HashiCorp Nomad vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

HashiCorp Nomad
Ranking in Container Management
16th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift Container...
Ranking in Container Management
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Container Management category, the market share of HashiCorp Nomad is 3.1% and it increased by 33.3% compared to the previous year. The market share of Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is 25.1% and it increased by 19.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Management
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

Use HashiCorp Nomad?
Share your opinion
Raju Polina - PeerSpot reviewer
Dec 26, 2022
A user-friendly solution with a well-designed UI that allows us to create flexible and robust infrastructure rapidly
One of the best features is monitoring; we can see metrics via visual aids when the load increases, for example. The software is user-friendly and straightforward to use, which is favorable to a developer. The system also takes care of itself regarding scaling; the platform can up and downscale automatically depending on demand. With OpenShift, there is no need to learn new technology, as the skills required for Kubernetes carry over; the commands are interchangeable. Therefore, OpenShift is a developer-friendly tool. We use the solution on the vendor's OpenStack Platform, and in terms of the ease and speed with which it enables us to create infrastructure, it's very straightforward. We can set up an environment within a day or two, and it's a very convenient way to develop. The infrastructure created by the solution on the OpenStack Platform is very robust; we created communication metrics: a shield where all VMs, master, and worker nodes communicate from subnet to subnet. We designed these and gave them to Red Hat, where they developed the ISO clients for deployment from day one. After gaining hands-on experience, we could create our own and implement a cluster. OpenShift is highly effective at creating infrastructure that can be flexibly sized to meet specific needs on the OpenStack Platform. The minimum basic configuration is three masters, three infra, and two worker nodes. When a load starts passing through this setup, and we reach a certain threshold, say the worker machines are running at 60%, we can add another node, another VM. We have added eight to ten VMs in this way before. After experimenting with different configurations, we get a feel of which one to implement for a specific use case within the production environment. If we want to scale up, we add worker nodes; nothing else is required. OpenShift provides solid security throughout the stack and the software supply chain; the solution has an inbuilt image registry and doesn't allow outside images, making the system more secure. The platform also features a Compliance Operator, which assesses the compliance of API resources and the nodes running the cluster.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I'm not familiar with pricing or financial aspects. In terms of effort versus benefit, it's worth it."
"Its price is a bit high because it's a premium product, but as long as the business is ready to pay for that, it's okay."
"OpenShift Container Platform is highly-priced."
"The pricing is expensive for licensing."
"The price is slightly on the higher side. It is something that can be worked on because most of the businesses now have margins."
"If you buy the product for a year or three, you get a lot of discounts...I feel that the product is worth its cost, especially since setting it up can be done with just a few clicks."
"We currently have an annual license renewal."
"It largely depends on how much money they earn from the application being deployed; you don't normally deploy an app just for the purpose of having it. You must constantly look into your revenue and how much you spend every container, minute, or hour of how much it is working."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
787,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which is better - OpenShift Container Platform or VMware Tanzu Mission Control?
Red Hat Openshift is ideal for organizations using microservices and cloud environments. I like that the platform is auto-scalable, which saves overhead time for developers. I think Openshift can b...
What do you like most about OpenShift Container Platform?
The tool's most valuable features include high availability, scalability, and security. Other features like advanced cluster management, advanced cluster security, and Red Hat Quay make it powerful...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenShift Container Platform?
The solution is expensive, and I rate it an eight out of ten. There is a subscription called OpenShift Plus, which offers additional features and products the vendor provides to complement the Open...
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Edenor, BMW, Ford, Argentine Ministry of Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), VMware and others in Container Management. Updated: May 2024.
787,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.