The Mirantis Kubernetes Engine (formerly Docker Enterprise, acquired by Mirantis in November 2019)aims to let users ship code faster. Mirantis Kubernetes Engine gives users one set of APIs and tools to deploy, manage, and observe secure-by-default, certified, batteries-included Kubernetes clusters on any infrastructure: public cloud, private cloud, or bare metal.
$0
per year
SUSE Rancher
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Developed by Rancher Labs and now from SUSE, Rancher is open-source software that enables organizations to deploy and manage Kubernetes at scale, on any infrastructure across the data center, cloud, branch offices, and the network edge. Rancher centrally manages Kubernetes clusters across the organization in order to ensure security and accelerate transformation. Rancher is also available hosted. Hosted Rancher is a fully managed Rancher control plane - presented as the fastest, most cost…
$7,594.99
per year up to 500 nodes
Pricing
Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
SUSE Rancher
Editions & Modules
Free
$0.00
per year
Basic
$500.00
per year
Subscription license
7,594.99
per year up to 500 nodes
Standard Subscription
11,234.99
per year 10 nodes
Priority Subscription
30,514.99
per year 10 nodes
Management Server Priority Subscription
41,830.99
per year 1 instance
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
SUSE Rancher
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
These pricing options are compatible with Linux or Windows Server and are per year, per node. The basic version requires maximum online purchase not to exceed 50 nodes. Support/professional services are not included.
I didn’t select Mirantis Cloud Native Suite (Docker Enterprise) when I joined this organisation it was already being used here. The one thing I can say about Mirantis Cloud Native Suite (Docker Enterprise) is easy to use and creates a good impact in the businesses. So, I …
So far I haven't used any other containerized product except Docker Enterprise because in terms of community support and tutorial videos, Docker has a better reach than other tools. Docker can be easily set up from local to the cloud without worrying about the flavor of OS …
I have not used any other software as a container management solution. Its containerized apps allow the usage of less memory, thus
they start and shut down very fast. This tool is helping the enterprise
software to work quickly against the changing conditions thus offers great
I have heard about others, but all my professional life I have been using Docker as my primary container and the thing is you just don't need anything else right now. Because Kubernetes supports Docker and Docker is open-source and just very simple to get started with. 10 …
I have used Vagrant for consistent development environments as well. It is a more "heavyweight" solution since it's a complete virtual machine that requires a host like VirtualBox in order to run. With Docker, the container is much more lightweight and just requires the docker …
Junior Systems Administrator | POS Programming Specialist
Chose Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
FreeNAS, I don't wish to bad mouth any product but it appeared that iXsystems just did not want to help their users or attempt to resolve issues. It looks good on paper and it worked well for me for about 4 years until I needed more support and a more complex and bigger …
Docker has become the defacto service, as far as I have seen, to run Linux or other tools on any OS and architecture and get the same output. I have used vagrant in the past, but it was much more complicated to use. Docker is very common among developers, so documentation and …
Dockers isn't a replacement for VMWare or VirtualBox in all cases. It's fundamentally a different way to solve the development problem. We use Docker when we need a lightweight, fast development scaffold. We use other virtualization solutions if we need GUI access or need a …
I would also compare to BSD Jails, LXC, and Solaris Zones, but they weren't listed. One of the first reasons we decided to use Docker over other container applications is because Docker is the default everyone recommends and is easily the most popular. We found Docker to be …
Docker provides less lock in and more portability than Heroku. You can also easily self host or choose a Docker hosting service. Additionally, there is a wide availability of Docker containers where Heroku build packs are somewhat more limited. Heroku offers a more turnkey …
We've used XAMPP, PHPmyAdmin and similar local environments (our app is on PHP).
Because of how easy you can change the configuration of libraries on PHP and versions (which is SO painful on XAMPP or other friendly LAMP local servers) we are using Docker right now. Also, being …
Prior to docker, we had a custom build and deployment system. For local development, we use VirtualBox to host our VMs, while our custom VMs resided directly on the servers. We chose Docker primarily to allow us to get rid of our custom deployment system, both simplifying build …
Docker is great because of how the Docker Runtime works and how it eliminates the need to have the full operating system overhead that you'd find in a virtual machine (VM), keeping things lightweight and compatible regardless of where you go. Having an isolated, full Linux …
For light weight frontends, the Docker Swarm is the easiest to manage. One person can then mange the production environment and at the same time develop new software.
While Ansible and Docker focus on solving two different problems, we were previously using Ansible to ensure that all dependencies were automatically setup on new servers and that proper configuration was applied when new nodes were brought up. With docker, most of these …
While we still use virtual machines [for our Docker servers], we prefer Docker containers for our deployments. It really allows for a simpler infrastructure footprint to manage. For example, instead of managing 30 virtual machines with one or two apps on each VM, we could …
I had to use virtual machines before, the last one was VirtualBox. I was only a user there, I wasn't responsible for the configuration, it was a black box for me. When I had to use Docker for the first time I was a skeptic, but it proved to be easy. I can't really compare the …
Doocker lacks a lot of the scaling, automation, integration of 3rd party tools/solutions, and integration of shared high-performance self-healing storage, solutions like Heketi provide those missing pieces.
