> I think you are responding too literally to his comment, which is spot on.
Should I respond metaphorically?
> A macos app is running in a sandbox and runs in a conceptually similar way to docker.
A Mac App fundamentally has access to system libraries and leverages those. A Docker container is designed to ignore the system and builds its own environment.
If you run a Docker container on a Mac or Windows, you are now running 3 operating systems. The host OS, the VM, and the Docker image.
This is not the same as a Mac App. Literally, figuratively, or hypothetically.
Because unlike Linux they don't have to, since MacOS actually defines the concept of a stable base system that can be targeted by applications. Docker exists in part because the Linux world has no such concept.
Thats the point here. The two aren't similar at all.
MacOS apps contain all the app. Mac Apps leverage all of the OS functionality they can. They are strongly tied to MacOS and rely on it for most functionality. When I upgraded to Big Sur, the Mac Apps that run on my computer adapt to the changed OS libraries and often present differently.
Docker apps contain their own complete environment. They are deliberately engineered to disassociate from the base OS.
Electron is a sort of middle ground largely ignoring many system libraries, but using others.
The only thing Docker has in Common with Mac Apps is the fact that they keep associated files bundled together.
A macos app is running in a sandbox and runs in a conceptually similar way to docker.
Go look in ~/Library/Containers
also look at the filesystem under <appname>.app