The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010 ----- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010 ----- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
Just don't do what one of our vendors recently did: containerise an application that by definition had to run on a single server. Talk about "ooooh, shiny!". So now, that server runs one application plus docker to contain it. Same vendor must have a senior app architect addicted to coder newz. In the last two years what used to be a solid Windows server platform app built with C++ and .NET has added to their integrated app suite ... a module in Java that has to run on Windows, a module in Node.js that has to run on Ubuntu, two web apps and a module in a Docker container that is only supported on CentOS/RedHat. If only we could change vendors...
Don't use the term "virtual machine" when close to Docker people, unless you are eager to listen to a 45 minute intense talk that Docker is NOT, I repeat: NOT virualization!
Virtualization is evil, Docker is good! And Docker isn't even "lightweight" virtualization. It is useless trying to discuss definitions of "virtualization" with Docker guys, or trying to compare the Docker way of providing isolation with a hypothetical minmal VM providing exactly those functions that your application needs while still being a VM (for the purpose of learning the details of what is so evil about virtualization). It is no use. The answer is given: VMs are evil, by definition.
On the more serious side:
Yes, the Docker demon is managed by a Linux kernel even in the Windows implemnentation.
This is not a Linux virtual machine. On Windows 10, the Docker demon runs inside a Hyper-V VM (so it requires a 64 bit CPU with Extended Page Tables. (On Server 2016 the implementation is somewhat different, and does not use Hyper-V.)
You can run Linux docker images in a Windows implementation; the Linux kernel functions are executed by the same kernel that runs the demon. You can obviously also run Windows docker images on Windows, but currently, the demon is in either Linux or Windows mode; it cannot run both flavors side by side. (I have seen rumours that this is being worked on, and will be possible in a future release.) The Linux implementation cannot run Windows images.
Docker is essentially suited for backend services: Until you start doing fancy tricks, a container's only interface to the world outside the Docker demon is one or more TCP ports, or for persistent data: Mapping (parts of) an external file system as a Docker volume.
There are two main alternatives for providing some sort of user interface: Either the container runs a web server, or you hook up a SSH console to it. In principle, I guess you could run e.g. an X.11 client in a Docker contiainer to give it a GUI interface; I doubt that anyone has seriously done anything like that.
I guess that Docker is as suitable for web servers running on a Windows host as for web servers running on a Linux host. But applications running a Windows GUI of any kind cannot be adapted to Docker. Nor can any application that requires user interaction for installation, installation must be pure command-line based, with all parameters supplied either on the call line or in a setup/ini-file.
When used for what it is good at, Docker is OK. Streching it to do "everything", being a complete replacement for traditional software design, installation and running, you should be prepared for some pains, in particular in environments where users prefer a highly functional GUI (like in high-quality native Windows applications).