Side by side
SCONE vs Sysbox
Both stand on container runtime software. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Free plan LinuxMacWindows
Visit SCONE Free plan LinuxSelf-hosted
Choose Sysbox if you need a free Linux runtime for rootless system workloads, containerized development, or CI/CD. Look elsewhere if you need VM-level isolation, host-device access inside system containers, or Docker seccomp profiles to restrict allowed syscalls.
Visit SysboxThe facts
| SCONE | Sysbox | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Not published | Not published |
| Runs on | Linux, Mac, Windows | Linux, Self-hosted |
| Lowest paid plan | Free or on request | Free or on request |
| Plans published | 1 | 1 |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | scone.software | github.com |
| On container runtime software | #27 of 28 | #23 of 28 |
SCONE: what it does well
Sysbox: what it does well
- Runs system workloads in rootless containers.
- Works with Docker and Kubernetes managers and orchestrators.
- Supports image building and the OCI image format.
- Free and open-source under Apache License 2.0.
What to know first
- Isolation is weaker than VM-based runtimes because containers share the Linux kernel.
- Does not support exposing host devices inside system containers.
- Does not support narrowing allowed syscalls through a Docker seccomp profile.
- Some distribution installation paths are marked work-in-progress.