10 ms·

OrbStack 1.0 is here! Fast, light, easy way to run Docker containers and Linux

44 points by mescalito 3y ago

fithisux 3y ago
It is not open source like Lima.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  That's what I'm struggling to wrap my head around. If you're a business that wants to pay for official support, you'd probably buy a Docker business license. If you're opposed to that behavior, you'll probably reach for Lima or Rancher Desktop. It looks like a quality tool, but I feel like most tenured Docker users will see a 'Pricing' page and close the window with their muscle-memory.
  - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
    Im a veteran paid-up Docker Desktop for Mac user... and I instantly paid for Orbstack.dev as soon as it was released. It's so so much better than Docker Desktop For Mac. Literally no reason to use slow bulky docker desktop when orbstack exceeds every expectation, and instant support from the solo developer who has put so much effort into this (and is still a teenager Im lead to believe!) Docker Desktop for Mac is not open source either. Orbstack is better in every single way.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      Fair enough, like I said it looks like quality software. Again though, I think the majority of users will either reach for something like Lima, Podman or Rancher given the history of the space. Relying on a subscription-service UI layer to use Docker is kinda redundant when everything inside is also freely available. If I was still evaluating Docker clients at-scale, I'm not sure this would make the cut. I'll fully believe that Orbstack is superior to Docker on Mac. It's just hard to understand 'the sell' when there are so many high-quality Free alternatives. Then again, I'm the sort of Mac user who CMD+Q's whenever I read "buy me a coffee" or the like.
      - duped 3y ago
        Orb is "Docker desktop but better" as well as "WSL, for MacOS"
      - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
        You failed at thinking that orbstack is nothing but a UI-layer to docker. It's certainly not that. In fact you don't even need to have the app running in order to use docker! Ive lost the link now but somewhere @Danny explains the different layers (like networking, file sharing, domains etc) that he had to write from scratch that are not part of Docker (the engine) For example. One of the longest bugs in Docker for Mac has been file-sharing/bind mounts... Orbstack performance over Docker for Mac in this respect is incredible. Also Docker for Mac (still) doesnt have ipv6 whereas Orbstack enables this out of the box seamlessly. Thinking of Orbstack as "just another UI for docker" is completely wrong.
        smoldesu 3y ago
        All of that sounds very impressive, I won't deny the effort that goes into making that from scratch. My point is that most of this also exists elsewhere, in non-Docker alternative implementations (like Lima + Podman). For most businesses looking at something like this, they will either want a comprehensive support contract or comprehensive ownership. Orbstack will struggle here, especially considering how it has basically nothing to do with the deployed product at most companies. You're not going to run production on Orbstack, so the value of it is pretty dubious relative to even a bad product like Docker Desktop. I swear I'm not trying to be too harsh here, I used Docker Desktop on Mac at my last job too. My team was researching alternatives to it, and given what we were looking at I don't think Orbstack would be compelling. The FOSS alternatives worked just fine for testing and development.
  - kdrag0n 3y ago
    The goal is that OrbStack is just a lot nicer to use. Better performance, lower resource usage, and many DX features (several of which are covered) that go together to create a delightful experience. It's also a lot cheaper than the Docker Business rate (at least according to their pricing page), and the saved developer time should pay for itself quickly. It could even mean that companies can ditch expensive EC2 cloud dev environments, for example.
    - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
      Orbstack even comes with working ipv6 out of the box unlike Docker Desktop for Mac which STILL doesnt have support for ipv6
      - kdrag0n 3y ago
        Yep, a lot of little things :)
        myPhilTaylor 3y ago
        A responsive developer who knows his product inside out, who replies daily to GitHub issues, values reports and resolves issues reported and releases fixes for reported issues in hours/days instead of months/years(if at all) - That alone is priceless and beats "official" Docker for Mac any day!
  - xyos 3y ago
    You're paying a premium because it's designed specifically for MacOS systems. Docker desktop is terrible on Mac, but Orbstack is awesome for this group of users.
    - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
      "premium" = $96 a year. Hardly breaking the bank. I spend more than that on coffee!!
kdrag0n 3y ago
Dev here, happy to answer questions!
- zshrc 3y ago
  Love OrbStack... been using it since I discovered it and instantly took over my Docker workflow. What are your plans for Virtual Machines? I know GUI support is planned but are you planning for Virtualization features to challenge the likes of maybe Parallels? EDIT: Also, are you planning on supporting macOS VMs?
  - kdrag0n 3y ago
    Love to hear it! The plan is for machines to be like WSL2: as integrated as possible. Not sure what you mean by Virtualization features? I won't say never, but no plans for macOS or Windows VMs for now.
- BitFlogger 3y ago
  Congrats on the launch! I just updated and saw the notification and passed it along to my legal department to get approval for purchase. Do you know if you are, or have any plans to be, SOC2 Compliant?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- mdeeks 3y ago
  Can you share any long term plans past 1.0? Honestly it feels like a finished product already. Which is amazing for a 1.0!
  - kdrag0n 3y ago
    Thanks! I won't be too specific because of a certain competitor looming on the horizon, but so far my plan is to focus on improving DX.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Qwertas 3y ago
I've been using it since beta and I love it.
xyos 3y ago
Hey kdrag0n, congrats on the launch! I've been using it since the beta, and let me tell you, this is gonna be the go-to option for Docker on Mac.
- kdrag0n 3y ago
  Thanks! Glad to hear that
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
LargeTomato 3y ago
I recently installed docker, podman, Colima, and Orbstack. Orbstack was the only one that overwrote the docker socket instead of connecting to the docker socket. The containerization on my Mac is locked into using Orbstack because no other container engine can bind to that, now overridden, socket.
- myPhilTaylor 3y ago
  orbstack provides a docker engine and sets the socket to point at that. It's a complete system, it's not "just a gui for an existing docker instance". Your issue is your flawed understanding of what Orbstack is and not understanding docker contexts. You can use Docker contexts to run OrbStack and Colima side-by-side. Switching contexts affects all commands you run from that point on, see: https://docs.orbstack.dev/install#colima https://docs.orbstack.dev/install#colima # Switch to OrbStack docker context use orbstack # Switch to Colima docker context use colima
- mdeeks 3y ago
  As the other commenter mentions, you can actually use `docker context` to choose which system you want to use for all of your tools. That docker socket you're referencing is just for the default context if you never chose anything. Personally, this is the behavior I want and I think that is correct. I just installed OrbStack. That means I want it to take over as the new way to use docker. Switching back to any other system is easy and it is documented here: https://docs.orbstack.dev/faq#revert-docker https://docs.orbstack.dev/faq#revert-docker I suppose Orbstack should make it more obvious what it did and how to revert though.

