Look, if you’re knee-deep in container workflows, you know the drill: BuildKit’s a beast for parallel builds and smart caching, but it isn’t always the perfect fit. Maybe you’re chasing rootless runs to dodge security headaches, or you need something that slots seamlessly into Kubernetes without a full Docker overhaul. Or hell, perhaps your CI/CD pipeline’s begging for less overhead. Whatever the itch, the good news is 2025’s stacked with solid alternatives from top players in cloud infra and dev tools. These aren’t just swaps-they’re upgrades tailored for teams moving fast. We’ll break down seven standouts, weighing what they crush, where they shine, and why a leading provider’s version might be your next move. Let’s dive in and get you building like pros.
1. AppFirst
AppFirst takes a completely different angle – instead of giving another build tool, it removes the need to write build and infra code at all. Developers describe basic app needs like CPU, memory, database type, and container image, then the platform spins up the actual cloud resources across AWS, Azure, or GCP without anyone touching Terraform or cloud consoles. Builds still happen, but the heavy lifting of secure networking, observability, and compliance sits behind the scenes.
Teams that already fight infra drift or PR review bottlenecks tend to look at it when they want developers to own the full lifecycle again. Everything provisioned stays auditable and cost-tracked per application.
Key Highlights:
- Declares app requirements, platform handles all infra
- Works across AWS, Azure, and GCP
- Built-in logging, monitoring, and alerting
- SaaS or self-hosted deployment
- Per-app cost visibility and audit logs
Pros:
- No Terraform or YAML maintenance
- Instant compliant environments
- Developers control deploys end-to-end
- Clear cost breakdown by app
Cons:
- Requires trusting a third-party control plane
- Less visibility into low-level cloud details
- Early lock-in to their abstraction model
Contact Information:
- Website: www.appfirst.dev
2. Podman
Developers who want a daemonless way to handle containers often end up looking at Podman. It runs containers rootless by default, which keeps things lighter on privileges and avoids the usual single daemon that can become a point of failure. The same tool can also deal with pods directly, so people working with Kubernetes locally find it pretty convenient – they just apply YAML files and things work without extra translation layers. Podman Desktop adds a GUI layer for those who prefer clicking over typing commands.
Compatibility stays high on the list too. Existing Docker images and compose files run without changes, and the project stays fully open source under Apache License 2.0. People mix it with Buildah and Skopeo when they want finer control over image building and moving images around.
Key Highlights:
- Daemonless and rootless container runtime
- Direct pod support and Kubernetes YAML playback
- Works with Docker images and compose files
- GUI available through Podman Desktop
- Pairs with Buildah and Skopeo for image tasks
Pros:
- No single daemon process to manage
- Rootless mode lowers security risks
- Easy local Kubernetes testing
- Full Docker compatibility
Cons:
- Some CI systems still expect a Docker daemon
- GUI layer is separate and occasionally lags behind CLI
- Certain Docker-specific features need workarounds
Contact Information:
- Website: podman.io
3. Red Hat
Red Hat pushes container builds through OpenShift, where Shipwright and Buildah handle most of the heavy lifting under the hood. Builds can run with or without root privileges, and the platform integrates the whole pipeline into the cluster itself. Teams already on OpenShift usually just use what’s there instead of adding separate build tools.
The approach leans toward enterprise workflows – policy controls, audit trails, and integration with internal registries are baked in. Build configurations live as Kubernetes resources, so everything stays declarative and repeatable.
Key Highlights:
- Builds integrated into OpenShift via Shipwright and Buildah
- Rootless build options available
- Policy and audit controls for enterprise use
- Build configs stored as cluster resources
Pros:
- Tight integration if already on OpenShift
- Enterprise-grade policy enforcement
- No separate build servers needed
Cons:
- Requires an OpenShift cluster subscription
- Less flexible outside the Red Hat ecosystem
- Learning curve matches the rest of OpenShift
Contact Information:
- Website: www.redhat.com
- Phone: +1 919 754 3700
- Email: apac@redhat.com
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/red-hat
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/RedHat
- Twitter: x.com/RedHat
4. Rancher Desktop
Rancher Desktop shows up when people want a full local Kubernetes setup without pulling in the whole Docker stack. It ships with k3s underneath, lets users switch Kubernetes versions from a menu, and gives a choice between Moby (the classic Docker daemon) or containerd plus nerdctl for the container side. Everything stays open source, so builds and runs happen using familiar CLI tools while the images stay right there on the laptop – no registry round-trips needed for local testing.
Most folks who try it end up using it because the experience feels closer to production clusters than minikube or kind in day-to-day work. Switching between runtimes is just a toggle, and the GUI keeps the heavy lifting hidden unless someone actually needs to dig in.
