3 ms·

Docker isn't what provides the security, Docker provides the format for the container - it is LXC, VirtualBox, VMWare, Xen, etc. and Docker provides the abstrac

by nikcub 12y ago

Docker isn't what provides the security, Docker provides the format for the container - it is LXC, VirtualBox, VMWare, Xen, etc. and Docker provides the abstraction layer - which is extremely useful. The timing is right since OS X Yosemite will include a Hypervisor - so for the first time ever all major operating systems will support it and we have Docker to make it all portable. No more kernel module installation, which is what has always made these type of solutions hard to roll out to consumers and non-techs.

walterbell 12y ago
> OS X Yosemite will include a Hypervisor Is that a type 1 hypervisor that can run a linux VM image/container without vbox/parallels/fusion, as if the VM/container was an "app"?
- nikcub 12y ago
  It looks like it is first a low layer hypervisor kernel support and then a library that provides virtualized cpu, network, graphics, IO, etc (the equivalent of this layer in Microsoft's Hyper-V is called Enlightment IO, IIRC). If you look at the architecture diagrams for vbox/vmware etc. you'll see they all have their own implementations of each library to do this on OS X. This is where the performance difference comes from. With Hypervisor.framework and each of the virtualization firms porting their platforms to it, it means this performance difference mostly disappears and the vendors can focus on improving the higher layers. When Microsoft did this in Windows, the ecosystem exploded. One difference is that Microsoft built and released tools and apps at the higher layers, such as application virtualization with App-V (where they compete with Citrix and VMWare). It doesn't look like Apple will do that, yet - but what it does mean is that someone can port or implement a common virtualization layer on OS X and bring better, cheaper, more accessible and open app virtualization to OS X (with great performance). It is a pretty big deal with potentially a lot of interesting opportunities and applications. There isn't enough information available about it yet, though (or I simply haven't found it) - someone with more familiarity with the tech and virtualization in general will likely dump info about it and what it would mean when we get more information about it and are closer to 10.10 going gold (the virtualization co's porting their platforms to support 10.10 will likely be an issue). edit: to add, the good thing about making Hypervisors built into the OS, having an abstraction layer on top of that, and then on the other end having Docker abstract the tech is that suddenly everything becomes portable and developers can focus on the more value add features (since core virtualization tech becomes commoditized)
  - walterbell 12y ago
    Sounds promising! Apple would need to document the virtual device interfaces so that Linux/BSD in-guest drivers can be developed by the open-source community. Until then, only OSX-on-OSX would work. Hopefully the Apple hypervisor can be disabled, e.g. if someone wants to run OS X on VMware on Windows on Mac hardware, or OS X on KVM on Linux on Mac hardware.

by nikcub 12y ago

walterbell 12y ago

> OS X Yosemite will include a Hypervisor Is that a type 1 hypervisor that can run a linux VM image/container without vbox/parallels/fusion, as if the VM/container was an "app"?

nikcub 12y ago
It looks like it is first a low layer hypervisor kernel support and then a library that provides virtualized cpu, network, graphics, IO, etc (the equivalent of this layer in Microsoft's Hyper-V is called Enlightment IO, IIRC). If you look at the architecture diagrams for vbox/vmware etc. you'll see they all have their own implementations of each library to do this on OS X. This is where the performance difference comes from. With Hypervisor.framework and each of the virtualization firms porting their platforms to it, it means this performance difference mostly disappears and the vendors can focus on improving the higher layers. When Microsoft did this in Windows, the ecosystem exploded. One difference is that Microsoft built and released tools and apps at the higher layers, such as application virtualization with App-V (where they compete with Citrix and VMWare). It doesn't look like Apple will do that, yet - but what it does mean is that someone can port or implement a common virtualization layer on OS X and bring better, cheaper, more accessible and open app virtualization to OS X (with great performance). It is a pretty big deal with potentially a lot of interesting opportunities and applications. There isn't enough information available about it yet, though (or I simply haven't found it) - someone with more familiarity with the tech and virtualization in general will likely dump info about it and what it would mean when we get more information about it and are closer to 10.10 going gold (the virtualization co's porting their platforms to support 10.10 will likely be an issue). edit: to add, the good thing about making Hypervisors built into the OS, having an abstraction layer on top of that, and then on the other end having Docker abstract the tech is that suddenly everything becomes portable and developers can focus on the more value add features (since core virtualization tech becomes commoditized)
- walterbell 12y ago
  Sounds promising! Apple would need to document the virtual device interfaces so that Linux/BSD in-guest drivers can be developed by the open-source community. Until then, only OSX-on-OSX would work. Hopefully the Apple hypervisor can be disabled, e.g. if someone wants to run OS X on VMware on Windows on Mac hardware, or OS X on KVM on Linux on Mac hardware.