4 ms·

From the official docs: >This section describes how to install Docker Engine on Linux, also known as Docker CE. Docker Engine is also available for Windows, ma

From the official docs: >This section describes how to install Docker Engine on Linux, also known as Docker CE. Docker Engine is also available for Windows, macOS, and Linux, through Docker Desktop. https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/ https://docs.docker.com/engine/install/ I'm not an expert but everything I read online says that Docker runs on Linux so with Mac you need a virtual environment like Docker Desktop, Colima, or Podman to run it.

LelouBil 1y ago
Docker desktop will run a virtual machine for you. But you can simply install docker engine in wsl or in a VM on mac exactly like you would on linux (you give up maybe automatic port forwarding from the VM to your host)
- rovr138 1y ago
  > But you can simply install docker engine in wsl or in a VM on mac exactly like you would on linux (you give up maybe automatic port forwarding from the VM to your host) and sharing files from the host, ide integration, etc. Not that it can't be done. But doing it is not just, 'run it'. Now you manage a vm, change your workflow, etc.
  - mpyne 1y ago
    Of course, but that's the value-add of Docker Desktop. But you don't have to tie yourself to it, or even if you do use it for a bit to get going faster, you have a migration path open to doing it yourself should you need it.
- linuxftw 1y ago
  This. I run docker in WSL. I also do 100% of my development in WSL (for work, anyway). Windows is basically just my web browser.
  - CuriouslyC 1y ago
    Ironic username. As a die hard, WSL aint bad though. I just can't deal with an OS that automatically quarantines bittorrent clients, decides to override local administrator policies via windows updates and pops up ad notifications.
    - mmcnl 1y ago
      I personally use Windows + WSL2 and for work use macOS. I prefer Windows + WSL2 by a longshot. It just "works". macOS never "just works" for me. Colima is fine but requires a static memory allocation for the VM, it doesn't have the level of polish that WSL2 has. Brew is awful compared to apt (which you get with WSL2 because it's just Linux). And then there's the windowing system of macOS that feels like it's straight from the 90s. "System tray" icons that accumulate over time and are distracting, awful window management with clunky animations, the near useless dock (clicking on VS Code shows all my 6 IDEs, why?). Windows and Linux are much modern in that regard. The Mac hardware is amazing, well worth its price, but the OS feels like it's from a decade ago.
    - linuxftw 1y ago
      All my personal machines run linux. At work my choices are Mac or Windows. If Macs were still x86_64 I might choose that and run a VM, but I have no interest in learning the pitfalls of cross arch emulation or dealing with arm64 linux distro for a development machine.
      - chuckadams 1y ago
        I never notice the difference between arm64 and x86 environments, since I'm flipping between them all the time just because the arm boxes are so much cheaper. The only time it matters to me is building containers, and then it's just a matter of passing `--platform=linux/amd64,linux/arm64` to `docker buildx`. If you're building really arch-specific stuff, then I could see not wanting to go there, but Rosetta support is pretty much seamless. It's just slower.
    - croon 1y ago
iainmerrick 1y ago
If you're already paying for Macs, is paying for Docker Desktop really a big problem?
- chrisweekly 1y ago
  I think the point is that Docker Desktop for macOS is bad.
  - chuckadams 1y ago
    It's not all that bad these days ever since they added virtio support. Orbstack is well worth paying for as an alternative, but that won't solve anyone's procurement headaches either.
  - iainmerrick 1y ago
    Oh! I wasn’t trying to make a big point except that paying for software isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and if you’re already invested in Macs you’re presumably OK with paying good money for good products. Having used Docker Desktop on a Mac myself, it seems... fine? It does the job well enough, and it’s part of the development rather than production flow so it doesn’t need to be perfect, just unobtrusive.

LelouBil 1y ago

Docker desktop will run a virtual machine for you. But you can simply install docker engine in wsl or in a VM on mac exactly like you would on linux (you give up maybe automatic port forwarding from the VM to your host)

rovr138 1y ago
> But you can simply install docker engine in wsl or in a VM on mac exactly like you would on linux (you give up maybe automatic port forwarding from the VM to your host) and sharing files from the host, ide integration, etc. Not that it can't be done. But doing it is not just, 'run it'. Now you manage a vm, change your workflow, etc.
- mpyne 1y ago
  Of course, but that's the value-add of Docker Desktop. But you don't have to tie yourself to it, or even if you do use it for a bit to get going faster, you have a migration path open to doing it yourself should you need it.
linuxftw 1y ago
This. I run docker in WSL. I also do 100% of my development in WSL (for work, anyway). Windows is basically just my web browser.
- CuriouslyC 1y ago
  Ironic username. As a die hard, WSL aint bad though. I just can't deal with an OS that automatically quarantines bittorrent clients, decides to override local administrator policies via windows updates and pops up ad notifications.
  - mmcnl 1y ago
    I personally use Windows + WSL2 and for work use macOS. I prefer Windows + WSL2 by a longshot. It just "works". macOS never "just works" for me. Colima is fine but requires a static memory allocation for the VM, it doesn't have the level of polish that WSL2 has. Brew is awful compared to apt (which you get with WSL2 because it's just Linux). And then there's the windowing system of macOS that feels like it's straight from the 90s. "System tray" icons that accumulate over time and are distracting, awful window management with clunky animations, the near useless dock (clicking on VS Code shows all my 6 IDEs, why?). Windows and Linux are much modern in that regard. The Mac hardware is amazing, well worth its price, but the OS feels like it's from a decade ago.
  - linuxftw 1y ago
    All my personal machines run linux. At work my choices are Mac or Windows. If Macs were still x86_64 I might choose that and run a VM, but I have no interest in learning the pitfalls of cross arch emulation or dealing with arm64 linux distro for a development machine.
    - chuckadams 1y ago
      I never notice the difference between arm64 and x86 environments, since I'm flipping between them all the time just because the arm boxes are so much cheaper. The only time it matters to me is building containers, and then it's just a matter of passing `--platform=linux/amd64,linux/arm64` to `docker buildx`. If you're building really arch-specific stuff, then I could see not wanting to go there, but Rosetta support is pretty much seamless. It's just slower.
  - croon 1y ago

iainmerrick 1y ago

If you're already paying for Macs, is paying for Docker Desktop really a big problem?

chrisweekly 1y ago
I think the point is that Docker Desktop for macOS is bad.
- chuckadams 1y ago
  It's not all that bad these days ever since they added virtio support. Orbstack is well worth paying for as an alternative, but that won't solve anyone's procurement headaches either.
- iainmerrick 1y ago
  Oh! I wasn’t trying to make a big point except that paying for software isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and if you’re already invested in Macs you’re presumably OK with paying good money for good products. Having used Docker Desktop on a Mac myself, it seems... fine? It does the job well enough, and it’s part of the development rather than production flow so it doesn’t need to be perfect, just unobtrusive.