[docs-scanner] Conflicting performance claims in networking backend table

[docker-agent]

File: content/manuals/desktop/features/networking/_index.md

Issue

The backend components table contains conflicting performance recommendations for Mac setups:

| Mac | Virtualization framework + gRPC FUSE | com.docker.backend | com.docker.backend | Recommended for performance and visibility |
| Mac | Virtualization framework + virtiofs| com.docker.backend | Apple's Virtualization framework | Higher performance but no file access visibility from host|

The first row recommends gRPC FUSE "for performance and visibility," but the second row states that virtiofs has "Higher performance." This creates confusion about which setup actually provides better performance.

If virtiofs is faster, then the gRPC FUSE row shouldn't claim to be recommended for performance. If gRPC FUSE is the overall recommendation, the virtiofs row shouldn't claim higher performance.

Suggested fix

Clarify the trade-offs more precisely. For example:

• gRPC FUSE: "Recommended for balanced performance and visibility"
• virtiofs: "Higher file I/O performance but no file access visibility from host"

Or state which specific performance aspect each excels at (file I/O vs network, etc.) to avoid the apparent contradiction.

---

Found by nightly documentation freshness scanner