I really don’t understand why they positioned Openshift so far from the open source K8s project. It’s even more opinionated than AKS/EKS, and this says a lot.
The only reason I see is that they wanted more vendor lock-in, but that rarely pays in the long run.
Red Hat wants to position OpenShift as a complete, batteries-included application platform. To do that, they had to make Kubernetes a lot more accessible to engineers who were scared of/uninterested in touching that stuff (back when Kubernetes was more novel). At its core, though, it's pretty much Kubernetes with a LOT of add-ons and (appreciated) security hardening.
Red Hat also does contribute a fair amount back to Kubernetes and CNCF: the Operator pattern, Istio, Ceph, etc.
Lucasoato · · focus · HN ↗
The only reason I see is that they wanted more vendor lock-in, but that rarely pays in the long run.
nunez · · focus · HN ↗
Red Hat also does contribute a fair amount back to Kubernetes and CNCF: the Operator pattern, Istio, Ceph, etc.
(I work at Red Hat.)