Container vs Docker Desktop
Both Container and Docker Desktop run OCI-compatible Linux containers on a Mac. The key difference is licensing: Container is Apache-2.0 with no subscription requirements; Docker Desktop moved to a paid subscription model for commercial use in organizations over a certain employee count.
| Feature | Container | Docker Desktop |
|---|
| License | Apache-2.0 | Commercial (paid subscription for orgs above a size threshold) |
| Self-hosting | Local install (pkg) | Local install |
| Apple silicon | Native (required) | Supported |
| macOS requirement | macOS 26 only | Older macOS supported |
| OCI compatibility | Yes | Yes |
| Kubernetes integration | Experimental | Yes (built-in) |
| Pricing | Free | Free personal; paid commercial |
Container is the better choice for teams that want an Apache-licensed container workflow on Apple silicon without subscription overhead. Docker Desktop is the better fit when you need its built-in Kubernetes integration, the Docker Extensions marketplace, or support for Intel Macs and older macOS versions.
Container vs OrbStack
OrbStack and Container both run Linux containers on Apple silicon Macs. OrbStack is a commercial product; Container is open source under Apache-2.0.
| Feature | Container | OrbStack |
|---|
| License | Apache-2.0 | Commercial |
| Price | Free | Paid subscription |
| OCI compatibility | Yes | Yes |
| macOS requirement | macOS 26 only | Older macOS supported |
| Linux VM support | Yes (per container) | Yes |
| Management interface | CLI only | GUI available |
Container is the right choice for developers who want a vendor-neutral, Apache-licensed tool and are comfortable with a CLI-only workflow on Apple silicon. OrbStack is worth considering when you want a graphical interface for managing containers and VMs, need to run on older macOS versions, or want a more polished out-of-box experience.