TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended) vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

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

    Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

    Score7.9 out of 10
    N/ARed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is a comprehensive service that offers fully managed OpenShift clusters, on IBM Cloud platform. It is directly integrated into the same Kubernetes service that maintains 25 billion on-demand forecasts daily at The Weather Company.N/A
    Pricing
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    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)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Considered Both Products
    Open Source
    No answer on this topic
    IBM
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Would buy again
    15 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    12 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Happy with the feature set
    15 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    92%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    12 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    15 Answers
    Features
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Container Management
    Comparison of Container Management features of CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended) and Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Feature
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
    -
    Ratings
    Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    7.4
    7 Ratings
    10% below category average
    Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.77 Ratings
    Container Orchestration00 Ratings8.27 Ratings
    Cluster Management00 Ratings7.17 Ratings
    Storage Management00 Ratings6.97 Ratings
    Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings7.37 Ratings
    Discovery Tools00 Ratings6.96 Ratings
    Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings7.46 Ratings
    Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings7.57 Ratings
    Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings6.77 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Small Businesses
    Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
    Score8 out of 10
    Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
    Score8 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
    Score8.6 out of 10
    Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
    Score8.6 out of 10
    Enterprises
    SUSE Rancher
    Score9.4 out of 10
    SUSE Rancher
    Score9.4 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.0
    (2 ratings)
    8.0
    (16 ratings)
    Support Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
    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
    RedHat OpenShift is not only suited for IBM Cloud but can run in ANY cloud. We installed in Azure Cloud, for example. It can also run on Linux servers or a Power 9 machine. It is built for multi-cloud or on-prem environments. IBM support provides such excellent guidance in the installation and configuration that no other product on the market can beat it.
    Incentivized
    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
    • Multiclick provisioning of resources makes it super easy to manage pods and deployments. We don't have to maintain code for the same
    • In built security features and customizability ensures that organization wide standards are integrated well into the containers
    • Automated backups, scale ups and fail recovery makes sure of minimal down time
    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
    • I wish it had better compatibility with docker file syntax. We had issues when it couldn't build standard docker files
    • Wish it had better documentation
    • Wish they offered fully supported client libraries for the Openshift API rather than dumping it on a 3rd party
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Open Source
    No answers on this topic
    IBM
    I think response time for IBM Cloud support should be improved.
    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
    We evaluated a number of potential solutions and ultimately chose Red Hat OpenShift because it was compatible with our existing technology. Time and costs savings have been realized throughout the company since we implemented Red Hat OpenShift, and the IT department has been freed up to focus on activities that are more valuable.
    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
    • Our customer satisfaction and NPS score has had positive outcomes based on new architecture
    • We are focused on business outcomes vs running the service and maintenance
    • OpenShift on IBM Cloud has had a direct, positive impact on TCO, ROI, and payback period
    • Our staff is more focused on higher-level business activities, i.e. acquiring & customer retention
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots