Ubuntu Knocks On Docker In Latest Snaps Promotion

[WiR3D]

Yeah same boat here. Different purposes.

I mostly use docker for local dev, and when I'm deploying something to docker which is only to make sure runtimes are exactly the same locally and in production.

I see snap for iot, that makes sense, managing docker containers on iot sounds like a nightmare tbh.

And don't get me started on snap on desktop. Ewww. Flatpak all the way

[Vermilion]

While Canonical tries to push Snaps for very different use cases, its lack of focus makes it the subpar alternative in every situation:
On Desktop, it slows boot and shutdown times, it lacks proper sandboxing without AppArmor, and until recently it had ridiculously long startup times.
On Servers, forced updates make it a no go for any serious production environment, no sandboxing for AppArmor-less distros, no virtual networks..
On Edge and IoT, its centralized delivery system makes Snapcraft.io a critical dependency, with no alternatives if anything goes south, especially considering Canonical's track record of axing projects that bleed money.

[Yalok]

Looks like a marketing joke from Canonical.

[ehansin]

no that is not correct, a base install of Ubuntu server have only one snap installed, lxd, and lxd isn't even active by default. Not sure what you mean by the boot being jumpy, I for one cannot see any difference between Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS and so on during boot.

It is like it is starting things on parallel or something like that (well, yes, I know to does that anyway!) What I mean is, as an example, I get the login prompt, and then more console output after the fact, stuff keeps coming. Has been that way for a while. Debian does not do this, whatever it is it is doing. I just figured it was Snap stuff, thought I may have been told that in the past. May just an assumption, and you know what they say. I don't need to be correct, rather be corrected if I am wrong.

I was just going to install 23.04 server on a VM to test again, but not going to download a 2.5 GB ISO for this right now, miss the old ~600 MB netinstall ISOs to be honest, but maybe will check out at another time. Because of work, have warmed up to RH derivatives and also Debian. But used to install Ubuntu server quite often, am not opposed to it.

[ssokolow]

I suppose I have to give them credit for admitting that Docker has them beat on "Host OS", "Container base OS", "Networking", and "Global distribution".

...though their text for "Global distribution" is a bit of an understatement. I'm not sure how many companies will want the vendor lock-in of having the Snap client hard-coded to "There's a single upstream repository and it's Canonical's".

As for which boat I'm in, I use Flatpak for applications and rely on Rust's Go-esque static linking for services I create.

[ridge]

lol.
lmao, even.

[EphemeralEft]

It’s kind of weird to make an infographic that so clearly shows their product to be inferior in most ways, but I guess I appreciate the honesty.

[sarmad]

Are there people who are using docker as a medium for distributing apps? Maybe in the IoT space they do that? That would be the only reason I can think of for making this comparison, otherwise the two techs are used for different things.

[ssokolow]

Are there people who are using docker as a medium for distributing apps? Maybe in the IoT space they do that? That would be the only reason I can think of for making this comparison, otherwise the two techs are used for different things.

You see the occasional open-source utility like whipper offering a Docker option. Typically, stuff that either has no GUI or added a Docker option before they also started supporting Snaps and/or Flatpak.

[Scellow]

Canonical = Microsoft, they lost credibility, just like Red Hat

People now have the choice, so they choose less worse: docker