Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 129 posts

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#61

Post by kristianp »

moondev wrote: post #55
Shank wrote: post #47

The really perplexing thing to me here is that Docker Desktop...was featured on stage at the Apple event. How? Did Apple just hack it together and get it working? Was it just fake? Was Docker involved at all? I feel like it was implied that Apple was doing the hard work here, but now it looks more like nobody was doing the work, and showing it off working was a hat trick?

https://i.imgur.com/bQb1grM.png Makes you wonder what else was "simulated" during the demo?

From that image, the docker server could have been running in a Linux VM, and docker desktop connecting to that.

EDIT: change "was" to "could have been".

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#62

Post by moondev »

jjcm wrote: post #53
moondev wrote: post #52

Apple's "demo" showed Docker for mac running, complete with containers. https://i.imgur.com/bQb1grM.png Docker here is saying their "for mac" application dependencies are not even all working yet. Unless I am missing something - Apple's Docker on silicon demo was fabricated?

Docker is likely saying that it doesn’t natively run on ARM yet. Apple’s demo was likely using Rosetta. That said this is all speculation at this point. We’ll know tomorrow.

A Linux virtual machine is required to run Docker on macOS.

Linux containers need a Linux kernel to function.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#63

Post by tristanstcyr »

vbezhenar wrote: post #57
crb002 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want x86 Docker on ARM.

What the point of docker if you can't just run single binary everywhere? That was its promise, right?

I don't think that doing so across architectures is a major goal.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#64

Post by sitkack »

noelherrick wrote: post #46
crb002 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS Graviton 2 ARM instances are more cost effective for most server loads. This is a gateway to saving a lot of cloud spend.

I agree with you, but there's probably already been some pressure with people wanting to use Raspberry PIs/other ARM-based boards for K8s clusters. I wonder where that tipping point will come. Anandtech's benchmarks: https://www.anandtech.com/show/15578/cloud-clash-amazon-grav... Here's a tweet about one company's experience: https://twitter.com/lizthegrey/status/1314618333140971521

Ubuntu on Arm is mature. I see no reason why Docker on Mac can't be running Armbuntu VMs.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#65

Post by sitkack »

moondev wrote: post #62
jjcm wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker is likely saying that it doesn’t natively run on ARM yet. Apple’s demo was likely using Rosetta. That said this is all speculation at this point. We’ll know tomorrow.

A Linux virtual machine is required to run Docker on macOS. Linux containers need a Linux kernel to function.

And Linux runs on Arm just fine. , Android.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#66

Post by sitkack »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #20
raverbashing wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is: why even care? Use an Arm image. For docker, it makes little to no difference

That requires that ARM images are available, which will take time and always have a disconnect. It also violates the idea of being able to run the exact same image on your laptop (ARM Mac) and in prod (x86 server).

It wasn't though, the same Dockerfile, but not the same image. The images are ephemeral and stateless, being only a projection of the Dockerfile.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#67

Post by moondev »

kristianp wrote: post #61
moondev wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://i.imgur.com/bQb1grM.png Makes you wonder what else was "simulated" during the demo?

From that image, the docker server could have been running in a Linux VM, and docker desktop connecting to that. EDIT: change "was" to "could have been".

> docker desktop connecting to that

Docker's blog post says "Docker for Mac (silicon)" dependencies are not working yet. Apple gave the demo 3 months ago.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#68

Post by vbezhenar »

jrockway wrote: post #29
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That requires that ARM images are available, which will take time and always have a disconnect. It also violates the idea of being able to run the exact same image on your laptop (ARM Mac) and in prod (x86 server).

You can run on ARM servers in production. They're even cheaper than x86 servers. (Though also slower, at least AWS's version.) Realistically, ARM is probably the future, and just needs something to push society in the direction of the future. A lot of people use Macs, so this forces people to become interested in switching, which has some value. Remember when the original iMac had USB instead of ADB ports? Everyone w…

> You can run on ARM servers in production. They're even cheaper than x86 servers. (Though also slower, at least AWS's version.)

Where can I buy ARM server comparable with x86 server on performance? I'm not interested with clouds, I want bare metal server. I'm not aware of any server brand like HP or Dell producing ARM servers. I'm also not aware of any CPU manufacturer producing computer desktops with ARM comparable with x86, outside of Apple macs. I'm not convinced that ARM is the future. For me the future is both architectures co-existing.

Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chips and Docker

#70

Post by moondev »

sitkack wrote: post #65
moondev wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Linux virtual machine is required to run Docker on macOS. Linux containers need a Linux kernel to function.

And Linux runs on Arm just fine. , Android.

I agree, which is why rosetta is irrelevant here.
Post reply on HN