Settings

Theme

Rancher Desktop 1.0

suse.com

152 points by vyskocilm 4 years ago · 64 comments

Reader

nhoughto 4 years ago

Just in time for the end of jan Docker Desktop grace period (https://www.docker.com/blog/the-grace-period-for-the-docker-...).

I played with this when first announced, and then now and all the things I wanted when i first tried it out are now fixed (mainly transparent networking..) and the option for dockerd container engine makes migrating pretty simple.

  • nhoughto 4 years ago

    minor additional benefit is that it configures 'service account signing' in k3s OOTB, so you don't have to hack it in by changing config behind docker desktop's back if you really need it like we did.

rjzzleep 4 years ago

What's the state of Rancher these days? I was handing over a clients project and looking for someone to maintain it long term. I chose Rancher in my ignorance, but all Rancher did was tank the project.

They installed their own halfbaked inhouse CloudNative Storage Provider, then quoted the client 50k to try to stabilize it. Their sales people were also nonstop trying to sell them on more consulting hours on top of the 50k they were taking in license fee for a 3 node cluster.

The whole thing left such a bad taste in my mouth that whenever I see Rancher I tell my clients to look for other options and run away as far as possible.

Now that Suse owns them I'm a bit more open to it, but I imagine there are still a lot of old rancher people in there.

Can anyone enlighten me on the current state of affairs?

  • bbunix 4 years ago

    The latest version 2.6 has an issue where it can lose track of the cluster state, rendering it useless. (You had one job Rancher).

  • CasperDern 4 years ago

    UI looks nice but is janky. Documentation is lacking, but sufficient. Longhorn works great (if you ignore CPU usage due to syncing when there's a lot of IOPS). Overal though self-hosting it has been pretty great for us from a usability perspective. Not sure if it's as enterprise-ready as they say though. Also haven't had to deal with their sales/support (yet).

  • arcastroe 4 years ago

    I self-host rancher 2.6 for personal use and maintain a 3-node cluster. I find it enjoyable to work with though I only host ~13 different web applications: private docker registry, gitea, drone, plex media server, sagemath through jupyter, and a few personal projects.

    It's probably unnecessary/overkill for single-user like myself, but so far I like it

  • qeternity 4 years ago

    We use rancher for a few clusters. The new UI a overhaul is atrocious and is very broken.

thrwawy283 4 years ago

It feels like we're late to create the desktop experience where most things run in containers. My wish is to run something like Proxmox as a "stable base", and within it have a VM for my firewall (pfsense), my primary Linux OS (Fedora/Arch), a VM for services (Docker & k8s), and a VM for Windows gaming. I like the separation of concerns. I've wanted to do all of this on a laptop but I can't get a VM to exclusively take control of the GPU & display controller (overtake the laptop display panel).

For a long while now I've wanted a stable, slim base OS. I actually thought Rancher Desktop was a rebirth of RancherOS: https://rancher.com/docs/os/

I really liked the concept of a "system docker" and a "user docker". I thought Fedora CoreOS had potential to be the first Linux "Desktop" container distro.

Oh well, maybe a desktop distro that aims to containerize all apps is a 2023 thing. Still remember that Steam bug?

  • thinkmassive 4 years ago

    Fedora Silverblue is a Linux desktop container distro https://silverblue.fedoraproject.org/

    • thrwawy283 4 years ago

      I have never heard of this (until now). Thank you! I've been loving NixOS so I hope it's easy to build the world like that. :-)

  • signalblur 4 years ago

    Isn’t that essentially what fedora Silverblue is?

    It’s an immutable desktop OS where everything is ran in flatpaks/podman pods for the most part and it’s actually a really great experience.

    Can play stellaris on steam with it for example with no issue.

  • moondev 4 years ago

    You can do exactly this with proxmox or esxi. Create a main "gaming vm" to autostart with GPU + USB passthrough. Then you can manage your other vms from the web browser on your gaming vm.

    • thrwawy283 4 years ago

      I understand what you're saying, but I'm seeking a very particular setup. Currently you cannot get a VM/guest to exclusively control the display panel of a laptop. You can get it to take exclusive control of a GPU, even an integrated GPU, but not the display controller and laptop panel itself. Usually the laptop user is left running an external monitor for their "main display". I did see myself administering pfsense and the separate "services" VM from the web browser.

      The best you can do is have the host/hypervisor own the laptop display, and then remote desktop to or "stream out" the guest framebuffer.

    • arejaytee 4 years ago

      But what are you using to access this startup VM that's isn't clunky/laggy?

  • XorNot 4 years ago

    We're sort of desperately missing a high speed graphics option for VMs. Which is one of those things which feels like it should have become more prevalent by now with everyone throwing GPUs into server hardware and wanting to timeslice it amongst containers.

  • lostmsu 4 years ago

    Have you tried Cubes OS?

    • thrwawy283 4 years ago

      Yes, but I don't consider that easier to maintain. The appeal of a dockerfile or k8s manifest means I can expect some degree of isolation, and easily distribute that experience to others. Getting something to run in Cube OS is more of the VM experience, than container experience. I do like both.

cholmon 4 years ago

It looks like Rancher Desktop uses Lima VM (https://github.com/lima-vm/lima) under the hood, I suppose in the same way that Docker Desktop uses Hypervisor.framework on macos? This is the first I've heard about the Lima project. I'll be interested to see how file system performance with this compares to Docker Desktop on mac.

  • jbreiding 4 years ago

    While I haven’t run rancher desktop, i have been running colima.

    https://github.com/abiosoft/colima

    Which also is built on top of lima.

    It’s been great, some network wonkiness, and works on m1 perfectly.

    The rancher devs have been contributing back to the project helping improve both.

  • solarkraft 4 years ago

    Cool! Haven't used it with containers (Docker Desktop has been good enough), but am quite a Lima fan.

    The main issues I've had are in networking and you have to keep in mind that you have to explicitly specify writable directories. Other than that it seems pretty well comparable to WSL2.

tokumei 4 years ago

These desktop applications look nice, but personally I’m much more comfortable with CLI tools. I have no idea what my colleagues are doing that use GUI git programs. I can’t even stand editor integration plugins.

Edit: On topic, just test k8s config changes in prod :^)

  • lucasyvas 4 years ago

    You need Docker Desktop on macOS and Windows even if you don't want it. Please, send help :(

    • carlreid 4 years ago

      For Windows, you can run docker in WSL at least. It's also easy to install using the script at https://get.docker.com.

      It will warn you about WSL and recommend Docker Desktop for Windows, which is funny since Docker Desktop can also run docker for you in WSL.

      • capableweb 4 years ago

        Could you really claim that installing Docker via WSL is actually running Docker on Windows? It's really hard for me to claim such. Rather, you're installing/running Docker via Ubuntu (or whatever image you use), while Windows is the host.

        • tyingq 4 years ago

          I think the context was replying to "You Need Docker Desktop", which used to be true with WSL1. WSL2 opens up the option to run regular Docker in the WSL2 instance, which doesn't have to be Ubuntu, but could be.

        • resizeitplz 4 years ago

          Sure you can. WSL abstracts a lot of the networking/integration between the host and VM, just like Docker Desktop does. The experiences are comparable.

  • solarkraft 4 years ago

    I'm a friend of git GUIs because I find the complexity best represented graphically. For Docker, however, I purely use shell commands (only using the GUI to start the engine) because that's what I know from servers.

  • rgoulter 4 years ago

    The command line interface is the easiest interface to script around, but it's also probably the least discoverable.

    GUI programs have much better discoverability. But ... it's generally hard to drive them with a keyboard.

    Emacs' magit or lazydocker strike me as a nice balance. Not as expressive as the command line, but powerfully keyboard-focused.

hhh 4 years ago

I have been using Rancher Desktop since the day Docker announced they would charge corporations for Docker Desktop. I don't really need it much, but I genuinely could not have had a cleaner transition. I uninstalled Docker Desktop, and hit install on Rancher Desktop. Everything 'just worked' and I started using nerdctl. This was on Windows, and a few months ago now.

I tried to install it on my personal M1 Max Macbook, and it was annoying enough (the vm stuff, which was annoying with Docker Desktop) that I just used Multipass and installed docker. I would 100% recommend anyone dependent on Docker Desktop on Windows give it a shot.

btreecat 4 years ago

This is something I find exciting! I was looking at our infrastructure and between all the various services, we basically have recreated k8s only more expensive and fragmented and tied explicitly to AWS.

On top of that, our local test env is based on docker-compose so it often has issues matching exactly to the deployed env in the cloud once you add all the networking.