Key Highlights:
- Runs k3s for lightweight Kubernetes on the desktop
- Choice between Moby or containerd/nerdctl runtime
- Build and run images without external registry
- Open source components only
- Easy Kubernetes version switching
Pros:
- Feels like real production clusters locally
- No lock-in to proprietary pieces
- Images ready instantly for local workloads
- Simple version management
Cons:
- Still heavier than plain containerd or Podman alone
- Some Docker Desktop habits need small adjustments
- GUI occasionally trails the CLI features
Contact Information:
- Website: www.rancher.com
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/rancher
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/rancherlabs
- Twitter: x.com/Rancher_Labs
5. OrbStack
OrbStack runs on macOS and aims to replace the usual Docker Desktop setup with something noticeably lighter and quicker. It handles Docker containers and Linux machines through a custom runtime that leans hard on VirtioFS, aggressive caching, and tight Rosetta integration for x86 images. Start times drop to a couple seconds, file sharing feels almost native, and CPU usage stays low even when a bunch of services are running.
People who switch usually notice the difference in battery life and disk noise first. The app itself is a small native Swift binary, so it doesn’t drag the system down like heavier VM-based solutions sometimes do.
Key Highlights:
- macOS-focused Docker and Linux runner
- VirtioFS file sharing and fast Rosetta emulation
- Low CPU, memory, and disk footprint
- Starts containers in seconds
- Native Swift application
Pros:
- Much lower resource usage than Docker Desktop
- File sharing speed close to native
- Battery-friendly on laptops
- Smooth x86 emulation when needed
Cons:
- Only available on macOS
- Smaller ecosystem of extensions
- Some very new Docker features arrive later
Contact Information:
- Website: orbstack.dev
- Email: hello@orbstack.dev
- Twitter: x.com/orbstack
6. Kubernetes
Kubernetes itself handles builds through a few native options when teams don’t want an external builder. Most clusters now use containerd as the runtime, and the platform offers Cloud Native Buildpacks or simple Dockerfile jobs via Kaniko inside the cluster. People who already run everything on Kubernetes often just keep builds there too – no extra daemons on developer laptops, and the same security policies apply to build pods as everything else.
The setup works fine for monorepos or when source code lives close to the cluster. Kaniko especially gets used a lot because it builds images without needing privileged access or a Docker daemon, which fits the rootless direction most clusters take these days.
Key Highlights:
- Kaniko for daemonless, rootless image builds
- Cloud Native Buildpacks integration
- Builds run as regular pods
- Uses same containerd runtime as production
- No local Docker required
Pros:
- Zero extra tools if already on Kubernetes
- Same RBAC and network policies apply
- Kaniko works in restricted environments
- Easy to cache layers across builds
Cons:
- Builds compete with application pods for resources
- Slower feedback when source is far from cluster
- Needs cluster access even for local dev
Contact Information:
- Website: kubernetes.io
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/kubernetes
- Twitter: x.com/kubernetesio
7. Buildah
Buildah focuses only on building container images and skips the runtime part entirely. Users work with a CLI that follows the same steps Docker or Podman would, but everything happens without a daemon and usually rootless. Scripts that already call docker build can switch to buildah bud with almost no changes, and the resulting images stay OCI compliant.
A lot of people pair it with Podman or Skopeo because the three tools come from the same project and share the same storage format. The workflow feels familiar to anyone who has used Dockerfile before, just lighter on the system.
Key Highlights:
- Daemonless OCI image building
- Rootless operation by default
- Compatible with existing Dockerfiles
- Works with Podman and Skopeo storage
- Scriptable CLI for CI pipelines
Pros:
- No background process eating resources
- Runs fine in restricted CI environments
- Same commands as Docker build in most cases
- Easy drop-in for existing scripts
Cons:
- No built-in registry push caching tricks
- Missing some newer BuildKit features
- Debugging multi-stage builds can feel verbose
Contact Information:
- Website: buildah.io
8. Northflank
Northflank runs as a hosted platform that takes source code and turns it into running workloads without making anyone manage the underlying Kubernetes or cloud resources. Developers point at a git repo, pick Dockerfile or Buildpacks, and the service handles builds, deploys, and scaling across connected clusters or its own infrastructure. The interface stays simple – mostly forms and a few YAML overrides when needed.
Teams that want self-service deploys without maintaining internal platforms tend to land here. Builds happen in the background with layer caching, and preview environments spin up automatically on pull requests.
Key Highlights:
- Git-driven builds with Dockerfile or Buildpacks
- Automatic preview environments per branch
- Runs on your clusters or theirs
- Built-in secrets and addon management
- Layer caching for faster rebuilds
Pros:
- No cluster management required
- Fast feedback with preview URLs
- Works with any Kubernetes underneath
- Simple rollout controls
Cons:
- Another control plane to trust
- Less visibility into build worker details
- Costs add up once traffic grows
Contact Information:
- Website: northflank.com
- Email: contact@northflank.com
- Address: 20-22 Wenlock Road, London, England, N1 7GU
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/northflank
- Twitter: x.com/northflank
9. Earthly
Earthly approaches container building with its own declarative language that looks a lot like Dockerfiles but adds reusable targets and proper caching across directories. Developers write Earthfiles once and run the same commands locally or in CI without drifting results – the build environment stays containerized and repeatable no matter where it executes. Caching works at a finer level than most tools, so changing one service in a monorepo rarely rebuilds everything else.