44 points by mescalito 3y ago

fithisux 3y ago

It is not open source like Lima.

smoldesu 3y ago
That's what I'm struggling to wrap my head around. If you're a business that wants to pay for official support, you'd probably buy a Docker business license. If you're opposed to that behavior, you'll probably reach for Lima or Rancher Desktop. It looks like a quality tool, but I feel like most tenured Docker users will see a 'Pricing' page and close the window with their muscle-memory.
- myPhilTaylor 3y ago
  Im a veteran paid-up Docker Desktop for Mac user... and I instantly paid for Orbstack.dev as soon as it was released. It's so so much better than Docker Desktop For Mac. Literally no reason to use slow bulky docker desktop when orbstack exceeds every expectation, and instant support from the solo developer who has put so much effort into this (and is still a teenager Im lead to believe!) Docker Desktop for Mac is not open source either. Orbstack is better in every single way.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    Fair enough, like I said it looks like quality software. Again though, I think the majority of users will either reach for something like Lima, Podman or Rancher given the history of the space. Relying on a subscription-service UI layer to use Docker is kinda redundant when everything inside is also freely available. If I was still evaluating Docker clients at-scale, I'm not sure this would make the cut. I'll fully believe that Orbstack is superior to Docker on Mac. It's just hard to understand 'the sell' when there are so many high-quality Free alternatives. Then again, I'm the sort of Mac user who CMD+Q's whenever I read "buy me a coffee" or the like.
    - duped 3y ago
      Orb is "Docker desktop but better" as well as "WSL, for MacOS"
    - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
      You failed at thinking that orbstack is nothing but a UI-layer to docker. It's certainly not that. In fact you don't even need to have the app running in order to use docker! Ive lost the link now but somewhere @Danny explains the different layers (like networking, file sharing, domains etc) that he had to write from scratch that are not part of Docker (the engine) For example. One of the longest bugs in Docker for Mac has been file-sharing/bind mounts... Orbstack performance over Docker for Mac in this respect is incredible. Also Docker for Mac (still) doesnt have ipv6 whereas Orbstack enables this out of the box seamlessly. Thinking of Orbstack as "just another UI for docker" is completely wrong.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        All of that sounds very impressive, I won't deny the effort that goes into making that from scratch. My point is that most of this also exists elsewhere, in non-Docker alternative implementations (like Lima + Podman). For most businesses looking at something like this, they will either want a comprehensive support contract or comprehensive ownership. Orbstack will struggle here, especially considering how it has basically nothing to do with the deployed product at most companies. You're not going to run production on Orbstack, so the value of it is pretty dubious relative to even a bad product like Docker Desktop. I swear I'm not trying to be too harsh here, I used Docker Desktop on Mac at my last job too. My team was researching alternatives to it, and given what we were looking at I don't think Orbstack would be compelling. The FOSS alternatives worked just fine for testing and development.
- kdrag0n 3y ago
  The goal is that OrbStack is just a lot nicer to use. Better performance, lower resource usage, and many DX features (several of which are covered) that go together to create a delightful experience. It's also a lot cheaper than the Docker Business rate (at least according to their pricing page), and the saved developer time should pay for itself quickly. It could even mean that companies can ditch expensive EC2 cloud dev environments, for example.
  - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
    Orbstack even comes with working ipv6 out of the box unlike Docker Desktop for Mac which STILL doesnt have support for ipv6
    - kdrag0n 3y ago
      Yep, a lot of little things :)
      - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
        A responsive developer who knows his product inside out, who replies daily to GitHub issues, values reports and resolves issues reported and releases fixes for reported issues in hours/days instead of months/years(if at all) - That alone is priceless and beats "official" Docker for Mac any day!
- xyos 3y ago
  You're paying a premium because it's designed specifically for MacOS systems. Docker desktop is terrible on Mac, but Orbstack is awesome for this group of users.
  - myPhilTaylor 3y ago
    "premium" = $96 a year. Hardly breaking the bank. I spend more than that on coffee!!

