8 ms·

Shame you started charging for commercial entities. We've all uninstalled Docker Desktop (Windows) now in our team and just gone to using the software (mainly S

Shame you started charging for commercial entities. We've all uninstalled Docker Desktop (Windows) now in our team and just gone to using the software (mainly SQL server) natively on our machines instead.

smoldesu 5y ago
Give Podman a look, if you haven't already. It's FOSS through-and-through, and kinda eats Docker's lunch for a lot of my personal uses. Not sure how it scales in larger environments, but it's pretty close to feature parity with Docker where it counts.
- grawlinson 5y ago
  nerdctl[0] is also worth a look. [0]: https://github.com/containerd/nerdctl https://github.com/containerd/nerdctl
- happymellon 5y ago
  Does Podman have a VM wrapper like Docker Desktop for running on MacOS?
  - MrWiffles 5y ago
    Last I looked, yes. AFAIK, MacOS lacks the necessary underlying features in the kernel to implement containers (at least this kind of container) at all, so you have to run a Linux VM under the hood to enable rough feature parity, which is a waste of resources in my view. Yet another reason I'm planning to ditch MacOS for Linux full time very soon.
    - bonzini 5y ago
      It's not that it doesn't implement containers, it's that most likely your container has Linux binaries in it and thus it cannot run on macOS.
    - happymellon 5y ago
      Oh, sorry you misunderstood my question. I know that I would have to run Linux in a VM. My question was whether Podman provided an installer that set up a Linux VM in the same way that Docker Desktop does. It's completely awful, seeing Mac and Windows spend their their trying to VM Linux, poorly. But that's what I have to work with.
      - smackeyacky 5y ago
        What is completely awful is developers tying themselves in knots trying to get MacOS to do things that Apple don't really want to do. The community edition of Docker is much closer to most cloud container setups anyway, so using Docker Desktop is really counter productive. There are better alternatives for your workstation, especially if your production environment is Linux based. Most, if not all, of the major development environments run well in Linux. Obviously not XCode, but for server side stuff it doesn't matter.
        happymellon 5y ago
        You have made two assumptions there. 1. That I don't use Linux when I can. I use Fedora on all my personal equipment, including laptops. When I have a choice I do use Linux because it is simply a better development environment. The question was because this is an article about Docker Desktop on MacOS and the poster suggested using Podman. 2. That running `brew install docker` was actually that hard. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely dislike running MacOS on my work laptop, but I don't have a choice and I have not seen a job where I would have a choice. Docker works "seamlessly", except that being a VM it does use 3Gb for even the most basic containers.
        smackeyacky 5y ago
        Most employers would give you some choice over your work machine don't they?
        happymellon 5y ago
        No. Most employers I've encountered pick one for you. The best I've had is the choice of Windows or Mac. They have never let me pick Linux. [Edit] Actually, one did. That was also the first place that I used Linux containers, long before Docker Desktop was a thing, and before the hype train really got rolling. Back when Docker really made sense for process isolation, rather than using it as a lazy Linux VM for building on your laptop.
- matsemann 5y ago
  For running a container it works fine. But for a developer workflow with docker compose, remote interpreters etc. it's nowhere near docker's offering.
- emptysongglass 5y ago
  For those curious, Podman also has an official GUI currently only available for macOS at https://github.com/containers/podman-desktop https://github.com/containers/podman-desktop
sergiomattei 5y ago
What was the point of using Docker in the first place then?
- benbristow 5y ago
  I don't know to be honest. Wasn't my decision (in-fact I campaigned against it). Probably just to say "we're using Docker" on the job spec.
otterley 5y ago
Software is worth paying for if it saves you time (and therefore money) and buys you a consistent, reliable experience with a pleasant UX. Building software is also the thing that pays a lot of our bills. We expect our customers to pay us for our engineering labor. What makes Docker any different?
- benbristow 5y ago
  The bait-and-switch, providing it for free then suddenly taking it away.
  - anamexis 5y ago
    If by "suddenly" you mean "with 5 months notice."
    - rat9988 5y ago
      After many years of service making it hard to remove, and a non negligible cost.
      - KronisLV 5y ago
