CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended) vs. GoDaddy Container-as-a-Service (ElasticHosts, Springs.io), discontinued

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

Unlike other providers, Springs doesn’t use a pre-built container solution, instead opting for their own software built from the ground up.

Incentivized

• 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

• Container hosting, cloud virtualization
• Elastic capacity scaling and pay-per-use billing
• Linux kernel containerization technologies for container isolation and control

Incentivized

• 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

• Provide more options at lower costs
• It would be nice to see that expanded out to more distributions. What would be potentially even better though is templates. Some hosts can deploy ready-to-run WordPress/Drupal sites, LAMP instances, ownCloud instances, etc. at the drop of a hat. If Springs could replicate this with their container hosting they’d immediately appeal to a much, much wider audience;

Incentivized

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

Springs is drastically cheaper than running 4 OVH servers, and a little cheaper than running nano instances on AWS.

Incentivized

• 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

• In the beginning I wasn’t sure what I should set it to for my web server, so I left it. After a while the Average usage area begins showing how much resource the container is demanding and from that more adequate limits can be set.
• Springs is drastically cheaper than running 4 OVH servers, and a little cheaper than running nano instances on AWS.

Incentivized