4 ms·

Honest question, what’s wrong with docker desktop? Looking at all the alternatives suggested it’s not clear to me why any other tools are better? I’m not using

by ekzy 2y ago

Honest question, what’s wrong with docker desktop? Looking at all the alternatives suggested it’s not clear to me why any other tools are better? I’m not using k8s locally, just docker compose. To connect to our remote k8s cluster, I use IntelliJ k8s extension (I just need to do some basic dev tasks, I’m not administrating the cluster)

alx__ 2y ago
For me, it was consuming so much memory. Switching to OrbStack helped fix that
- bboygravity 2y ago
  FreeBSD jails? :p
maxyurk 2y ago
it's not free
Andoryuuta 2y ago
One big difference is the licensing. Docker Engine itself is apache licensed (and hence free to use at a company of any scale), but Docker Desktop requires a paid plan if your company has more than 250 employees or more than $10 million in annual revenue [0]. [0]: https://docs.docker.com/engine/#licensing https://docs.docker.com/engine/#licensing
- fragmede 2y ago
  Which like, seems entirely fair, but when there are suitable enough replacements that cost $0, why pay for it? Sure there are big picture reasons, but companies often don't think that long-term.
  - otteromkram 2y ago
    Priority tech support when everything blows up is usually the number one reason.
    - dewey 2y ago
      I have a hard time thinking of cases where you need support or priority support for developer tooling like Docker. It’s not like Docker Desktop is running in production.
      - chuckadams 2y ago
        “The update failed on 200 desktops.” “Performance is crap when running BlahBlah Management Suite.” And so on. You don’t necessarily call support when one dev has an issue, you call when they all do.
Delk 2y ago
Docker Desktop requires a paid licence for companies with over 250 employees. While that's totally fair, it can add red tape if you want to use it in a project. I'm not completely sure about licensing for Container Desktop but the footer suggests MIT license.

by ekzy 2y ago

alx__ 2y ago

For me, it was consuming so much memory. Switching to OrbStack helped fix that

bboygravity 2y ago
FreeBSD jails? :p

maxyurk 2y ago

it's not free

Andoryuuta 2y ago

One big difference is the licensing. Docker Engine itself is apache licensed (and hence free to use at a company of any scale), but Docker Desktop requires a paid plan if your company has more than 250 employees or more than $10 million in annual revenue [0]. [0]: https://docs.docker.com/engine/#licensing https://docs.docker.com/engine/#licensing

fragmede 2y ago
Which like, seems entirely fair, but when there are suitable enough replacements that cost $0, why pay for it? Sure there are big picture reasons, but companies often don't think that long-term.
- otteromkram 2y ago
  Priority tech support when everything blows up is usually the number one reason.
  - dewey 2y ago
    I have a hard time thinking of cases where you need support or priority support for developer tooling like Docker. It’s not like Docker Desktop is running in production.
    - chuckadams 2y ago
      “The update failed on 200 desktops.” “Performance is crap when running BlahBlah Management Suite.” And so on. You don’t necessarily call support when one dev has an issue, you call when they all do.

Delk 2y ago

Docker Desktop requires a paid licence for companies with over 250 employees. While that's totally fair, it can add red tape if you want to use it in a project. I'm not completely sure about licensing for Container Desktop but the footer suggests MIT license.