Apache Mesos vs. Red Hat OpenShift

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Mesos
Score 2.6 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
OpenShift is Red Hat's Cloud Computing Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering. OpenShift is an application platform in the cloud where application developers and teams can build, test, deploy, and run their applications.
$0.08
per hour
Pricing
Apache MesosRed Hat OpenShift
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
MesosRed Hat OpenShift
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Features
Apache MesosRed Hat OpenShift
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Apache Mesos
-
Ratings
Red Hat OpenShift
7.9
90 Ratings
3% below category average
Ease of building user interfaces00 Ratings8.274 Ratings
Scalability00 Ratings8.790 Ratings
Platform management overhead00 Ratings7.382 Ratings
Workflow engine capability00 Ratings7.573 Ratings
Platform access control00 Ratings8.384 Ratings
Services-enabled integration00 Ratings7.876 Ratings
Development environment creation00 Ratings8.082 Ratings
Development environment replication00 Ratings8.077 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification00 Ratings7.780 Ratings
Issue recovery00 Ratings7.979 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes00 Ratings7.883 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache MesosRed Hat OpenShift
Small Businesses
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.3 out of 10
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloud Kubernetes Service
IBM Cloud Kubernetes Service
Score 9.2 out of 10
IBM Cloud Private
IBM Cloud Private
Score 9.5 out of 10
Enterprises
Docker
Docker
Score 9.2 out of 10
IBM Cloud Private
IBM Cloud Private
Score 9.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache MesosRed Hat OpenShift
Likelihood to Recommend
2.0
(2 ratings)
8.6
(99 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.9
(9 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(7 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
5.5
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.4
(19 ratings)
Support Rating
1.0
(1 ratings)
7.3
(8 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(2 ratings)
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
-
(0 ratings)
7.4
(2 ratings)
Professional Services
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache MesosRed Hat OpenShift
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
There's really no reason to ever use Mesos. We switched over to Kubernetes and it's been a breath of fresh air - better CD support, easy CLI for browsing logs, no mysterious dangling redeploys. If you're looking for a tool to manage a fleet of Docker containers on VMs, Kubernetes beats Mesos by a wide margin.
Read full review
Red Hat
Well, in our case, because I have two use cases, one is with the operator, which obviously is super easy with OpenShift because it's just click, click start aside from the issue from the operator. But that's a different interview. And the other point is for the web portal that our portal team uses, it's very easy. Two perform a task needed for them to do their deployment, their pipelines, and their daily Java.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Mesos may have many frameworks. If you have Mesos installed on your servers, you may use it for many kinds of tasks. Today we're running only web applications but the idea is to install a different framework for big data soon.
  • There is a good community growing around it.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Scales very well.
  • It provides you with a landing pad to modernize what you have in a phased approach so you don't have to do it all at once, right? You can take small pieces of work and implement those on OpenShift over time. It enables us to be able to implement things like GI ops configuration as a service, and infrastructure as a service using the tools that are native to OpenShift, which gives us far greater reliability and consistency as far as monitoring for any kind of drift and configuration or unauthorized changes. So it pretty much gives us a lot of visibility on things that are otherwise relatively difficult to see using the old means of doing what we do. So it provides us with a modern set of tools to accomplish all those objectives.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • Unreliable deployments that would fail for no good reason. Sometimes our Docker container would be "restarting" forever because Mesos thought it didn't have enough resources to start the container.
  • Impossibly slow UI. Built in React under the hood with a lot of bloatware backed in, so loading the Mesos UI on a slow internet connection was painful.
  • No real logging solution - it would stream "console.log()" output to the UI, but searching for logs wasn't really possible without downloading a huge file.
  • No built-in support for redeploying containers from a CI. We had to create a service whose whole job was to expose an HTTP endpoint that restarted a container, and then made Circle CI ping the endpoint whenever we wanted to redeploy.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Network of observability, so having one single screen to see to have some network-related metrics for the pod levels. Also at the cluster itself level and more importantly is ease of use for troubleshooting when there's any timeout. This has been the single kind of issue I've been facing for my three years of experience with OpenShift and it hasn't been an easy task for such troubleshooting.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
Leverage OpenShift Online constantly at both the free and paid tiers. While AWS is convenient, it often brings more administration than I want to deal with for a quick application (i.e. Drupal or Wordpress blog). OpenShift also simplifies the DNS registration and ability to share application environments with team members
Read full review
Usability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
As I said before, the obserability is one of the weakest point of OpenShift and that has a lot to do with usability. The Kibana console is not fully integrated with OpenShift console and you have to switch from tab to tab to use it. Same with Prometheus, Jaeger and Grafan, it's a "simple" integration but if you want to do complex queries or dashboards you have to go to the specific console
Read full review
Performance
Apache
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
Applications deployed to OpenShift clusters stay responsive when peak load hits or when the traffic dies down - since the platform reacts by scaling out or scaling in the deployed applications elastically - achieved through' policy sense and response automation - leveraging monitoring, measuring (metrics), auto-scaling to meet SLAs, SLOs, and SLIs. This approach works for stateless or stateful business logic hosting applications. The deployed applications perform consistently, stably, and securely across many deployment platforms - public clouds, private data centers, at the edge, or on factory floors - hosted by bare metal or virtual environments.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
No real support channel, the Mesos GitHub issues list was the only one we found and it wasn't particularly helpful.
Read full review
Red Hat
Their customer support team is good and quick to respond. On a couple of occassions, they have helped us in solving some issues which we were finding a tad difficult to comprehend. On a rare occasion, the response was a bit slow but maybe it was because of the festival season. Overall a good experience on this front.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
Kubernetes is really great and their community is growing really fast (Google influence). We evaluated it in the beginning and it would fit for our web applications workload. We decided to proceed with Mesos because it has more potential. You may use a different framework for different kinds of tasks on Mesos. There is a Kubernetes framework for Mesos, by the way.
Read full review
Red Hat
We had some existing apps and were looking for a platform to modernize our app deployments and scale for future growth. Based on Kubernetes, OpenShift offers more flexibility and customization. We could deploy any type of containerized application, not just Cloud Foundry-specific ones. I particularly liked the built-in security and its focus on rapid and automated deployments. Moreover, our cloud strategy isn't set in stone. OpenShift's flexibility means we could deploy on-prem, in multiple public clouds, or use a hybrid approach - something other products couldn't offer as expected.
Read full review
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
Apache
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
It's easy to understand what are being billed and what's included in each type of subscription. Same with the support (Std or Premium) you know exactly what to expect when you need to use it. The "core" unit approach on the subscription made really simple to scale and carry the workloads from one site to another.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • It's optimizing our resources.
  • It's improving our process. This argument is not just for Mesos, but we needed a tool like this to start changing and it works like a charm.
  • It's open source.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • I'll say a lot of positive impact because when we started making this product aware to all the application domains in our business, they saw how easy to use. I mean we are giving a lot of control to the development team, how they can scale their application, how can they check the health of the application, and what action they can take if they are in any kind of failure or even meeting the business's SLA. So there are a lot of capabilities and those are really new features they can use. Those I think are a good use of OpenShift.
Read full review
ScreenShots