HashiCorp Nomad vs. IBM Cloud Private

Nomad is well suited for organizations who wish to tackle the problem of cloud computing with as little opinion as possible. Where competing tools like Kubernetes limit the concept of "batteries included," Nomad relies on engineers understanding the missing components and filling them in as necessary. The benefit of Nomad is the ability to build a system out of small pieces with the cost of having more complexity at a system level compared to alternatives.

Incentivized

IBM Cloud Private is an ideal platform for companies to accelerate their business growth. It helps in reducing the cost of IT and operations while delivering a great customer experience. With IBM Cloud Private, you can gain agility and security with a flexible hybrid model that fits your needs. It's highly recommended to my colleagues from me.

Incentivized

• Nomad is incredibly simple by nature, following the Linux philosophy of doing one thing great. That one thing for Nomad is job scheduling.
• Nomad is a modern tool, written in Go with a large community and maintained by HashiCorp.
• Implementation of Nomad is very simple since it is a single binary.

Incentivized

• Capacity On Demand to scale up and down environments
• SaaS model allows our team to have less involvement in managing or controlling the underlying cloud infrastructure including network, servers, operating systems, storage, or even individual application capabilities.
• SaaS model allows our team to worry less about upgrades, fix packs, environment support etc.

Incentivized

• Nomad only handles one part of a full platform. Expertise and vision are required in implementing an entire system that is functional enough for an organization to rely on. This includes other tools to handle things like secrets, service discovery, network routing, etc.
• Nomad is delayed in some modern functionality, like features for service-mesh and open tracing. These features are on the tool's roadmap, but there's currently no native support. These paradigms can be established still, but require more expertise outside of Nomad itself.
• Nomad is not the leading tool for this space, and as such risks being left behind by tools with much greater support, such as Kubernetes.

Incentivized

• Bluemix/IBM Cloud UI can be better
• Changing Brand name from Bluemix to IBM Cloud, as we are habituated to Bluemix more

Incentivized

Nomad's primary competitor is Kubernetes, specifically its scheduling component. Kubernetes is a much more complete system that will handle more things than job scheduling, including service discovery, secrets management, and service routing. There also exists a much larger community support for Kubernetes vs Nomad. One might say Kubernetes is the safer choice between the two. Kubernetes is the complete "operating system" for cloud computing, but with it includes complexities that are "Kubernetes" specific. The decision really comes down to a mindset of monolith vs components. With Kubernetes, I would argue you choose the entire system as a whole. With Nomad, you design your system piece by piece. There is no wrong answer.

Incentivized

With VMware cloud, each VMware Cloud customer must have an SDDC account(VMC) as well as a general AWS account. The two accounts must be linked for the service to work which is a tiresome thing to do for some clients but with IBM Cloud Private all these issues are solved.

Incentivized

• Nomad has allowed our organization to deploy quicker and more frequently with a lower failure rate.
• Nomad has brought in consistency from an operations perspective.
• Nomad's performance allows us to scale infinitely while providing functionality that reduces mean time to repair (canary deploys, versioning, rollbacks, etc).

Incentivized

• IBM Cloud has helped us start using the cloud and migrating old services to the cloud.

Incentivized