GoDaddy Container-as-a-Service (ElasticHosts, Springs.io), discontinued vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

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

Incentivized

When you want to deploy a large number of apps within a Kubernetes cluster, and when you want to directly transform your source code into container orchestration and add it to the cluster with the least amount of effort possible, Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is an excellent choice. This is because Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is very well for circumstances like these. It's a fantastic tool for keeping tabs on your cluster's health with minimal effort.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• All the deployment artifacts can be reused with minor changes to run on Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
• Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud enables users to manage VMs outside cluster using KubeVirt feature
• The DevOps pipeline, like ArgoCD, was quick and easy to showcase the capability in Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

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

• 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

I think response time for IBM Cloud support should be improved.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

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

• 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

• 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