Compare

MIOSA vs Fly.io

Fly.io runs apps as machines close to your users. MIOSA runs services, computers and sandboxes on one platform. This page compares what each documents.

MIOSA Fly.io Fly.io

Every competitor statement is from Fly.io’s own public documentation (fly.io/docs, as of 2026-10-23). MIOSA statements link to the page that documents them. Where MIOSA has no equivalent, the row says so.

Workloads

CapabilityMIOSAFly.io
Long-running app from an image or repositoryYes, Services run modes server, worker, cron, staticYes, apps on Machines
Direct control of a VMYes, Computers with a full Linux desktopYes, Machines
Ephemeral code executionYes, SandboxesNot the documented model; Machines are long-lived by default
Config as codemiosa.json / miosa.app.ymlfly.toml
Multiple regionsus-east, us-west, us-miaA wider published region list

Sources: services, computers, sandboxes, and Fly.io’s Machines and fly.toml reference.

Networking and data

CapabilityMIOSAFly.io
Private networking between a project’s servicesSame host today; wider private networking is not generally availableDocumented private networking across a region
Public address per serviceYes, <label>.<org>.miosa.app, plus custom domainsYes, *.fly.dev plus certificates
Managed Postgres, MySQL, Redis, MongoDBYesManaged Postgres is documented; other engines are run by you
Public database endpoint with an allowlistYes, TLS onlyConnections are documented through your own proxy or app

Sources: custom domains, databases, public endpoint.

What MIOSA does not have

  • Fly.io’s region coverage. Three regions, named above; nothing else is claimed.
  • Cross-host private networking between services. Same-host private networking works today.

When to choose each

  • Choose Fly.io if you need its region footprint or you already run your networking around it.
  • Choose MIOSA if your product also needs sandboxes and agent workloads, a console for customers of your own, or one platform for machines, services and data.
Was this page helpful?