TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended) vs. IBM Cloud Functions

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    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

    IBM Cloud Functions

    Score6.5 out of 10
    N/AIBM Cloud Functions is a PaaS platform based on Apache OpenWhisk. With it, developers write code (“actions”) that respond to external events. Actions are hosted, executed, and scaled on demand based on the number of events coming in. No servers or infrastructure to provision and manage.

    $0

    per second of execution

    Pricing
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)IBM Cloud Functions
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    Basic Cloud Functions Rate
    $0.00017
    per second of execution
    API Gateway Rate
    Free
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)IBM Cloud Functions
    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
    Best Alternatives
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)IBM Cloud Functions
    Small Businesses
    Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
    Score8 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
    Score8.6 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Enterprises
    SUSE Rancher
    Score9.4 out of 10
    AWS Lambda
    Score8.3 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)IBM Cloud Functions
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.0
    (2 ratings)
    3.0
    (7 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)IBM Cloud Functions
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    IBM Cloud Functions [is] not the worse product on the IBM cloud. I decided to write this review as I thought it would be balanced. I would still use functions to set up a serverless architecture where execution time is pretty quick and the code is relatively simple. I wouldn't use IBM Cloud Functions for async calls obviously, as costs could be higher. The functions documentation is lacking in terms of CI/CD, and there are unexplainable errors occurring - like the network connection that I mentioned. So I wouldn't just rely on IBM Cloud Functions too much for the entire system, but make sure it's diversified.
    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
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Great substitute for a simple API calls to run non-complicated code.
    • Easy way to run Python/Java/Javascript to get something done.
    • File validation.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Billing can be a hassle, not the most responsive customer service/support team
    • Handles & executes most functionalities, but other platforms offer more scalability if you're seeking consistent and stable growth
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • ICF is a lightweight service and does not require runtime configurations
    • Scalable on demand and hence there is no need to pay for runtime costs
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • It directly affected our expenses since we do not need to deploy and maintain a set of separate applications.
    • It allowed us to pay for only the amount of time cloud functions run.
    • It saved on maintenance and monitoring of the applications it replaced.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots