CloudFoundry vs. SUSE Rancher

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
CloudFoundry
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
CloudFoundry 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
SUSE Rancher
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Developed by Rancher Labs and now from SUSE, Rancher is open-source software that enables organizations to deploy and manage Kubernetes at scale, on any infrastructure across the data center, cloud, branch offices, and the network edge. Rancher centrally manages Kubernetes clusters across the organization in order to ensure security and accelerate transformation. Rancher is also available hosted. Hosted Rancher is a fully managed Rancher control plane - presented as the fastest, most cost…
$7,594.99
per year up to 500 nodes
Pricing
CloudFoundrySUSE Rancher
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Subscription license
7,594.99
per year up to 500 nodes
Standard Subscription
11,234.99
per year 10 nodes
Priority Subscription
30,514.99
per year 10 nodes
Management Server Priority Subscription
41,830.99
per year 1 instance
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CloudFoundrySUSE Rancher
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Features
CloudFoundrySUSE Rancher
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
CloudFoundry
9.8
1 Ratings
20% above category average
SUSE Rancher
-
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
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
CloudFoundry
-
Ratings
SUSE Rancher
8.2
7 Ratings
5% above category average
Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.36 Ratings
Container Orchestration00 Ratings9.27 Ratings
Cluster Management00 Ratings8.47 Ratings
Storage Management00 Ratings7.56 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings8.26 Ratings
Discovery Tools00 Ratings7.86 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings7.77 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings8.66 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings8.37 Ratings
Best Alternatives
CloudFoundrySUSE Rancher
Small Businesses
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Score 9.5 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Score 9.5 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Score 9.5 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
CloudFoundrySUSE Rancher
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(1 ratings)
8.8
(17 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(3 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
6.8
(2 ratings)
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
-
(0 ratings)
4.5
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
CloudFoundrySUSE Rancher
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.
Read full review
SUSE
SUSE Rancher as a management tool becomes useful on a larger scale. Small deployments not so much. If someone also requires Kubernetes capacity or storage, Rancher is an excellent choice. Also, without Kubernetes' skills, it is unlikely that Rancher deployment is going to be a success. Then again if someone else is managing your Kubernetes capacity, setting up the software's capacity will yield greater control. Rancher is not a very integrated solution similar to others in the market.
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
Read full review
SUSE
  • Public and private cloud infrastructure providers based on K8s CAPI
  • REST API that can be used to integrate company services with Rancher
  • GUI that is easy to learn and use in daily operations
  • Builtin GitOps automation solution based on Fleet project
  • It is fully open source
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.
Read full review
SUSE
  • No possibility to snapshot Projects. You can snapshot and restore the whole Kubernetes cluster, but not a Project or Namespace. For this, you have to use external tools.
  • You cannot detach the Rancher-created Kubernetes clusters from Rancher management.
Read full review
Usability
CloudFoundry
No answers on this topic
SUSE
Overall it deserves an 8 out of 10. The platform is very easy to use as long as the UI is stable. We have had a few buggy versions in the past. However the CLI is excellent and the platform is simple to manage and maintain. It is easy to deploy and offer for company wide use which increases utilization and ROI.
Read full review
Support Rating
CloudFoundry
No answers on this topic
SUSE
The documentation is quite complete and there is a very active community that is willing to collaborate and answer questions for those who are just starting out.
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.
Read full review
SUSE
We started using SUSE Rancher in the early days and spent a large amount of time getting to know and love it. This was before the days of some of the likes of Amazon Web Services who may now provide a cheaper but less feature-rich alternative to SUSE Rancher, however we have yet to explore this.
Read full review
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
CloudFoundry
No answers on this topic
SUSE
The investment for small environments is quite significant. There has to be a compelling case to enhance the areas where SUSE Rancher brings in value to make such a financial leap. There is also a free version to test the value propositions, which will help support the user's buying decisions. More clusters, more volume, more tasks and more complexity in the environment equals more value that Rancher can provide.
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.
Read full review
SUSE
  • Shortens "Time-to-Market" factor for new business applications or implementing new functionalities. From 1 to 50 microservices-based business applications in 6 years.
  • 24/7 availability, generates more money. There are many infrastructure components that are regularly powered-off for maintenance or upgrade, bur we rarely are turning off our downstream Kubernetes clusters where our business applications lives.
  • Single Point of Contact with platform maintenance and development Team, eases implementation of new business applications
Read full review
ScreenShots