I've wanted to start moving us to Kubernetes so we can have a much closer env across the board. In order to do this, we would need to support both osx and Linux development, and for this I was investigating minikube but my previous XP with minikube left me not liking that solution long term.

I look forward to investigating this tool and seeing the potential in a local development workflow.

  • CameronNemo 4 years ago

    I blogged about using Linux containers on macOS, including research into the operation and features of solutions like minikube, lima/nerdctl, Rancher Desktop, and Docker Desktop. You may find it helpful.

    https://cameronnemo.gitlab.io/posts/mac-os-containers/

  • rodgerd 4 years ago

    > we basically have recreated k8s only more expensive and fragmented

    Exactly my driver for getting k8s (in the form of OpenShift) in place years ago to support a microservices push: if you want to deploy a fleet of a few hundred independent runtimes independently of one another, you could waste a lot of time and effort building everything that's needed to support that out of bits of VMware and F5 irules and things, or you can use something designed to support the case from day one.

ginko 4 years ago

Am I the only one that's starting to get a bit annoyed when random software for the desktop is getting called "XYZ Desktop"? I came here expecting a new desktop environment or WM called 'Rancher'.

  • lf-non 4 years ago

    It is an indicator of mindset shift in the larger populance.

    In a word where mobile and web apps are becoming more and more popular, calling a product a 'software solution' or an 'app' does not immediately make it obvious where the software will run.

    Adding the word desktop makes it stand out to the audience who is looking for desktop software (and presumably who don't want to setup server side software, fiddle with cli or use an externally hosted orchestration service).

    I recommend embracing the new reality that a vast majority of consumer grade software in present day world does not target desktops.

  • bzzzt 4 years ago

    I think the 'desktop' naming convention is older than most OSS WM's/desktop environments, it was even used for games: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_and_His_Desktop_...

    (now that would be a great name for a WM ;) )

  • lioeters 4 years ago

    I agree, it should be called "XYZ for Desktop".

dang 4 years ago

A related thread from a few months ago:

Rancher Desktop, a Docker Desktop Replacement - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28835690 - Oct 2021 (220 comments)

westurner 4 years ago

From https://rancherdesktop.io/ :

> Kubernetes and Container Management on the Desktop:

> An open-source desktop application for Mac, Windows and Linux.

> Rancher Desktop runs Kubernetes and container management on your desktop. You can choose the version of Kubernetes you want to run. You can build, push, pull, and run container images using either containerd or Moby (dockerd). The container images you build can be run by Kubernetes immediately without the need for a registry.

How does Rancher Desktop compare to Docker Desktop in terms of e.g. k8s support?

  • CameronNemo 4 years ago

    I think they ship k3s, which is sort if vanilla. It works great in my (limited) experience.

  • jeffh 4 years ago

    A key point around Rancher Desktop's k8s (actually k3s) support that stands out is that it allows you to use any k3s version and swap between them. This is great for those that want to test their workloads on different k8s versions right on their desktop.

jmacd 4 years ago

This is the Spite Store of containers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YlA6gtha-w

steeve 4 years ago

The killer feature over Docker for Mac would be memory ballooning. With this, there would be no need to specify a specific amount of memory, and the Linux VM would live happily alongside Mac OS. I know this is a limitation of Virtualisation/Hypervisor Framework apparently, but still.

It works wonder on WSL2, for instance.

Assigning all CPUs shouldn't do anything impactful really.

smarx007 4 years ago

Can it be used to run Docker Compose workloads? As I understand, the tool is launched because at the end of January the Docker Desktop grace period elapses and it becomes paid for large business.

  • WatchDog 4 years ago

    You can install docker-compose independently, it's apache2 licensed unlike docker-desktop.

    On macOS

        brew install docker-compose
  • smarx007 4 years ago

    For anyone reading this: Rancher Desktop w/dockerd powers docker-compose perfectly (installed via pip3), at least on some of my projects `docker-compose up --build` ran out of the box without any problems.

  • SureshG 4 years ago

    Yes, nerdctl compose will work for most of the use cases. Check this compatibility guide - https://github.com/containerd/nerdctl/blob/master/docs/compo...

  • beardedaussie 4 years ago

    I am also curious about this.

