Containers are therefore lightweight, so you can run more containers than VMs on a host server. They are also less flexible. Whereas you can run Linux in a VM running on Windows, that idea makes no sense for a container, which shares operating system files with its host.
Many answers make sense. Except that MS is pushing Docker with HyperV (and a ton of marketing arguments): in this case, having a Windows or a Linux host VM is exactly the same. And therefore not having Linux containers enabled in Server 2016 is a non-sense.
I agree that if we want the real benefits of containers in production, we should prefer real hosts to VM. But still there are scenarios where you want to be able to deploy a complete solution mixing windows/linux containers in a fast, easy way (i.e. single host).
Now, I now it’s coming with version 1709.
yea your right, the answer is that microsoft is lazy. There is no reason why docker EE cant support running linux containers in a linux host (in a hyper-v VM).
Docker for windows does this, and their installer prevent docker for windows being installed in windows server 2016. Its complete nonsense. Sometimes we use containers for things other than production systems where performance is used - ie for testing.