        > After many years of service making it hard to remove... Would you rather they go under as a company, due to how badly their attempts at monetizing containers have failed in the past and then have Docker Desktop not be maintained at all and have Docker as a whole take a noticeable hit? > ...and a non negligible cost. I'd say that perhaps using either Docker with the CLI, IDE integrations/plugins or using Rancher Desktop (https://rancherdesktop.io/ https://rancherdesktop.io/) are more cost effective alternatives in that case.
      - glenngillen 5y ago
        So the thing that makes this egregious is they let you use it for free for _almost a decade_, while they fumbled finding an alternative monetisation strategy?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Isthatablackgsd 5y ago
> Shame you started charging for commercial entities. Is that how it works for commercial license? Commercial license come with extras than what personal-use/free licenses have. You are whining that Docker is charging for commercial license that the company you works for is a commercial entity. Docker provides an platform and they are not free for commercial to use. Personal use is a drop in the bucket for them because personal users are not overwhelming their servers or pulling huge data daily. Commercial entities is a deluge in the bucket for Docker because entities use their servers more often than personal user do. Commercial uses consumes more data than personal use and you want Docker to accept that and eat the costs for commercial entities? If Docker does this, then Docker will not last a year without commercial pricing. You, sir, have a strange ideology of this.
- hedora 5y ago
  All commercial entities I have worked for wanted to locally host docker hub for cost, resiliency and security reasons. Third parties even produced patches to do this but upstream rejected them. They wanted a monopoly on burning server and network time on CI jobs. Now they have it, and I'm not sympathetic if it wastes their money. I'm more concerned that it wastes my time.
  - Isthatablackgsd 5y ago
    My take of this is that those commercial entities are not raising hell over this. Commercial entities have the buying power (not the individuals nor the single developer(s) of the company) and they are complicit with it. The reason why Docker haven't change stance on the pricing because those entities haven't/don't attempt to use their buying power to sway Docker to change their stance. Yes, developers are raised hell over it but their power as a developers in the commercial entities are not equal. Developers does not run the company, the board of director/CEO/founder/owner does as they please. They just accepts it. That is not the fault of Docker, that is on those commercial entities who have the money continue to pay for those. It is too late to change the stance on this because entities have been paying for Docker support for YEARS and YEARS and YEARS, even way before that last year pricing tier changes.
- 5y ago
dewey 5y ago
Are you charging your customers money for the things your team builds for them? Why should Docker be different?
lnxg33k1 5y ago
I guess docker inc must be desperate to have got rid of a bunch of freeloaders. Keep in mind that docker for desktop needs a license for companies having more than 250 employees or 10 million in revenues, not from kids experimenting, not from hobbists, not students, companies doing 10 millions of dollars, if you are a company that makes 10 million of revenues a year and have uninstalled a software that was valuable for you to run away from paying 5 dollars, then write the name of the company so we can also avoid it in the future
- bloopernova 5y ago
  5 dollars per user per month, I think? If it was 5 dollars one-time fee for a greater level of access to the docker hub, many companies would have gone for it. At 1,000 employees you'd have to get $60,000 authorized yearly, which is going to make many companies look for the cheaper/free option. Upon waking up some more, I found this: https://www.docker.com/pricing https://www.docker.com/pricing "Teams" option is $7/user/month. "Enterprise" is $21/user/month.
  - lnxg33k1 5y ago
    I really hate modern companies, always so entitled to bailouts and freebies, but what kind of sympathy are you expecting? OMG a company with 1000 employees with macbooks paid several thousands dollars per year is going to be bankrupt because someone has decided that their entitlement to freebies is kaput, help me I'm out of napkins to stop the cry
    - bloopernova 5y ago
      I'm not defending the attitude. In fact I loathe the reluctance of companies to pay for software. In a recent gossip session with some buddies, one told a story of a company that had hit the Docker rate limit during a production deploy but still refused to pay the subscription fee! Plus so much open source software that should be funded by companies whose business literally would die without it. How many companies fund Homebrew, or whatever apps are used in their build toolchain? How many pay for desktop or server Linux?

smoldesu 5y ago

Give Podman a look, if you haven't already. It's FOSS through-and-through, and kinda eats Docker's lunch for a lot of my personal uses. Not sure how it scales in larger environments, but it's pretty close to feature parity with Docker where it counts.

grawlinson 5y ago
nerdctl[0] is also worth a look. [0]: https://github.com/containerd/nerdctl https://github.com/containerd/nerdctl
happymellon 5y ago
Does Podman have a VM wrapper like Docker Desktop for running on MacOS?
- MrWiffles 5y ago
  Last I looked, yes. AFAIK, MacOS lacks the necessary underlying features in the kernel to implement containers (at least this kind of container) at all, so you have to run a Linux VM under the hood to enable rough feature parity, which is a waste of resources in my view. Yet another reason I'm planning to ditch MacOS for Linux full time very soon.
  - bonzini 5y ago
    It's not that it doesn't implement containers, it's that most likely your container has Linux binaries in it and thus it cannot run on macOS.
  - happymellon 5y ago
    Oh, sorry you misunderstood my question. I know that I would have to run Linux in a VM. My question was whether Podman provided an installer that set up a Linux VM in the same way that Docker Desktop does. It's completely awful, seeing Mac and Windows spend their their trying to VM Linux, poorly. But that's what I have to work with.
    - smackeyacky 5y ago
      What is completely awful is developers tying themselves in knots trying to get MacOS to do things that Apple don't really want to do. The community edition of Docker is much closer to most cloud container setups anyway, so using Docker Desktop is really counter productive. There are better alternatives for your workstation, especially if your production environment is Linux based. Most, if not all, of the major development environments run well in Linux. Obviously not XCode, but for server side stuff it doesn't matter.
      - happymellon 5y ago
        You have made two assumptions there. 1. That I don't use Linux when I can. I use Fedora on all my personal equipment, including laptops. When I have a choice I do use Linux because it is simply a better development environment. The question was because this is an article about Docker Desktop on MacOS and the poster suggested using Podman. 2. That running `brew install docker` was actually that hard. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely dislike running MacOS on my work laptop, but I don't have a choice and I have not seen a job where I would have a choice. Docker works "seamlessly", except that being a VM it does use 3Gb for even the most basic containers.
        smackeyacky 5y ago
        Most employers would give you some choice over your work machine don't they?
        happymellon 5y ago
        No. Most employers I've encountered pick one for you. The best I've had is the choice of Windows or Mac. They have never let me pick Linux. [Edit] Actually, one did. That was also the first place that I used Linux containers, long before Docker Desktop was a thing, and before the hype train really got rolling. Back when Docker really made sense for process isolation, rather than using it as a lazy Linux VM for building on your laptop.
matsemann 5y ago
For running a container it works fine. But for a developer workflow with docker compose, remote interpreters etc. it's nowhere near docker's offering.
emptysongglass 5y ago
For those curious, Podman also has an official GUI currently only available for macOS at https://github.com/containers/podman-desktop https://github.com/containers/podman-desktop

sergiomattei 5y ago

What was the point of using Docker in the first place then?

benbristow 5y ago
I don't know to be honest. Wasn't my decision (in-fact I campaigned against it). Probably just to say "we're using Docker" on the job spec.

otterley 5y ago

Software is worth paying for if it saves you time (and therefore money) and buys you a consistent, reliable experience with a pleasant UX. Building software is also the thing that pays a lot of our bills. We expect our customers to pay us for our engineering labor. What makes Docker any different?

