Containerization, or the process of packing a software application and all of its dependencies into a single container image, is not a new concept. The company Docker was first responsible for popularizing the concept of containers and bringing them to the mainstream before the “Open Container Initiative” (OCI) came along. This is the reason people sometimes confuse containers with Docker, but you must understand that Docker is just a tool in the container space.
Docker containers are lightweight, stand-alone, and executable packages that include everything needed to run a piece of software. Their main focus is to isolate different applications and their dependencies to enable portability. On the other hand, Docker Desktop is an application designed to provide developers with a seamless environment for creating, managing, and orchestrating Docker containers. It includes a graphical user interface (GUI), Docker CLI, Docker Compose, and Kubernetes integration, simplifying the development and testing of containerized applications locally.
Docker Desktop is one of the most popular developer-focused tools for managing containers and simplifying the development workflow. Released in the mid-2000s, it has become a go-to tool for building, testing, and deploying applications in containers. In the Windows and MacOS environments, a Docker engine establishes a Linux virtual environment to run the Docker engine.
One of the main advantages of Docker Desktop is its integration capabilities with different development environments. Overall, it simplifies the complexities of containerization, making it accessible for developers of all skill levels.
In this post, you’ll learn about some of the main reasons for exploring the alternatives to Docker Desktop. You’ll be introduced to some of the most popular Docker Desktop alternatives, and you’ll be able to choose the best container orchestration tool for your needs.
Reasons for Considering Docker Desktop Alternatives
While Docker Desktop is a highly used tool, it has its own shortcomings, so developers may want to look for alternatives. Here are some of the main reasons why developers or organizations explore Docker Desktop alternatives.
Licensing and Cost Concerns
During the initial years of release, Docker Desktop was available freely for individuals and organizations. However, in August 2021, it moved toward a commercial licensing model for companies with more than 250 employees or over $10 million in revenue. This introduction to subscription plans for professional use prompted users to seek cost-effective alternatives that fit within their budgets.
Performance Issues on Certain Platforms
Docker Desktop is a resource-intensive tool, particularly on Windows and MacOS, which leads to performance issues like high CPU and memory usage. Sometimes, users also experience slow startup and operational speeds, which can hamper development efficiency and productivity.
Compatibility with Different Operating Systems
While there are plenty of operating systems available for different purposes, Docker Desktop may not be fully optimized for all operating systems. This can cause compatibility issues or require workarounds for certain development environments. There are some alternatives that offer better native support for specific operating systems, and they provide a smoother and more integrated experience.
Preference for Open-Source and Noncommercial Tools
Open-source tools are the preference of many developers, as they are community-driven, ensure transparency, provide frequent updates, and allow the ability to contribute to the project. These open-source alternatives can help avoid vendor lock-in. They provide users with more control over their development tools and infrastructure.
Seeking Tools with Unique or Emerging Features
Certain Docker Desktop alternatives include special features or improvements that can be more appropriate for particular use cases or development requirements. Developers normally look for tools that provide specialized capabilities, such as enhanced security features, better orchestration, or more advanced networking options.
Top Docker Desktop Alternatives
1. Podman
Podman (Pod Manager) is probably one of the most famous alternatives to Docker Desktop. It’s an open-source container management tool that offers a daemonless container engine for developing, managing, and running OCI containers on Linux systems.
Developed by Red Hat, Podman is designed to be a drop-in replacement for Docker Desktop with a focus on security, flexibility, and compatibility. One of the key features that makes Podman a unique tool is that it is daemonless. In Docker Desktop, if the Docker daemon fails, then all other containers running on it will fail. In Podman, each container has its own runtime process and not just one daemon.
Podman has compatibility with OCI container image spec just like Docker, which typically means that all the images produced by Docker can easily be run with Podman. Also, the command line interface of Podman is quite similar to Docker. For example, commands like docker ps and docker run are given as podman ps and podman run, respectively, in Podman.
Another way that Podman differs from Docker is that it uses rootless containers by default. Although root access is not required to start and manage a container, it does help to reduce the possibility of privilege escalation due to possible vulnerabilities in the container runtime.
Pros of Podman
Reduces the attack surface and improves overall security due to is daemonless and rootless architecture
Easy to transition containerized applications to Kubernetes environments
Is a fully open-source project without licensing and cost concerns
Easy to use if you’re familiar with Docker
Cons of Podman
Has less mature support for Windows and MacOS compared with Linux
Is still in development for a more mature and extensive ecosystem including third-party integrations.Fewer learning resources available online compared with Docker.
2. Rancher Desktop
Rancher Desktop is another open-source alternative to Docker Desktop that provides a simplified, integrated development environment for container management and Kubernetes clusters. Developed by Rancher Labs (a subsidiary of SUSE), Rancher Desktop aims to streamline container development workflows on Mac, Windows, and Linux by combining the benefits of Docker and Kubernetes in a user-friendly interface. One interesting fact is that both Kubernetes and Rancher Desktop use the same container runtime.
Rancher Desktop allows you to choose between the Moby engine (offered by Continered) and the dockerd engine (offered by Docker) for building, pushing, and running containers. Compared with Docker Desktop, which provides Docker CLI as a CLI tool, Rancher provides both kubectl and nerdctl for managing Kubernetes and containers, respectively.
Rancher Desktop also includes a local Kubernetes cluster, enabling developers to build, test, and run Kubernetes applications directly on their desktops.
