CircleCI vs. CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
CircleCI
Score 9.5 out of 10
N/A
CircleCI is a software delivery engine from the company of the same name in San Francisco, that helps teams ship software faster, offering their platform for Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD). Ultimately, the solution helps to map every source of change for software teams, so they can accelerate innovation and growth.
$15
per month
CoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
CoreOS rkt or Container Linux was a rival to Docker that was acquired by Red Hat, then given to the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF). The project has since been discontinued.N/A
Pricing
CircleCICoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Editions & Modules
Server
Contact Sales
Performance
starting at $15
per month
Scale
starting at $2000
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CircleCICoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
CircleCICoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Best Alternatives
CircleCICoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
CircleCICoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
7.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
6.9
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
CircleCICoreOS rkt / Container Linux (project ended)
Likelihood to Recommend
CircleCI is well suited if you, your developer, or team of developers have already worked with it in the past. They don't need to go through the learning curve of yet another Continuous Integration tool. Circle handles Continuous Integration workflows very well, including pretty complex workflows. With that said, Circle can get expensive if you need to run multiple containers in parallel and might not be as easy to setup as some alternatives, such as Jenkins.
Read full review
It is very well suited for local testing where one knows what is being worked on and knows all the dependencies of the software project. On the other hand, it would be less appropriate in situations where a simple chroot can do the trick without the overhead of running a Go application.
Read full review
Pros
  • Full customization and scripting abilities. Using tools like bash scripts, SSH, and Node, running almost anything upon committing some code to GitHub becomes possible.
  • Integration with all of our favorite services. GitHub and Slack in particular are crucial to our business and CircleCI's integration is seamless and full-featured.
  • Great config file syntax. Many CI services require you to perform advanced configuration in a UI. This is fine at first (and CircleCI offers this for many options available), but when you start needing to manage a large number of projects, committing configuration changes to a Git repository is more consistent and maintainable than making the change many different times manually in a UI.
Read full review
  • Running a secure container without messing up with low-level details
  • Very clear and straightforward approach to building a container
  • A way to go for new projects thinking of containers
  • Comprehensive and well-written documentation compatible with UNIX keep it simple way of thinking
Read full review
Cons
  • CircleCI mostly getting built into both upstream platforms (Github/Gitlab) and downstream platforms (AWS, Azure, GCP), in which cases it's often a better fit or can be used as a part of existing tooling
  • UX can be confusing to navigate and see what's happening.
Read full review
  • Market share, it's often very difficult to find new talent who use CoreOS rkt.
  • Lack of wow features, CoreOS rkt doesn't necessarily offer any immediate advantages over other container solutions.
Read full review
Usability
CircleCI interface is awesome in that it is relatively modern and makes it clear exactly which parts of the engineering lifecycle you are in
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
It's pretty snappy, even with using workflows with multiple steps and different docker images. I've seen builds take a long time if it's really involved, but from what I can tell, it's still at least on par if not faster than other build tools.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
I haven't personally used their support service, but I have heard from others that they are responsive. I've also seen only one or two downtimes in over a year of use and both were no more than an hour or two.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Jenkins and Teamcity both have additional features that maybe you require, but they are also a lot more work to get set up and working. There's a much longer learning curve to getting these configured for a simple build. They're not hosted, so you have to maintain the infrastructure and scale yourself. They're both good products if you require more than CircleCI, but if not, skip the extra headache and go with something simple like CircleCI.
Read full review
We evaluated CoreOS rkt and Docker when selecting software solutions for my department. We ended up using CoreOS rkt because of how well it fits with CoreOS and the choice of gRPC for the API. We provide a managed service that runs CoreOS on a bare metal server, CoreOS rkt was a logical choice for compatibility. We also found that developers were having better scusess interacting with gRPC than other container engines REST protocols. It was a close race but eventually there were just enough small benefits to push CoreOS rkt in front of the competition.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Saves us a lot of time and reduces potential mistakes by making our deployment and QA process completely automated
  • Builds docker images for us so we don't have to build them locally on our machines
  • Runs tests automatically on every commit, so we catch mistakes early
Read full review
  • Developers spend less time configuring and more time coding.
  • Less time training developers as CoreOS rkt lets them use whatever hardware and operating system they want.
  • Reduced our IT costs, solutions are containerized using CoreOS rkt meaning they can write one solution with many developers in mind.
Read full review
ScreenShots