TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

CloudFoundry vs. CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    CloudFoundry

    Score10 out of 10
    N/ACloudFoundry is a free, open source cloud computing platform supported by the non-profit CloudFoundry. It is not tied to any particular cloud service, but can be self-hosted or run on any cloud service preferred.N/A

    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)

    Score8.5 out of 10
    N/ACoreOS rkt or Container Linux was a rival to Docker that was acquired by Red Hat, then given to the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF). The project has since been discontinued.N/A
    Pricing
    CloudFoundryCoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    CloudFoundryCoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    YesNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Features
    CloudFoundryCoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Platform-as-a-Service
    Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of CloudFoundry and CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Feature
    CloudFoundry
    9.8
    1 Ratings
    24% above category average
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    -
    Ratings
    Ease of building user interfaces10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Scalability9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Development environment creation10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Development environment replication10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Issue recovery10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Upgrades and platform fixes10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    CloudFoundryCoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Small Businesses
    IBM Cloud Foundry
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
    Score8 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    IBM Cloud Private
    Score9.6 out of 10
    Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
    Score8.6 out of 10
    Enterprises
    AWS Elastic Beanstalk
    Score8.6 out of 10
    SUSE Rancher
    Score9.4 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    CloudFoundryCoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Likelihood to Recommend
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    7.0
    (2 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    CloudFoundryCoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    Likelihood to Recommend
    CloudFoundry
    It's well suited if:
    • The organization has large number of applications that needs to be deployed frequently.
    • The organization is tied to the DevOps mindset.
    • The organization has programs in different languages.
    • The applications does not need EJB's support that servers like web logic provide.
    It's less suited if:
    • The applications needs security configuration within the same CloudFoundry instance.
    • The organization, for whatever reason does not want developers to manage the instances.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    CoreOS rkt is well suited for any development environment where operating systems and hardware are not homogeneous. CoreOS rkt allows us to write code on one machine with the confidence that it will work on any other. This has been immensely helpful as our developers are often switching to the latest and greatest machines and operating systems. CoreOS rkt is less suited for environments that are not Software as a Service. There is often no need to bring the entire developer environment and associated dependencies when delivering a one time product. In these environments CoreOS rkt just adds unneeded overhead.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    CloudFoundry
    • Support for Orgs and Spaces that allow for managing users and deployables within a large organization.
    • Easy deployment, deploying code is as simple as executing single line from CLI, thanks to build-packs.
    • Solid and rich CLI, that allows for various operations on the instance.
    • Isolated Virtual Machines called Droplets, that provide clean run time environment for the code. This used to be a problem with Weblogic and other application servers, where multiple applications are run on the same cluster and they share resources.
    • SSH capability for the droplet (isolated VM's are called droplets), that allows for real time viewing of the App code while the application is running.
    • Support for multiple languages, thanks to build-packs.
    • Support for horizontal scaling, scaling an instance horizontally is a breeze.
    • Support for configuring environment variable using the service bindings.
    • Supports memory and disk space limit allocation for individual applications.
    • Supports API's as well as workers (processes without endpoints)
    • Supports blue-green deployment with minimal down time
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • Running a secure container without messing up with low-level details
    • Very clear and straightforward approach to building a container
    • A way to go for new projects thinking of containers
    • Comprehensive and well-written documentation compatible with UNIX keep it simple way of thinking
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    CloudFoundry
    • Does not support stateful containers and that would be a nice to have.
    • Supports showing logs, but does not persist the logs anywhere. This makes relying on Cloud Foundry's logs very unreliable. The logs have to be persisted using other third party tools like Elk and Kibana.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • Market share, it's often very difficult to find new talent who use CoreOS rkt.
    • Lack of wow features, CoreOS rkt doesn't necessarily offer any immediate advantages over other container solutions.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    CloudFoundry
    While Docker shines in providing support for volumes and stateful instances, Cloud foundry shines in providing support for deploying stateless services. Heroku shines in integrating with Git and using commits to git as hooks to trigger deployments right from the command line. But it does not provide on-premise solution that Cloud foundry provides.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    Docker, lxc, Ubuntu Snappy, partisan chroot+unshare Reformulating the problem and realizing a container is not necessary when a testing environment with clearly defined behavior.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    CloudFoundry
    • Positive impact, since it simplifies the deployment time by a huge margin. Without cloud foundry, deploying a code needs coordination with infrastructure teams, while with cloud foundry, its a simple one line command. This reduces the deployment time from at least few hours to few minutes. Faster deployments promote faster dev cycle iterations.
    • Code maintenance such as upgrading a Node or Java version is as simple as updating the build-pack. Without cloud foundry, using web logic, the specific version only supports a specific version of Java. So updating the version involves upgrading the version of web logic that needs to involve few teams. So without cloud foundry, it takes at least few days, with cloud foundry, its a matter of few mins.
    • Overall, happier Developers and thats harder to quantify.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • Developers spend less time configuring and more time coding.
    • Less time training developers as CoreOS rkt lets them use whatever hardware and operating system they want.
    • Reduced our IT costs, solutions are containerized using CoreOS rkt meaning they can write one solution with many developers in mind.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots