Along with Docker's efforts, there are others working on container-based storage. This landscape[1] lists Ceph, Gluster, but also Portworx, Minio, Diamanti, Dell EMC's Rex-Ray, and SolidFire. I think also folks like StorageOS and Supergiant and frankly the whole storage & platform industry players are running in this direction.
[1] https://github.com/cncf/landscape
I mapped out the influencer networks for Docker and Kubernetes using the tool Little Bird - you can see here[1] that the Kubernetes network is not dominated by any one subgroup: it's not an ecosystem dominated by anybody (except Google, and not in the same way as most OSS which come out of companies). So don't worry about Heptio in that way -- if anything worry that too many companies are all trying to fix the same problems, and they'll be duplicative and not economically viable.
Those graphs are very hard to read, and don't show things like stdev. It just looks like to me that docker is a much more popular project (200+ people in single groups)
They are groupings off of a network clustering based on Twitter following relationships -- scale questions aside, I think they indicate that Docker has a few tightly-connected clusters (the three big ones are roughly DevOps influencers, Docker employees, and Kubernetes folks) vs Kubernetes, which is more fragmented (if you squint the clusters are Docker, CoreOS, Red Hat, a few Google ones, etc.)
I'll try to publish a more detailed analysis soon. My hypothesis is that the K8s influencer ecosystem is not dominated by any one group or any one company, which is not surprising at this stage.
Many times asking for your salary isn't a nefarious negotiating tactic - it's just to make sure both parties are in the same ballpark. If you're already at $110K and the opening tops out at $80K, there's no reason to waste either party's time.
If that is the real reason, there is nothing keeping them from disclosing the salary range for the position. That way they don't waste anyone's time...
Recruiter here. Good question. In the majority of cases, I would say your approach would be just as effective. However, I prefer asking because:
1) It's about gaining intelligence - not in a nefarious way. If enough candidates at the right experience level are giving me a range of $90K - $100K and the client still won't budge beyond looking at candidates in the $60K - $80K range, I can eventually come back to them and say "Listen: of the last 10 candidates you liked, their salaries were..." A smart, reasonable client will make adjustments.
2) In rare cases: a "rockstar" candidate may be able to get 10% more than the budgeted amount, for example. So I would hate to send you that $80K tops message if there were potential for a perfect match. Then suddenly you're no longer interested and we missed a grand opportunity.
Again, I agree with you for the most part. But ultimately, the recruiter figures: 99% of candidates give their salary number or a tight range, upfront, without issue, so there's no harm in asking for reasons 1 and 2.
None of this makes perfect sense, and reads like just-so stories. On 1), you could just as easily say "of the 10 candidates you liked, 8 of them were still interested given the salary bracket." For 2), you could say "the job pays $X-Y, with flexibility on the top end if they really want you."
It's interesting ("gaining intelligence") to read an account of recruiter allegiances, though.
Or said another way, the falsehood is "Addresses don't depend on delivery mechanisms." I'm also in California without home postal delivery. If you're going to deliver a package via USPS, you need to use my PO Box. If you're going to deliver via FedEx/UPS, you need my street address. If you don't tell me which way you're going to send it until the end of the order process, I have to go back and fix it if I guessed wrong.
When I was little, we had no address. We did live next to the local post office, so using a PO box for mail was nice and simple. For UPS, we had to give an address like, "the house next to the post office on the east side". It usually worked, but occasionally they'd get their directions mixed up and deliver to the house on the other side.
