Podman vs. Docker: Better on Paper, Losing in Practice

Actually, on paper, Podman checks every box for the future of containerization: rootless containers, no background daemon eating up resources, and tighter integration with systemd for those who care about system-level control. It's secure, it's open-source, it's designed with modern principles in mind. But why does Docker, the older, heavier, arguably messier sibling, still rule the container world? And if you've ever dared to mention Podman in a dev forum, you've probably gotten some variation of: "Yeah, Podman's cool, but Docker just works." That's the entire issue right there. Let's dig into it. ## First-Mover Advantage Isn't Just Marketing Docker came out swinging back in 2013. It wasn't just a new tool—it defined how people thought about containers. The industry moved fast to adopt it. Entire platforms were built around it. Tutorials, documentation, CI/CD workflows, orchestration tools—you name it—were designed with Docker in mind. Even today, people casually refer to "Docker containers" the way they call tissues "Kleenex." But by the time Podman rolled out in 2019, Docker had already dug itself into the foundations of countless systems. That six-year head start wasn't just time—it was entrenchment. You can't just replace that with good intentions and better defaults. ## The Compatibility Illusion One of Podman's original selling points was Docker compatibility. Actually, in theory, you could alias `docker` to `podman` and just keep rolling along. Except... no. Not really. Real-world feedback paints a different story. Sure, Podman can run many Dockerfiles and compose configurations, but users repeatedly find edge cases that make that switch less than seamless. As one frustrated user put it: "I tried, Podman proved to be much more problematic and less stable. Maybe in a couple years." Another added: "There are slight variations, not much, but enough to make it a hassle." What kind of variations? For starters: - Podman Compose is an entirely separate project from Docker Compose—and it's not always up to date or fully compatible - Issues around container startup order, networking behavior, restart policies - Integration problems with GPUs or alternate storage paths The moment you step even slightly off the beaten path, you're back in "debug everything yourself" territory. ## Documentation: Docker Is the Default Let's talk about one of the biggest invisible forces keeping Docker on top: documentation. When nearly every GitHub README, dev blog, or open-source app tells you to "run this Docker Compose file," you follow the path of least resistance. Docker's maturity means there's a wealth of resources out there—blog posts, Stack Overflow answers, YouTube tutorials—ready to help troubleshoot your exact problem. Meanwhile, Podman still feels like the new kid in school. Even when it works just fine, the lack of baked-in documentation means more Googling, more guesswork, and more trial-and-error. As one user said bluntly: "Most guides are written for Docker. If you use what everyone else uses, it's easier to get help." ## Compose vs. Quadlets: The Workflow Divide If Docker Compose is the cozy little house you've lived in for years, Podman's Quadlets are that eco-friendly, modular prefab cabin in the woods—interesting, innovative, but you're not sure how to live in it yet. Compose lets you define services, volumes, networks, and dependencies in a single YAML file. It's tidy. It's readable. It's self-documenting. Even for solo projects, devs often stick with Compose just to avoid memorizing long Docker commands. Podman, on the other hand, leans into systemd integration. Quadlets are systemd unit files that define containers and pods in a way that makes them first-class citizens on your system. That's great for operations, but it's a hard sell for developers who just want to spin something up and get coding. As one user quipped: "Writing Quadlet files is a nightmare. You need one file for each container, volume, network, and pod… all in the same directory. Compose just works." ## Podman Is Built for Ops, Docker for Devs This might be the heart of the whole issue. Docker is dev-first. It assumes control. It sets up your networking, logging, and container lifecycle. It runs a root-level daemon and says, "Don't worry, I got this." And for developers who don't want to wrestle with firewalls or system policies, that's a win. Podman is ops-first. It respects the host environment. It won't override your system settings. It integrates beautifully with SELinux and systemd. It's made to fit in, not take over. And that's the problem for casual users. Developers aren't necessarily looking for integration with enterprise security protocols. They want frictionless container launches, simple commands, and minimal configuration. If you're not on Fedora, Arch, or RHEL—where Podman is preinstalled and fully supported—installing and updating Podman can be a hassle too. On Debian-based systems, Podman is often outdated in the main repos, and getting newer versions involves jumping through hoops. With Docker, you add one repo, and you're off to the races. ## Stability Over Ideology Podman checks a lot of ideological boxes. It's daemonless. It's rootless. It avoids the kinds of security pitfalls that Docker inherited from its early, Wild West days. If you care deeply about system security and resource isolation, Podman is compelling. But most users aren't dealing with national security or regulatory compliance on their homelab setups. They're running Nextcloud, Plex, or Home Assistant. They're not trying to perfect their SELinux policies—they're trying to stream a movie without it crashing halfway through. As one user summed it up: "Docker is rock solid and I haven't found a reason to switch." ## The Bottom Line Actually, Podman is objectively better in some ways—more secure defaults, system integration, and a modern architecture. But the real world doesn't run on specs alone. It runs on support, stability, and simplicity. The current state of play? Docker still wins by default. Because people know it. Because it works. And because, for most, good enough is more than enough. If Podman wants to truly dethrone Docker, it needs more than just theoretical advantages. It needs: - Smoother compatibility - Better docs - Wider community support - More time Right now, being "better" on paper isn't enough. Not when Docker's been playing the long game—and winning—for over a decade.