3 ms·

Well it makes developing Docker Desktop infinitely easier for them, since they no longer need to start their own Linux VM under the hood. I think the software i

by paxys 1y ago

Well it makes developing Docker Desktop infinitely easier for them, since they no longer need to start their own Linux VM under the hood. I think the software is "sticky" enough that people will still prefer to use Docker Desktop for the familiar CLI and UX, Docker Compose, and all the Docker-specific quirks that make migrating to a different container runtime basically impossible.

prmoustache 1y ago
I never used docker desktop and am struggling to understand what you are supposed to be doing with a gui in a docker/container context.
- arjonagelhout 1y ago
  For me, Docker Desktop is simply an easy way to launch the Docker daemon and inspect some created images and their corresponding logs. Other than that, the cli suffices.
  - hiccuphippo 1y ago
    We had to remove Docker Desktop at my job (I think they started asking for money?) and moved to Lima/Colima. If this project means one less program to configure to get my docker containers running then I'm all for it.
    - queenkjuul 1y ago
      Docker desktop for commercial use requires a license and they don't release binaries for Mac other than desktop. Seems like their one route to monetization. I use docker for literally only one build that doesn't work on native macOS so i love the idea of switching to a simple standalone CLI
    - bruckie 1y ago
      I use Rancher Desktop plus the FOSS docker CLI from Homebrew. Works well, and has no licensing issues.
- stackskipton 1y ago
  GUI lets you look at logs quickly, there is buttons to click quickly open http://localhost:<port> http://localhost:<port>, stop and start containers, get shell in container and bunch of other stuff that people developing or testing against containers need locally.
  - prmoustache 1y ago
    I am surprised a developer would not have chosen to redirect the port at run time already and would not be running the containers in the foreground in the first place.
    - phinnaeus 1y ago
      Dropbox copypasta goes here
      - Spivak 1y ago
        I mean maybe but if you run your containers not via a GUI you get most of that for free or at worst with a docker logs or docker exec command. Do people learn docker not via the CLI?
        queenkjuul 1y ago
        I for one have been using docker on Linux for years and have to use a Mac at work, and I'm totally baffled by the fact i need to install docker desktop to use the CLI and don't get why you'd need or want the GUI. And like I'm not all anti-GUI, it's just that docker is one of those things I've never even imagined using a GUI for
        selcuka 1y ago
        I mean, it's nice to have a GUI when running multiple containers on Docker, or Kubernetes, but I've never used Docker Desktop on my work Mac either. For Kubernetes, something like K9s [1] or Headlamp [2] works fine. I remember seeing something similar for Docker but I can't remember the name. [1] https://k9scli.io/ https://k9scli.io/ [2] https://headlamp.dev/ https://headlamp.dev/
- bdcravens 1y ago
  Very few use the GUI for things other than configuring Docker engine settings like memory, etc.
- pxc 1y ago
  Imo, the GUI isn't really the most important part of things like Docker Desktop. The nice part is that they (a) set up the Linux VM that runs the Docker daemon for you and (b) handle the socket forwarding magic that lets you communicate with it "directly" by running the Docker client on the host OS. This is likewise true for Podman Desktop, Rancher Desktop, etc. The GUI is icing on the cake, imo.
- dajtxx 1y ago
  The problem (as far as I can tell) is that for Windows and MacOS you can't install the docker daemon etc without installing Desktop. I have a Mac for work and containers are a pain. I've tried Podman, UTM, colima, Docker Desktop etc and it all boils down to the same thing - run a linux VM and have the command line utils cooperate with the VM to run the containers. It comes down to which solution has the least friction and irritations and Docker might still win there. My current setup is UTM running a debian VM which I share my source directory with and ssh into to run docker. This is simpler for my brain to understand because the linux VM isn't a hidden component I forget to manage. But it's not obvious how to mount the shared directory and I'm constantly running into networking problems - currently I cannot connect as myself and must sudo ssh for it to work. A reboot (of the Mac) used to fix it, but no longer does. I've given up trying to fix it and just sudo.
pxc 1y ago
Docker Desktop on Windows uses WSL to provide the Docker daemon, doesn't it? So Docker Desktop has a history of leaning into OS offerings for virtualizing Linux like this where they can.
- cosmotic 1y ago
  Docker desktop on macos uses the Apple virtualization framework to run a Linux VM these days. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization
coredog64 1y ago
Unless this provides an extremely compatible Docker socket implementation, this is the answer. When Docker changed the licensing for Docker Desktop, my previous employer made it harder to get permission. However, there were a few tools that were in common usage, and once you mentioned that you used them, you got your permission. Some progress has been made to create a non-Docker implementation that integrates with all those random tools that expect to be able to yeet bytes into or out of the Docker socket, but I still hit blockers the last time I tried.