    Reading the FAQ (https://docs.rancherdesktop.io/faq):

    *Q: I can no longer run docker compose after installing Rancher Desktop and uninstalling Docker Desktop, what happened?*

    *A: The docker compose subcommand is bundled as part of a Docker Desktop installation and is removed when uninstalled. Follow these instructions to install it.*

    It also stated you can have both Docker Desktop and Rancher Desktop installed, but only one can be running at a time as it shares the same docker socket. I might try installing Rancher Desktop and stopping Docker Desktop and seeing if it all works as expected.

  • CameronNemo 4 years ago

    I have not tried it, but I imagine you can. There is an option to use dockerd in the VM.

  • encryptluks2 4 years ago

    There is Podman Compose which will what you want. I particularly like Podman, because you can use it for Minikube, independently, rootless, etc.

capableweb 4 years ago

It's unclear from this website or the landing page of Rancher Desktop, can I use this to just run containers without involving the bloated mess which is Kubernetes? I just want to have something to run the container runtime cross-platform locally, without involving Kubernetes as I already run a different service for container management on my servers.

Shadonototra 4 years ago

can't we do better than electron?

seriously?

a whole freaking browser only just to display few sliders, combobox and buttons?

this is very sad and concerning, either people are clueless, or they are clueless, i see no other reasons; you really not care at all, do you?

you use go already, use that https://fyne.io/

  • seabrookmx 4 years ago

    Such a tiresome argument.

    We need a whole freaking browser, only to display some text on this Web 1.0 hackernews website?

    If the tool works well and doesn't use too many resources (see: VS Code, Spotify, Postman, among others that use a "browser" based UI), why does it matter?

    Let developers choose the tools they want to build the things they want to build. You want a k8s desktop app written in fyne-io? Go for it!

    • Shadonototra 4 years ago

      > If the tool works well and doesn't use too many resources (see: VS Code, Spotify, Postman, among others that use a "browser" based UI), why does it matter?

      hahaha, i see, it's a lost battle, bloaters of computers, you won

      hope you not from EU, i would be ashamed

      > Let developers choose the tools they want to build the things they want to build. You want a k8s desktop app written in fyne-io? Go for it!

      slave mindset, empower the idiocracy, never give feedack, never stand up when you think wrong things, negative feedback = troll obviously

      reminds me of a packed bus, there was that random drunk dude harassing that other random guy

      everyone stood silent

      that's our society, and that's why it's trash

      another startup with 100M in VC funding and generates 1k dollar in profit

      but i am wrong, i always am wrong

      • seabrookmx 4 years ago

        > reminds me of a packed bus, there was that random drunk dude harassing that other random guy > everyone stood silent

        Hardly. I have no problem with you stating your opinion, and would not downvote anyone for doing so. I'm simply saying that I hear this opinion all the time and don't agree with it.

        > hope you not from EU, i would be ashamed

        Not sure how my country of origin is at all relevant here, but.. OK.

hsn915 4 years ago

This is depressing actually.

Instead of working to simplify the desktop, people are pouring energy into solutions that further complexity everything.

I don't understand the comments on this thread that express excitement and enthusiasm.

To this day, the UX of the linux desktop is subpar. This is caused by the complexity involved in running a gnu/linux system.

We do not need additional layers of complexity.

We need to collapse the layers and simplify the architecture of everything.

  • taeric 4 years ago

    Pretty sure this is a non sequitur. This isn't a desktop environment, but a desktop application to manage containers. Right?

  • jeffh 4 years ago

    I feel you hit reply on the wrong thread ... this seems to have nothing to do with Rancher Desktop?!?

  • yjftsjthsd-h 4 years ago

    Rancher Desktop is

    > an open source app for desktop Kubernetes and container management on Mac, Windows and Linux

    What does that have to do with Linux desktop UX or running a GNU/Linux system?

    I could see objecting to k8s and containers in general on the basis of too many layers, but by the time someone's looking at using Rancher Desktop they've probably made that decision already. (For instance, this caught my eye because at work we ship everything in containers. Even if I disliked that, there's no way I'm ever moving the whole company off containerization, so I want the best tools to do the job I have.)

    • hsn915 4 years ago

      I was meta-commenting about other comments in this thread that imply the future of desktop is all containers and that this would be a good thing.

Keyboard Shortcuts

j
Next item
k
Previous item
o / Enter
Open selected item
?
Show this help
Esc
Close modal / clear selection