CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended) vs. D2iQ Mesosphere

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
CoreOS 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
D2iQ Mesosphere
Score 7.5 out of 10
N/A
D2iQ (formerly Mesosphere) still supports the Mesosphere solution, which is designed for operations at a very large scale. It's powered by DC/OS, a production-proven cloud native platform that runs containers and data services on the same infrastructure. D2iQ rebranded to reflect their change and broadening of focus towards Kubernetes but other services such as Cassandra, Kafka, and Spark. D2iQ also now offers IT professional services in tandem with its products.N/A
Pricing
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)D2iQ Mesosphere
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)D2iQ Mesosphere
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)D2iQ Mesosphere
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)D2iQ Mesosphere
Small Businesses
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.3 out of 10
Docker
Docker
Score 9.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Docker
Docker
Score 9.3 out of 10
Docker
Docker
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Docker
Docker
Score 9.3 out of 10
Docker
Docker
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)D2iQ Mesosphere
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(2 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)D2iQ Mesosphere
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
D2iQ (formerly Mesosphere)
Mesosphere is well suited for orchestrating workloads. It supports Docker as a container as well as support others. It is highly suitable for running resilient and auto recovering big data/application containers. Mesosphere has proven time and again to be production ready at a massive scale. It supports native single button/API call scale up and scale down and supports various deployment patterns like Blue-Green and others.
Read full review
Pros
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
Read full review
D2iQ (formerly Mesosphere)
  • Deploying mesosphere and friends (e.g. marathon)
  • Deploying applications (e.g. Cassandra, Jenkins, Spark) on to mesosphere
  • Providing value add components such as velocity, and marathon-lb
Read full review
Cons
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.
Read full review
D2iQ (formerly Mesosphere)
  • Setting up is a bit of a hassle, especially ZooKeeper state management and mesos and marathon quorum.
  • Occasionally, I observed some failures when deploying something onto Marathon. Logging or detailed error reporting can help.
  • Stale containers and inconsistent states resultant of the cluster failure are hard to solve and need a complete system restart to get it back to normal state.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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.
Read full review
D2iQ (formerly Mesosphere)
I happen to like mesosphere because it integrates well with a Jenkins based workflow, Deis is a little more Heroku like and it's not clear how to fit that model into a continuous-integration process. Kubernetes has also been criticized for being complicated.
Read full review
Return on Investment
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.
Read full review
D2iQ (formerly Mesosphere)
  • I see mesosphere as having a positive impact overall on the industry trending Docker and containers in general.
  • Seeing how mesosphere helps and simplifies things for the developer and ops, it is definitely a game changer.
  • Native support of on demand scaling up and down as per the need is one of the best features.
Read full review
ScreenShots