by paxys 1y ago

prmoustache 1y ago

I never used docker desktop and am struggling to understand what you are supposed to be doing with a gui in a docker/container context.

arjonagelhout 1y ago
For me, Docker Desktop is simply an easy way to launch the Docker daemon and inspect some created images and their corresponding logs. Other than that, the cli suffices.
- hiccuphippo 1y ago
  We had to remove Docker Desktop at my job (I think they started asking for money?) and moved to Lima/Colima. If this project means one less program to configure to get my docker containers running then I'm all for it.
  - queenkjuul 1y ago
    Docker desktop for commercial use requires a license and they don't release binaries for Mac other than desktop. Seems like their one route to monetization. I use docker for literally only one build that doesn't work on native macOS so i love the idea of switching to a simple standalone CLI
  - bruckie 1y ago
    I use Rancher Desktop plus the FOSS docker CLI from Homebrew. Works well, and has no licensing issues.
stackskipton 1y ago
GUI lets you look at logs quickly, there is buttons to click quickly open http://localhost:<port> http://localhost:<port>, stop and start containers, get shell in container and bunch of other stuff that people developing or testing against containers need locally.
- prmoustache 1y ago
  I am surprised a developer would not have chosen to redirect the port at run time already and would not be running the containers in the foreground in the first place.
  - phinnaeus 1y ago
    Dropbox copypasta goes here
    - Spivak 1y ago
      I mean maybe but if you run your containers not via a GUI you get most of that for free or at worst with a docker logs or docker exec command. Do people learn docker not via the CLI?
      - queenkjuul 1y ago
        I for one have been using docker on Linux for years and have to use a Mac at work, and I'm totally baffled by the fact i need to install docker desktop to use the CLI and don't get why you'd need or want the GUI. And like I'm not all anti-GUI, it's just that docker is one of those things I've never even imagined using a GUI for
        selcuka 1y ago
        I mean, it's nice to have a GUI when running multiple containers on Docker, or Kubernetes, but I've never used Docker Desktop on my work Mac either. For Kubernetes, something like K9s [1] or Headlamp [2] works fine. I remember seeing something similar for Docker but I can't remember the name. [1] https://k9scli.io/ https://k9scli.io/ [2] https://headlamp.dev/ https://headlamp.dev/
bdcravens 1y ago
Very few use the GUI for things other than configuring Docker engine settings like memory, etc.
pxc 1y ago
Imo, the GUI isn't really the most important part of things like Docker Desktop. The nice part is that they (a) set up the Linux VM that runs the Docker daemon for you and (b) handle the socket forwarding magic that lets you communicate with it "directly" by running the Docker client on the host OS. This is likewise true for Podman Desktop, Rancher Desktop, etc. The GUI is icing on the cake, imo.
dajtxx 1y ago
The problem (as far as I can tell) is that for Windows and MacOS you can't install the docker daemon etc without installing Desktop. I have a Mac for work and containers are a pain. I've tried Podman, UTM, colima, Docker Desktop etc and it all boils down to the same thing - run a linux VM and have the command line utils cooperate with the VM to run the containers. It comes down to which solution has the least friction and irritations and Docker might still win there. My current setup is UTM running a debian VM which I share my source directory with and ssh into to run docker. This is simpler for my brain to understand because the linux VM isn't a hidden component I forget to manage. But it's not obvious how to mount the shared directory and I'm constantly running into networking problems - currently I cannot connect as myself and must sudo ssh for it to work. A reboot (of the Mac) used to fix it, but no longer does. I've given up trying to fix it and just sudo.

pxc 1y ago

Docker Desktop on Windows uses WSL to provide the Docker daemon, doesn't it? So Docker Desktop has a history of leaning into OS offerings for virtualizing Linux like this where they can.

cosmotic 1y ago
Docker desktop on macos uses the Apple virtualization framework to run a Linux VM these days. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization

coredog64 1y ago

Unless this provides an extremely compatible Docker socket implementation, this is the answer. When Docker changed the licensing for Docker Desktop, my previous employer made it harder to get permission. However, there were a few tools that were in common usage, and once you mentioned that you used them, you got your permission. Some progress has been made to create a non-Docker implementation that integrates with all those random tools that expect to be able to yeet bytes into or out of the Docker socket, but I still hit blockers the last time I tried.