If you believe yesterday's CNBC article, the reason that Goldman Sachs got involved in Docker's latest funding round is because their developers told them to. The article said the following:
"In case of both Goldman Sachs and Northern Trust and others expressing interest that were banks, the interest originated in their I.T. organizations," said Ben Golub, Docker's chief executive officer. "It was what all their colleagues at other banks were talking about. They informed their investments wing."
Could there be any truth in this? As far fetched as this may sound, many of our customers are from the finance sector and our sales pipeline is disproportionately filled with finance companies. If you think about it for a moment, it's not as far fetched as is sounds.
Banks have got lots systems, often put together in a higgledy–piggledy sort of way. This is not necessarily a reflection of the banks' capabilities (or lack thereof) but rather a reflection of the security and regulatory constraints they face. And the banks clearly think that any security issues associated with Docker are either already fixed or will be fixed shortly. A small or medium sized software company may very well not need Docker, because, for example, they use a collection of other tools and project management techniques that work just fine.
So, although we may never have guessed that banks would help drive the adoption of Docker, with a moment's thought you can see why they are. Maybe more than any other type of company, banks can benefit from any improvements to their delivery processes and the tooling that helps them move applications from one environment to another.
Previous article
