubernetes). The author's complaints are valid, and the Docker team needs to do a better job on these issues. Personally I am going to be taking a close look at rkt and other technologies as they come along. Docker blew this technology open by making it more approachable but there is no reason to think they are going to own it. It's more like databases than operating systems.
I'm trying to get started with rkt right now but it's (understandable) lack of maturity is a bit daunting, I think some usability issues need to be handled / offloaded to some other tools. And acbuild severly needs caching built in.
Disclaimer, new to containers, if it sounds like I'm doing something wrong let me know, it certainly feels like I'm missing something right now.
You'll see a maturity in this space after the Open Containers Initiative standardizes the container image format. Then, developers can focus on UX improvements rather than worrying about what the build tool should even be producing.
Reliance on initiatives and standards bodies to provide a guidance for maturity, at least in recent years, is a fools errand. They usually end up rubber stamping what's been the norm and work back from there.
If you are looking at rkt, if you have time, take a look at Kurma (open-source too). Kurma was built using the same specification rkt was built from. Here is the getting started guide: http://kurma.io/documentation/kurmad-quick-start/ What I like of kurma is that I can simply run docker images from the hub, no need to download, convert, etc.
Disclaimer: I am an Apcera employee and Kurma is an open-source project sponsored by Apcera
