[righthand]

They invest in it because Docker is waaay out of spec with how things are done on Linux. Doing things that break the system, struggling with rootless for years, and who can miss the vendor lock-in? Podman is open and compliant and compliments k8s as well. It’s just nonsense the amount of effort developers have invested in Docker because it was first to market for easy containers.

[mardifoufs]

Docker is every bit as open and not locked in as podman. Perhaps even more so as it's so widely used and doesn't require redhat specific projects around it. Are you confusing docker with docker hub?

[jzb]

It’s really not if you’re talking about Docker Desktop or any of the commercial products: https://docs.docker.com/subscription/desktop-license/

Podman Desktop is completely open.

[mardifoufs]

Well sure, then let's talk about podman desktop. I'm pretty sure the discussion was around docker itself, but maybe I got confused... Because otherwise you can just use other tools rather that docker desktop to manage docker containers (eg rancher desktop, which is also open source).

[righthand]

No, I’m not confusing requiring a DockerHub account to even install Docker. Though that is an excellent example of it’s non-openness, thank you.

[mardifoufs]

What? That's just completely wrong. Even for docker desktop (which is completely different from docker engine) you don't need an account

[righthand]

It appears they have since reverted the decision in 2020 but it used to require logging in for Docker Engine:

https://github.com/docker/docs/issues/6910

I did not know this as I stopped using Docker long ago.

[mardifoufs]

Oh yeah to be clear, I absolutely agree that docker desktop as a whole is a mess especially since they keep introducing more ways to tie it up to docker hub etc. I wouldn't use it unless I'm on windows. So yes, avoid docker desktop but docker (the engine) itself is thankfully completely separate from docker desktop.

[dathinab]

> doesn't require redhat specific projects around it.

that is like saying oh no docker requires docker (company) specific projects around it

and as far as I can tell docker in recent years mainly cares about docker desktop and swarm which are less open then podman given their business model

[mardifoufs]

Docker still sees a ton of development. I wouldn't be surprised if it sees more dev than podman.

And my point was more so that podman is obviously designed around the rhel ecosystem. I'm not saying it's closed! Just that even if we were to (wrongly) argue that one of the two is more "locked in", it's clearly podman. Docker is so much more widely used, ported, is basically as completely "non locked in" as it could be.

The only possible "lock in" is maybe the docker images namespace defaulting to docker hub but imo that's trivial and basically more of an early design choice that can't be reverted.

By all means, we can argue about technical differences but the often repeated argument about docker being less open than podman or whatever is just not true

[dathinab]

docker isn't really struggeling with rootles, it works with rootless since a long time

they just never bothered making it the default or officially supporting it

which in context with how they acted about other security problems int the past tells a lot about how serious the docker company takes security on linux