kdrag0n 3y ago

Dev here, happy to answer questions!

zshrc 3y ago
Love OrbStack... been using it since I discovered it and instantly took over my Docker workflow. What are your plans for Virtual Machines? I know GUI support is planned but are you planning for Virtualization features to challenge the likes of maybe Parallels? EDIT: Also, are you planning on supporting macOS VMs?
- kdrag0n 3y ago
  Love to hear it! The plan is for machines to be like WSL2: as integrated as possible. Not sure what you mean by Virtualization features? I won't say never, but no plans for macOS or Windows VMs for now.
BitFlogger 3y ago
Congrats on the launch! I just updated and saw the notification and passed it along to my legal department to get approval for purchase. Do you know if you are, or have any plans to be, SOC2 Compliant?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
mdeeks 3y ago
Can you share any long term plans past 1.0? Honestly it feels like a finished product already. Which is amazing for a 1.0!
- kdrag0n 3y ago
  Thanks! I won't be too specific because of a certain competitor looming on the horizon, but so far my plan is to focus on improving DX.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Qwertas 3y ago

I've been using it since beta and I love it.

xyos 3y ago

Hey kdrag0n, congrats on the launch! I've been using it since the beta, and let me tell you, this is gonna be the go-to option for Docker on Mac.

kdrag0n 3y ago
Thanks! Glad to hear that

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

LargeTomato 3y ago

I recently installed docker, podman, Colima, and Orbstack. Orbstack was the only one that overwrote the docker socket instead of connecting to the docker socket. The containerization on my Mac is locked into using Orbstack because no other container engine can bind to that, now overridden, socket.

myPhilTaylor 3y ago
orbstack provides a docker engine and sets the socket to point at that. It's a complete system, it's not "just a gui for an existing docker instance". Your issue is your flawed understanding of what Orbstack is and not understanding docker contexts. You can use Docker contexts to run OrbStack and Colima side-by-side. Switching contexts affects all commands you run from that point on, see: https://docs.orbstack.dev/install#colima https://docs.orbstack.dev/install#colima # Switch to OrbStack docker context use orbstack # Switch to Colima docker context use colima
mdeeks 3y ago
As the other commenter mentions, you can actually use `docker context` to choose which system you want to use for all of your tools. That docker socket you're referencing is just for the default context if you never chose anything. Personally, this is the behavior I want and I think that is correct. I just installed OrbStack. That means I want it to take over as the new way to use docker. Switching back to any other system is easy and it is documented here: https://docs.orbstack.dev/faq#revert-docker https://docs.orbstack.dev/faq#revert-docker I suppose Orbstack should make it more obvious what it did and how to revert though.