Hacker News Reader

Comment by offtop5 | Hacker News Reader

Can we give them a full month to sort this out ?

I want x64 docker on Arm , as this could also be massive for server power consumption. But things take time . If your some wiz kid who can crack this puzzle you’ll have a billion dollar startup within 6 months

As someone who’s published on the App Store , having a single binary run on IPhone , IPad and Mac is a much much bigger deal than most of you realize .

View on HN

And if some startup is doing it, i know enough companies who will instantly buy a better docker for mac solution if it does have better filesystem performance. Accessing the macs filesystem from the docker container is really slow, there are some solution (e.g. docker-sync) but they all stop working after some time.

Is Apple still offering options that such kind of software could actually be developed by non-apple on _their_ system?

Why? I would expect the user experience to suffer on one or both. MS already went down this path and the end result were apps that made compromises to try being usable on both platforms.

What is the x64 on ARM opportunity in a bit more detail? What would drive a billion dollar valuation for such a business?

I would have thought that anything of lasting interest would be available in source code and thus ported to run natively on ARM...

Because years , if not decades of legacy server code could be ran on Arm without re-writing anything.

An EC2 rival could run the same processes using 30% of the power. Plus as ARM tends to run on much smaller devices, you could theoretically save tons of physical space with data centers.

Fascinating, so you are saying if a Rosetta2 like software can be made for Graviton or X1, that’d be an instant hit?

Assuming you could also have the same reliability, I'd believe you could get the cost way down. Who wouldn't want to operate their service for half price

I don't want x86 Docker on ARM.

... so what, so no one else should be allowed to want it?

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.

You're confusing docker with java.

The point of docker is to bundle all the dependencies of a given application into a single place.

That way you don't have "works on my machine" problems, because both prod and dev are clean virtualized identical systems (containers)

No it wasn't, you are thinking of Java.

Docker was snapshots of developer machines you can run in production. They never promised that it would run everywhere.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com