I think they understate the importance of accepting OCI and Dockerfile semantics as a path to an external "run one of these" and having it actually emerge as a jail based outcome.
I get saying "we don't need these additional layers/abstractions" but what it ignores is me saying "I want to run this code, and what I have is a suite of Docker based behaviour and I want a low friction path to use that Docker compose method, to get where I want"
They also haven't yet addressed how things re-scale sideways. Pods, and scaling is why people wind up behind traefik or caddy, fronting a service. It's not because the service lies in RFC1918 (how I wish they had written kubernetes to V6 native) it's because the service is being delivered by multiple discrete runtime states "inside" and scales horizontally.
It's a different operating system. You can't point at a dockerfile, say "port this please from linux-such-and-such to FreeBSD" and expect it to work every time. There are nuances even with linux-compat.
Contrary to popular belief load-balance/scaleout is orthogonal to containers (and k8s is only one of the ways to go about it), so obviously it's not discussed in an article about containers.
Isn’t podman already supported? I wouldn’t be surprised that there already exist tools that will jail-ify that as well.