Pros of Rancher Desktop
Fully open source, encourages community contributions, and avoids licensing fees
Provides a local Kubernetes environment that is ideal for developers working on Kubernetes applications
Caters to both novice and expert developers by combining command-line tools with a graphical user interface (GUI) for administering Kubernetes
Availability on Windows, MacOS, and Linux platforms
Cons of Rancher Desktop
Steeper learning curve for users who are less familiar with Kubernetes concepts
Although rapidly developing, is relatively newer compared with Docker Desktop
As it creates local Kubernetes clusters, performance can vary based on the underlying hardware and configuration.
3. Minikube
Minikube is an open-source tool that allows users to run single-node Kubernetes clusters locally on MacOS, Windows, or Linux. Although Minikube does not provide any user interface, it simplifies the setup and management of Kubernetes environments on local machines, making it an excellent choice for developing, testing, and learning Kubernetes.
Minikube supports various container runtimes, including Docker, containerd, and CRI-O, allowing flexibility in the development environment.
Minikube works with the Hypervisor framework on MacOS, Hyper-V on Windows, native (no virtual machine), Docker, or KVM on Linux. It provides a full Kubernetes cluster on a local machine, enabling developers to test and develop Kubernetes applications without needing a remote cluster. This is the reason that if you’re using Kubernetes with Docker, Minikube might be the best alternative for you.
Finally, it works seamlessly with standard Kubernetes tools such as kubectl, enabling a smooth transition to production environments.
Pros of Minikube
Support for multiple container runtimes
Provides a full-fledged local Kubernetes cluster, ideal for Kubernetes development
Fully open source with no licensing cost
Includes a variety of add-ons for the Kubernetes environment
Cons of Minikube
For developers who need basic container management without Kubernetes, Minikube might be a little complex.
Lack of built-in GUI
As it runs the Kubernetes cluster locally, it can be resource-intensive.
4. LXD
LXD is an open-source container and virtual machine manager that provides a hypervisor-like experience for Linux containers. it’s designed to run system containers and offers a lightweight alternative to traditional virtual machines while providing full operating system environments. It supports running full Linux distributions inside containers, offering a more VM-like experience with the efficiency of containers.
LXD provides a powerful command-line interface (CLI) and a REST API for managing containers and virtual machines programmatically. It also has good image management capabilities, including image creation, publication, and downloading from image servers.
Finally, LXD has advanced network management capabilities, including support for various networking configurations and integration with cloud networks.
Pros of LXD
Fully open source and benefits from community contributions
Provides a REST API for programmatic management, facilitating integration with other tools and automation systems
Can manage both containers and virtual machines
Offers sophisticated network and storage management capabilities
Cons of LXD
The advanced features of LXD can introduce complexity.
Majorly focuses on system containers rather than application container solutions
Requires knowledge of system containers and potentially virtual machines
5. Containerd
Containerd is an open-source project originally created by Docker Inc. and is now a graduated project of the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF). It is a container runtime that’s part of the Docker ecosystem, but it can also be used as a stand-alone. It’s designed to handle the execution and lifecycle management of containers and provides a robust and reliable runtime that can be embedded into higher-level systems such as Docker, Kubernetes, and other container orchestration platforms.
Containerd is OCI compatible and ensures broad compatibility with different container formats and runtimes. It provides a powerful API to manage the lifecycle of containers, including image transfer, container execution, and storage management. It’s specially designed to be embedded into larger systems, making it a flexible choice for various container orchestration needs. Also, it integrates with various snapshotters (e.g., overlayfs, btrfs, zfs), to enable flexible and efficient image layer management.
Pros of Containerd
Lightweight and efficient, with minimal overhead
Highly extensible and can be integrated into various container orchestration platforms
Adherence to industry standards
Fully open source and community-driven
Cons of Containerd
Lacks a native graphical user interface
Primarily optimized for Linux, with some support for Windows
Requires manual setup and integration with other tools to provide a complete container management solution
Which Tool Is Best for You?
There is no one tool that fits all of your needs. Here’s the information about what tools are best suited for which kind of application.
Best overall alternative: Podman for its Docker compatibility, security features, and ease of migration.
For Kubernetes developers: Rancher Desktop for comprehensive Kubernetes integration.
For lightweight Kubernetes development: Minikube for simplicity in Kubernetes environments.
For system containers and advanced features: LXD for users needing system-level containers.
For Kubernetes runtime integration: Containerd for a lightweight, efficient runtime in Kubernetes setups.
Overall, Podman is generally the best alternative for most Docker Desktop users due to its ease of migration, feature parity, and security enhancements. However, for users with specific needs around Kubernetes or system containers, Rancher Desktop, Minikube, and LXD are strong contenders.
Apart from Docker Desktop alternatives, you can also explore DevZero, which is an emerging platform designed to simplify the development and deployment process much like Docker. It aims to streamline the process of setting up, maintaining, and managing development environments. It provides developers with consistent, scalable, and ready-to-use environments that can significantly reduce the time and effort required for configuration and deployment.
DevZero presents a compelling alternative to Docker, especially for teams seeking to minimize setup time, ensure environment consistency, and leverage cloud scalability.
Conclusion
After reading this post, you now know about some of the shortcomings of Docker Desktop. You’ve explored a list of alternatives that can replace Docker Desktop for container management while providing other useful features.
Finally, you’ve seen that based on all the features, Podman stands out as one of the best Docker Desktop replacements.
Also, DevZero is another tool that can replace Docker for various development purposes. DevZero’s cloud-based approach can offer significant advantages in terms of ease of use, collaboration, and resource management.
