Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Containerization is the backbone of modern cloud architecture, and understanding these platforms is essential for any exam covering deployment strategies, scalability patterns, and infrastructure management. You're being tested on more than just knowing what Docker does—you need to understand the difference between a container runtime and an orchestration platform, when to use managed services versus self-hosted solutions, and how these tools enable principles like portability, microservices architecture, and infrastructure as code.
The platforms in this guide fall into distinct categories based on their role in the container ecosystem. Some handle the low-level work of actually running containers, others orchestrate thousands of them across clusters, and still others provide enterprise-ready platforms with built-in DevOps tooling. Don't just memorize product names—know what layer of the stack each tool operates at and what problems it solves.
These tools handle the fundamental work of creating, running, and managing individual containers. They're the foundation that orchestration platforms build upon.
Compare: Docker vs. Podman—both provide similar CLI experiences for developers, but Podman's daemonless, rootless design offers stronger security defaults. If an exam question asks about container security best practices, Podman's architecture is your go-to example.
Orchestration tools manage clusters of containers at scale, handling deployment, networking, load balancing, and self-healing. This is where single containers become distributed systems.
Compare: Kubernetes vs. Docker Swarm—both orchestrate containers, but Kubernetes offers more sophisticated features (auto-scaling, extensive ecosystem) at the cost of complexity. Swarm prioritizes simplicity and Docker-native workflows. Exam tip: if asked about trade-offs between complexity and capability, this comparison demonstrates the principle perfectly.
Cloud providers offer fully managed Kubernetes that abstracts away cluster maintenance—upgrades, scaling, and monitoring happen automatically. These services trade some control for operational simplicity.
Compare: GKE vs. ECS—GKE runs standard Kubernetes (portable skills and configurations), while ECS uses AWS-proprietary APIs (deeper AWS integration but vendor lock-in). For FRQs on cloud portability versus ecosystem optimization, this distinction matters.
These platforms add developer experience, security, and DevOps tooling on top of Kubernetes, targeting organizations that need more than raw orchestration.
Compare: OpenShift vs. Rancher—OpenShift provides a complete, opinionated platform (more features, more prescriptive), while Rancher focuses on managing existing Kubernetes clusters flexibly (less opinionated, more adaptable). Both target enterprise needs but from different angles.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Container Runtimes | containerd, Podman, Docker Engine |
| Full Container Platforms | Docker, Podman |
| Self-Managed Orchestration | Kubernetes, Docker Swarm |
| Managed Kubernetes (AWS) | ECS, EKS |
| Managed Kubernetes (GCP) | GKE |
| Managed Kubernetes (Azure) | AKS |
| Enterprise Platforms | OpenShift, Rancher |
| Multi-Cluster Management | Rancher, GKE (multi-cluster) |
| Serverless Containers | ECS Fargate, GKE Autopilot |
| Security-Focused Design | Podman, OpenShift |
Which two platforms offer daemonless or rootless container execution, and why does this architecture improve security?
Compare Kubernetes and Docker Swarm: what trade-off do they represent, and which would you recommend for a small development team versus a large enterprise?
If an organization wants to run containers on AWS with minimal infrastructure management, which ECS launch type should they choose, and how does it compare to GKE Autopilot?
What distinguishes a container runtime (like containerd) from a container platform (like Docker)? Name one scenario where you'd use containerd directly instead of Docker.
An enterprise needs to manage Kubernetes clusters across multiple cloud providers with centralized access control. Compare OpenShift and Rancher—which better fits this use case, and why?