A separate product called Earthly Lunar watches the whole pipeline for policy breaks, test flakes, or sketchy dependencies. Most people start with the open-source builder and later add the monitoring piece when the organization wants guardrails without slowing anyone down.
Key Highlights:
- Declarative Earthfiles with reusable targets
- Consistent builds locally and in CI
- Monorepo-friendly cross-directory caching
- Containerized build environment
- Lunar add-on for SDLC policy enforcement
Pros:
- Same output on laptop or remote runner
- Caching saves serious time in big repos
- Language feels familiar yet stricter
- Open-source core stays free
Cons:
- Learning another syntax instead of plain Dockerfile
- Some Docker features need translation
- Lunar policy layer costs extra and needs setup
Contact Information:
- Website: earthly.dev
- Twitter: x.com/earthlytech
10. VMware
VMware folds container builds into its Tanzu platform, where teams use Build Service to turn source code into images without local daemons. It relies on Cloud Native Buildpacks mostly, so Dockerfile tweaks aren’t always needed, and builds run as Kubernetes jobs with the same access controls as apps. People already on vSphere or VCF often extend their setup this way to keep everything in one console.
The Kubernetes Service piece adds managed clusters where builds can pull from private registries or push to Harbor. Workflows stay declarative through YAML, and integration with CNCF tools means it plays nice with existing pipelines.
Key Highlights
- Build Service with Cloud Native Buildpacks
- Runs builds as Kubernetes pods
- Managed clusters via Kubernetes Service
- Ties into vSphere and VCF environments
- YAML-based declarative pipelines
Pros
- No local build tools cluttering laptops
- Consistent security across builds and deploys
- Easy extension for existing VMware users
- Built-in registry support
Cons
- Tied to Tanzu ecosystem for full features
- Buildpacks limit some Dockerfile tricks
- Cluster dependency adds overhead
Contact Information
- Website: www.vmware.com
- Phone: +1 800 225 5224
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/vmware
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/vmware
- Twitter: x.com/vmware
11. Depot
Depot steps in as a build runner that plugs into existing CI systems, handling the actual Docker image creation on remote machines optimized for speed. It uses native builders for different architectures and keeps cache layers persistent across runs, so rebuilds skip the full sequence if nothing changed. Teams connect it to their GitHub Actions or Jenkins without rewriting pipelines – just swap the build step.
The focus lands on fixing common CI slowdowns like cache evictions or slow storage, especially when multi-arch images are in play. From the setup, it feels geared toward places where build times eat into dev cycles.
Key Highlights
- Remote Docker builds with persistent caching
- Native support for Intel and ARM
- Integrates with CI providers like GitHub Actions
- Low-latency machines for faster layers
- Free trial for seven days
Pros
- Cuts build times without CI changes
- Handles multi-arch without extra config
- Cache stays reliable across sessions
- Simple plug-in for most pipelines
Cons
- Adds another service to the stack
- Trial ends quick, paid plans vary
- Dependent on CI for triggering
Contact Information
- Website: depot.dev
- Email: contact@depot.dev
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/depot-technologies
- Twitter: x.com/depotdev
12. GitLab
GitLab bundles container builds right into its CI/CD runners, where .gitlab-ci.yml files define the steps for Dockerfile execution or Kaniko jobs. Runners can spin up on shared infrastructure or self-hosted machines, and the platform caches images between pipelines to avoid redundant pulls. Auto DevOps mode even guesses build configs from repo contents if someone skips the YAML.
Security scans and compliance checks hook in automatically during builds, so teams get feedback without separate tools. The all-remote setup means updates roll out monthly, keeping features fresh across the board.
Key Highlights
- Inline CI/CD with .gitlab-ci.yml
- Kaniko or Docker executor options
- Auto DevOps for quick starts
- Built-in image caching and scans
- Monthly release cadence
Pros
- Everything in one platform from code to deploy
- YAML feels straightforward for most
- Scans catch issues early
- Flexible runner hosting
Cons
- YAML can grow unwieldy in big projects
- Shared runners sometimes queue up
- Full power needs self-hosted setup
Contact Information
- Website: docs.gitlab.com
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/gitlab-com
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/gitlab
- Twitter: x.com/gitlab
Wrapping It Up
At the end of the day, picking a BuildKit replacement usually comes down to what’s already slowing you down. If the daemon itself feels like a liability or you keep fighting privilege escalations, the daemonless crowd makes life quieter. If you’re deep in Kubernetes anyway, just leaning on what the cluster already gives you often feels like the path of least surprise. And when the real enemy is context-switching between twenty YAML files and PRs that never end, some of the newer platforms that hide the whole mess start looking pretty reasonable.
No single tool checks every box for everybody. Some shave minutes off local builds, others save hours of ops meetings, and a few just let you get back to writing the code that actually matters. Test a couple that match your biggest pain right now, run your real Dockerfile or monorepo through them, and you’ll know within a day which one stops feeling like friction. The rest is just details. Happy building.
