Early Docker build demonstrates incoming Apple Silicon support

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in Mac Software
The virtualization software Docker is getting closer to being usable by developers on an Apple Silicon Mac, with an early version of the tool confirmed as being able to run on the new chip architecture.

An early M1-supporting build of Docker [via Twitter/@mugofsoup]
An early M1-supporting build of Docker [via Twitter/@mugofsoup]


Mentioned in Apple's launch of its Apple Silicon Mac lineup, Docker has yet to fully make the transition from being usable on Intel Macs to versions using M1. In a tweet, it seems the work to make the transition is making progress.

Docker VP of engineering Jean-Laurent Morlhorn shared a post on Twitter by developer Dave Scott, showing a version of Docker that is working on an M1 Mac. In commenting on the screenshot, Morlhorn adds it is a "super early version of Docker Desktop running on Apple Silicon."

It's alive ! Super early version of docker desktop running on Apple Silicon. No publicly available build yet. https://t.co/Djug9s5Id6

-- Jean-Laurent Morlhon (@morlhon)


While the post is a good sign for users of the tool, it doesn't mean it will be released imminently with Apple Silicon support, as Morlhorn advises there's "no publicly available build yet."

On November 16, Docker advised it was actively working through the steps needed to get it working on M1 hardware. Aiming to "provide the same great experience on the new Macs" and for a seamless transition, developer Ben De St Paer-Gotch explained there was a need to move its "plumbing" to Apple's new hypervisor framework, and that using Rosetta 2 doesn't get Docker Desktop "all the way."

The company also has to rely on software by other firms that need to go through the same transition process. The list included Electron, which officially started to support M1 on November 20.

Docker isn't the only virtualization software wrestling with the move to M1. Both Parallels and VMWare have confirmed support for M1 is on the way for their respective tool packages.
bala1234Philapalooza

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 9
    djames4242djames4242 Posts: 651member
    This.is.super.exciting!

    It sounds like there is some hope that Docker + Rosetta will even allow existing containers to run...? This is the Christmas present I’m hoping for 🙂
    williamlondonwatto_cobraPhilapalooza
  • Reply 2 of 9
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 626member
    You can download a working VM from GitHub right now. It's running Ubuntu 20.10. Still very rudimentary but it definitely works. Command line only right now. It might work with a xwindows client. I haven't tried that yet.

    https://github.com/mibosshard/SimpleVM/releases
    edited November 2020 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 9
    ivanhivanh Posts: 597member
    The weakness of Linux and distros and even hypervisors are not capable of responding to new OSes. All Linux VMs on Oracle Virtual Box are not able to run on Big Sur, not to mention the Apple Silicone. How come?
  • Reply 4 of 9
    prismaticsprismatics Posts: 164member
    ivanh said:
    The weakness of Linux and distros and even hypervisors are not capable of responding to new OSes. All Linux VMs on Oracle Virtual Box are not able to run on Big Sur, not to mention the Apple Silicone. How come?

    The new OS you are speaking of is more similar to iOS than OS X and breaks critical things that are considered granted on other computing platforms. Of course you should not expect general purpose computing applications to be instantly available on a platform that has experienced something similar to an earthquake (even by Apple standards) the developers are waking up from.

    I think it can be said that general purpose computing applications that rely on a very broad set of technologies to be present on a platform will be hard to support on a mac, forcing developers to create so many special cases that you could simply write a new app entierly just for macOS which is hard to justify you see.

    edited November 2020
  • Reply 5 of 9
    jkereszturijkereszturi Posts: 4member

    ... Of course you should not expect general purpose computing applications to be instantly available on a platform that has experienced something similar to an earthquake (even by Apple standards) the developers are waking up from.

    I think it can be said that general purpose computing applications that rely on a very broad set of technologies to be present on a platform will be hard to support on a mac, forcing developers to create so many special cases that you could simply write a new app entierly just for macOS which is hard to justify you see.

    That sounds fairly negative and I wouldn’t classify virtualization as “general purpose computing applications”, but even that seems is getting support from VMware, Parallels and Docker. Anyway, after spending past couple of days setting up and playing with an M1 Mac Mini, I’m extremely impressed with how well it runs existing Intel applications and even a few older iOS apps i tried...right out of the gate. In terms of justifying writing (or retrofitting) applications targeting MacOS, it would follow that the combined size of MacOS and iOS (now that the two platforms are even more similar being on same family of processors) would be even more attractive.
    h4y3s
  • Reply 6 of 9
    nicholfdnicholfd Posts: 824member
    ivanh said:
    The weakness of Linux and distros and even hypervisors are not capable of responding to new OSes. All Linux VMs on Oracle Virtual Box are not able to run on Big Sur, not to mention the Apple Silicone. How come?
    For Virtual Box, you'll have to ask Oracle why there are issues on macOS Big Sur.  All of my VMs (under VMware Fusion) work just fine on my intel based Macs, running macOS Big Sur. 

    You cannot expect existing x86 based VM's to run on Apple Silicone - it is a different CPU architecture (x86 vs. ARM).  Virtualization requires the VMs to match the CPU architecture of the host.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 9
    nicholfdnicholfd Posts: 824member
    prismatics said:
    ivanh said:
    The weakness of Linux and distros and even hypervisors are not capable of responding to new OSes. All Linux VMs on Oracle Virtual Box are not able to run on Big Sur, not to mention the Apple Silicone. How come?

    The new OS you are speaking of is more similar to iOS than OS X and breaks critical things that are considered granted on other computing platforms.

    I think you are mistaken.  macOS Big Sur is still macOS.  Virtualization is still there and works fine for VMs that match the host architecture.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 9
    croprcropr Posts: 1,124member
    nicholfd said:
    prismatics said:
    ivanh said:
    The weakness of Linux and distros and even hypervisors are not capable of responding to new OSes. All Linux VMs on Oracle Virtual Box are not able to run on Big Sur, not to mention the Apple Silicone. How come?

    The new OS you are speaking of is more similar to iOS than OS X and breaks critical things that are considered granted on other computing platforms.

    I think you are mistaken.  macOS Big Sur is still macOS.  Virtualization is still there and works fine for VMs that match the host architecture.
    I think prismatics is not that wrong.   Running Docker containers on Apple silicon with Big Sur faces the same challenges  as running Docker on any non X86 device, including iPads. The OS on the device is only a small part of the equation, the big part is the CPU architecture
  • Reply 9 of 9
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 626member
    cropr said:
    nicholfd said:
    ivanh said:
    The weakness of Linux and distros and even hypervisors are not capable of responding to new OSes. All Linux VMs on Oracle Virtual Box are not able to run on Big Sur, not to mention the Apple Silicone. How come?

    The new OS you are speaking of is more similar to iOS than OS X and breaks critical things that are considered granted on other computing platforms.

    I think you are mistaken.  macOS Big Sur is still macOS.  Virtualization is still there and works fine for VMs that match the host architecture.
    I think prismatics is not that wrong.   Running Docker containers on Apple silicon with Big Sur faces the same challenges  as running Docker on any non X86 device, including iPads. The OS on the device is only a small part of the equation, the big part is the CPU architecture
    You couldn’t run docker on an iPad. iPads don’t support virtualization. The M1 does. Docker uses QEmu to emulate x86 if needed. Or you can run an Arm64 architecture in docker on a Arm64 OS. This is all working in development and I’m sure docker is close to a beta. QEmu is already mostly working in development. 

    The Open Source community seems very enthusiastic about the M1 and Apple Silicon Macs. 
    edited December 2020
Sign In or Register to comment.