benbristow 5y ago
The bait-and-switch, providing it for free then suddenly taking it away.
- anamexis 5y ago
  If by "suddenly" you mean "with 5 months notice."
  - rat9988 5y ago
    After many years of service making it hard to remove, and a non negligible cost.
    - KronisLV 5y ago
      > After many years of service making it hard to remove... Would you rather they go under as a company, due to how badly their attempts at monetizing containers have failed in the past and then have Docker Desktop not be maintained at all and have Docker as a whole take a noticeable hit? > ...and a non negligible cost. I'd say that perhaps using either Docker with the CLI, IDE integrations/plugins or using Rancher Desktop (https://rancherdesktop.io/ https://rancherdesktop.io/) are more cost effective alternatives in that case.
    - glenngillen 5y ago
      So the thing that makes this egregious is they let you use it for free for _almost a decade_, while they fumbled finding an alternative monetisation strategy?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Isthatablackgsd 5y ago

> Shame you started charging for commercial entities. Is that how it works for commercial license? Commercial license come with extras than what personal-use/free licenses have. You are whining that Docker is charging for commercial license that the company you works for is a commercial entity. Docker provides an platform and they are not free for commercial to use. Personal use is a drop in the bucket for them because personal users are not overwhelming their servers or pulling huge data daily. Commercial entities is a deluge in the bucket for Docker because entities use their servers more often than personal user do. Commercial uses consumes more data than personal use and you want Docker to accept that and eat the costs for commercial entities? If Docker does this, then Docker will not last a year without commercial pricing. You, sir, have a strange ideology of this.

hedora 5y ago
All commercial entities I have worked for wanted to locally host docker hub for cost, resiliency and security reasons. Third parties even produced patches to do this but upstream rejected them. They wanted a monopoly on burning server and network time on CI jobs. Now they have it, and I'm not sympathetic if it wastes their money. I'm more concerned that it wastes my time.
- Isthatablackgsd 5y ago
  My take of this is that those commercial entities are not raising hell over this. Commercial entities have the buying power (not the individuals nor the single developer(s) of the company) and they are complicit with it. The reason why Docker haven't change stance on the pricing because those entities haven't/don't attempt to use their buying power to sway Docker to change their stance. Yes, developers are raised hell over it but their power as a developers in the commercial entities are not equal. Developers does not run the company, the board of director/CEO/founder/owner does as they please. They just accepts it. That is not the fault of Docker, that is on those commercial entities who have the money continue to pay for those. It is too late to change the stance on this because entities have been paying for Docker support for YEARS and YEARS and YEARS, even way before that last year pricing tier changes.
5y ago

dewey 5y ago

Are you charging your customers money for the things your team builds for them? Why should Docker be different?

lnxg33k1 5y ago

I guess docker inc must be desperate to have got rid of a bunch of freeloaders. Keep in mind that docker for desktop needs a license for companies having more than 250 employees or 10 million in revenues, not from kids experimenting, not from hobbists, not students, companies doing 10 millions of dollars, if you are a company that makes 10 million of revenues a year and have uninstalled a software that was valuable for you to run away from paying 5 dollars, then write the name of the company so we can also avoid it in the future

bloopernova 5y ago
5 dollars per user per month, I think? If it was 5 dollars one-time fee for a greater level of access to the docker hub, many companies would have gone for it. At 1,000 employees you'd have to get $60,000 authorized yearly, which is going to make many companies look for the cheaper/free option. Upon waking up some more, I found this: https://www.docker.com/pricing https://www.docker.com/pricing "Teams" option is $7/user/month. "Enterprise" is $21/user/month.
- lnxg33k1 5y ago
  I really hate modern companies, always so entitled to bailouts and freebies, but what kind of sympathy are you expecting? OMG a company with 1000 employees with macbooks paid several thousands dollars per year is going to be bankrupt because someone has decided that their entitlement to freebies is kaput, help me I'm out of napkins to stop the cry
  - bloopernova 5y ago
    I'm not defending the attitude. In fact I loathe the reluctance of companies to pay for software. In a recent gossip session with some buddies, one told a story of a company that had hit the Docker rate limit during a production deploy but still refused to pay the subscription fee! Plus so much open source software that should be funded by companies whose business literally would die without it. How many companies fund Homebrew, or whatever apps are used in their build toolchain? How many pay for desktop or server Linux?