In any rapidly emerging market, consultants can be a great source for vendor-neutral insights, as they typically work with multiple technologies to help their customers make informed decisions. In that vein, Derya (Dorian) Sezen of kloia, a new-era consulting organization that provides services toward transition of legacy workloads to frontline technologies in Cloud, DevOps and Microservices, recently wrote a blog summarizing his experience with Rancher and Red Hat OpenShift. In his blog, Dorian compared and scored the two Kubernetes management tools across 13 categories including installation easiness, CNCF/industry standards, open-source, licensing, multi-cluster, upgrades, Kubernetes version, vendor-lock, Windows container support, support, sales, partner ecosystem and bundle options.
Dorian’s comparison is based on Rancher and OpenShift customer feedback, technical evidence and his experience with both platforms as a cloud and DevOps consultant. The final score was Rancher 33 points, OpenShift 25 points. Check out Dorian’s key points and our associated takeaways:
“OpenShift has relatively longer installation and upgrade times,” says Sezen. “This is not suitable for CI/CD solutions that deploy the entire clusters during the platform deployment pipelines. Version upgrades on OpenShift are reported to be risky and painful. Some major upgrades have been reported to take all night till the morning. And a specific version upgrade has been reported [to have] created disruption on the overall system.”
Of course, this is one organization’s experience and your mileage may vary. But it’s valuable insight, nonetheless, and why we wanted to share the information.
Learn more about Rancher’s benefits in A Buyer’s Guide to Enterprise Kubernetes Management Platforms.