Live data from Hacker News

macOS Container Machines

github.com

291–300 of 457 posts

Re: macOS Container Machines

#291
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in my day you to to download a couple GB worth of cygwin, and that wasn't an actual environment, basically just a GNU toolchain compiled for windows. But it got you like....grep and bash and stuff that ran natively on windows which was kinda cool.

Does any older folk here remembers when NT was the Cool New Thing (TM) and it had by design support to multiple subsystems plopped over the NT API, and Win32 was just one of them alongside POSIX (Interix) and OS/2? There was even a _very short_ time span when Interix was actually usable (it was extremely short though)

I guess that makes me square within the 'older folk' subset - I continued to use the NT core with LiteSTEP alongside the SGI/IRIX Octane2 well after Y2K.

Those days I was working on a rework of the TRO PLATO learning system which was a real beast but essential for the individual learning project of a charter school i was supporting.

PLATO had been taken from it's dedicated mainframe world and made 'runnable' on W95 workstations with an NT server - but it really didn't run well, and the kids could really get behind the interface into regular Windows environment too readily. In combination the workstations were crazy hard to keep running cleanly.

So in the end; we had to take the software out of Windows, wash it clean in the waters of Silicon Graphics System-V with BSD extensions (X11) Unix and BSD - NeXTSTEP, just so we could bring it back to Windows properly using LiteStep.

Life happened and I lost touch with the outcome of it all, moving on to my next project; but, I kept a LiteSTEP desktop until moving entirely over to Linux in 2004.

Haven't used Windows for anything but a gaming load since '05 and stopped doing even that in about 2010, nothing later than XP.

Re: macOS Container Machines

#292

Anyone know why you would use this instead of QEMU+Lima+Colima+Docker/containerd? The latter works on multiple OSes, has a very large ecosystem of tools, images, documentation, and lets you replace pieces as needed

From a layman's POV ("I just want to run my containers I need for dev work"), there's no point in switching to this for now. It's just cool that Apple cares enough about containers and might come up with an Apple-like built-in solution some day, this is the groundwork.

I'd stick to Colima, or Orbstack if you trust them enough to not do a rug-pull once their users are reliant on them enough to pay any amount.

Re: macOS Container Machines

#293

To clarify a few comments here: this is not only OCI containers: container machines add support for persistence and filesystem mounting, making container machines a great lightweight Linux environment for developers using macOS. More details here: https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2026/389

Still feels like a apple-ified microvm

Re: macOS Container Machines

#294
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be wonderful if this ran on older versions of macOS, but according to the README they only support 26.

you do not understand... Not run on, run IN :) I'm saying the older version of macos could build/run INSIDE the container just like on a ubuntu 24.04 system you can do: FROM ubuntu:16.04 or docker run ubuntu:16.04 and though I haven't tried it, I believe docker can do arm in x86 using an emulator (like rosetta)

Oh right. I don't see Apple having any interest in supporting that given their current trajectory.

Re: macOS Container Machines

#295

Anyone know why you would use this instead of QEMU+Lima+Colima+Docker/containerd? The latter works on multiple OSes, has a very large ecosystem of tools, images, documentation, and lets you replace pieces as needed

QEMU has worse performance than Apple's native virtualization framework on macOS, for one thing. That said, Lima supports the latter as well.

Re: macOS Container Machines

#296
post #181

So essentially both macOS and Windows now heavily support developing using Linux on them. They can't more openly admit that they are no match for Linux in that area. There's some clever advertising in it for Linux, if Linux was advertising.

A lot of devs needs to use linux but they still use it just as a VM (Mac) or in some kind emulation (WSL). How pathetic.

Re: macOS Container Machines

#299
post #181

So essentially both macOS and Windows now heavily support developing using Linux on them. They can't more openly admit that they are no match for Linux in that area. There's some clever advertising in it for Linux, if Linux was advertising.

Linux also can't openly admit that it's no match for macOS/Windows on the desktop, which is why we have this hybrid situation - macOS/Windows desktops running Linux VMs
Post reply on HN