If you need to invest significant effort into dumping it, it's almost certainly cheaper to just pay for it. Especially so if the alternative makes any sort of compromise on developer experience.
If it takes two engineers half a year to get a replacement working you're already back in black, and honestly I'm not even sure why (in our specific case) it would take that long when there already are free alternatives.
And this is only the first example I saw. Now we have to root out all apps everywhere across the company that might integrate this tightly with docker.
Then there are performance considerations. Docker Inc apparently did quite a bit to improve performance, especially disk perf. We need to verify all of our existing workflows still work reliably.
None of this is hard, it just takes time and effort.
You had it for free for a long time? Lucky you!
The problem is really more one of "we operated so long without paying and now, blam, everyone pays next year".
It'd be sort of like if github deciding "You know what, everyone now needs to pay $7 a month/user for github". Perfectly within their right, but also a little bit of whiplash for a large number of people.
The next question is if this will last. There's already competitors to docker (rancher/podman/various k8s on my box things).
It seems that their assumptions were correct.
I do agree it is a product that is potentially worth paying for. I do NOT think that the product is worth the amount we were suddenly forced to pay. It felt like extortion.
But that last time was on Intel Macs; maybe the situation is completely different on ARM.
I mostly use the CLI so I have Podman a try and it took less than a single lunch to completely replace Docker for me. Performance is excellent for ARM, and acceptable for the x86 containers I infrequently use.
https://gist.github.com/acdha/9be1c3521af4f18d9f86264a889581...