Docker runs both locally and on the server, whereas VirtualBox is only used locally to create a development environment. Docker gives us the ability to have the exact same environment both in the cloud and on individual developers' laptops. There are no surprises for the team, …
Vagrant is another software that offers similar [features that] stack to Docker. It offers an isolated container similar to Docker but Docker is lighter weight because it does not have the additional overhead of a VM Container. Docker has a much larger community of developers …
Docker is a different beast in that it is not trying to solve all of your infrastructure problems or most of them, it is simply trying to provide a reliable container serviced based on linux containers in which you can easily and quickly deploy microservices. LXD does provide …
Docker doesn't directly compare to very many other services. It is unique in its field. However, I love how fast Docker services spin up in comparison to VM-based or server-based applications. Docker is being adopted at a fast rate in the industry, so it's great to see Docker …
Before Docker, we were using Chef to manage our deployments. Chef didn't provide the environmental consistency and release confidence we needed. We had a split process between how the build servers, the developers and the deployed environments were managing the software …
SUSE Rancher is an excellent choice for managing multiple Kubernetes clusters, especially when catering to different teams with distinct access rights and requirements. It allows us to deploy these clusters on-premises across various sites or in the cloud. However, if you’re …
We started using SUSE Rancher in the early days and spent a large amount of time getting to know and love it. This was before the days of some of the likes of Amazon Web Services who may now provide a cheaper but less feature-rich alternative to SUSE Rancher, however we have …
DevOps Architect for Containerization Platforms and Microservices
Chose SUSE Rancher
That is the one of the greatest values of Rancher. You can choose to add new features and functionalities to your environment by implementing other projects from SUSE, but you not forced to. You can use Longhorn as Persistent Storage, but you can use any other i.e. VMware CSI, …
As we use only AWS EKS Clusters originally we were using the AWS Console and CLI but that is too limited in scope. Also, we were using AWS IAM roles to provide access to users but that was lots of extra work to have them integrated into SSO while on Rancher we have just …
I find SUSE Rancher easier to use and configure with the features I want to really use. I'm finding more people in the community to help in getting support for the product. The other competitors seem to lock you too much into their own ecosystems and keep many needed details …
lens installs locally and needs access (network) to the kube_api of the clusters. With Rancher, you need access to the rancher front end (UI / 443), and your clusters Kube API does not need to be exposed (even over a VPN or whitelisted ips). For security reasons, the rancher …
We were looking for an open-source solution for simply deploying and managing K8s on bare metal in both big and small environments. SUSE Rancher was the easiest to install. Rancher Kubernetes Engine (2) and K3s will give you just a plain simple Kubernetes environment. The …
Docker is great for when you would want to use a VM for any given application, but don't need the overhead of the whole OS. Docker containers use very little computing resources, boot up very quickly, and are very easy to set up. An instance where Docker may not be appropriate would be for an application that requires good security. If in this situation, a true VM would probably be your best bet.
SUSE Rancher as a management tool becomes useful on a larger scale. Small deployments not so much. If someone also requires Kubernetes capacity or storage, Rancher is an excellent choice. Also, without Kubernetes' skills, it is unlikely that Rancher deployment is going to be a success. Then again if someone else is managing your Kubernetes capacity, setting up the software's capacity will yield greater control. Rancher is not a very integrated solution similar to others in the market.
Docker has a bit of a learning curve, and it takes some time to become familiar with the tooling and syntax. Transitioning an existing architecture to docker can represent a significant investment.
Docker attempts to provide some level of cross-host container orchestration via swarm, but it falls short of third-party solutions like kubernetes.
We occasionally run into stability issues when the docker daemon is subjected to high load (many applications starting/stopping frequently). In these cases, docker hangs and we have to restart or replace the node.
No possibility to snapshot Projects. You can snapshot and restore the whole Kubernetes cluster, but not a Project or Namespace. For this, you have to use external tools.
You cannot detach the Rancher-created Kubernetes clusters from Rancher management.
Docker's CLI has a lot of options, and they aren't all intuitive. And there are so many tools in the space (Docker Compose, Docker Swarm, etc) that have their own configuration as well. So while there is a lot to learn, most concepts transfer easily and can be learned once and applied across everything.
Overall it deserves an 8 out of 10. The platform is very easy to use as long as the UI is stable. We have had a few buggy versions in the past. However the CLI is excellent and the platform is simple to manage and maintain. It is easy to deploy and offer for company wide use which increases utilization and ROI.
The community support for Docker is fantastic. There is almost always an answer for any issue I might encounter day-to-day, either on Stack Overflow, a helpful blog post, or the community Slack workspace. I've never come across a problem that I was unable to solve via some searching around in the community.
The documentation is quite complete and there is a very active community that is willing to collaborate and answer questions for those who are just starting out.
I have not used any other software as a container management solution. Its containerized apps allow the usage of less memory, thus they start and shut down very fast. This tool is helping the enterprise software to work quickly against the changing conditions thus offers great scaling by simultaneously allowing me to meet the demands, which also leads to easy implementation of the strategies.
SUSE Rancher is an excellent choice for managing multiple Kubernetes clusters, especially when catering to different teams with distinct access rights and requirements. It allows us to deploy these clusters on-premises across various sites or in the cloud. However, if you’re dealing with only one or a few Kubernetes clusters, using SUSE Rancher might introduce unnecessary complexity. This is where EKS wins, as its native cloud based abilities are better suited to scale, support higher complexity and larger demand.
We are able to try things very quickly compared to before. If you need to debug it, changes on X/Y/Z will have an impact on the way your app works, and changing libraries or configurations of the environment easily can improve your development cycles.
In case someone new arrives, the onboarding is pretty easy thanks to Docker. We have tried many configs and images until we reached a point were we have what we want. We don't have to painfully do that again for every new user. We just send him the image.
Shortens "Time-to-Market" factor for new business applications or implementing new functionalities. From 1 to 50 microservices-based business applications in 6 years.
24/7 availability, generates more money. There are many infrastructure components that are regularly powered-off for maintenance or upgrade, bur we rarely are turning off our downstream Kubernetes clusters where our business applications lives.
Single Point of Contact with platform maintenance and development Team, eases implementation of new business applications