Amazon EC2 Container Service vs Codeanywhere: What are the differences?
What is Amazon EC2 Container Service? Container management service that supports Docker containers. Amazon EC2 Container Service lets you launch and stop container-enabled applications with simple API calls, allows you to query the state of your cluster from a centralized service, and gives you access to many familiar Amazon EC2 features like security groups, EBS volumes and IAM roles.
What is Codeanywhere? Online code editor, available on iOS, Android and more. Integrates with GitHub and Dropbox. A development platform that enables you to not only edit your files from underlying services like FTP, GitHub, Dropbox and the like, but on top of that gives you the ability to collaborate, embed and share through Codeanywhere on any device.
Amazon EC2 Container Service can be classified as a tool in the "Containers as a Service" category, while Codeanywhere is grouped under "Cloud IDE".
Some of the features offered by Amazon EC2 Container Service are:
- Docker Compatibility
- Managed Clusters
- Programmatic Control
On the other hand, Codeanywhere provides the following key features:
- Code editor
- FTP Client
- SSH Terminal
"Backed by amazon" is the top reason why over 97 developers like Amazon EC2 Container Service, while over 12 developers mention "Sleek interface" as the leading cause for choosing Codeanywhere.
According to the StackShare community, Amazon EC2 Container Service has a broader approval, being mentioned in 794 company stacks & 391 developers stacks; compared to Codeanywhere, which is listed in 5 company stacks and 6 developer stacks.
What is Amazon EC2 Container Service?
What is Codeanywhere?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Amazon EC2 Container Service?
What are the cons of using Codeanywhere?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
We began our hosting journey, as many do, on Heroku because they make it easy to deploy your application and automate some of the routine tasks associated with deployments, etc. However, as our team grew and our product matured, our needs have outgrown Heroku. I will dive into the history and reasons for this in a future blog post.
We decided to migrate our infrastructure to Kubernetes running on Amazon EKS. Although Google Kubernetes Engine has a slightly more mature Kubernetes offering and is more user-friendly; we decided to go with EKS because we already using other AWS services (including a previous migration from Heroku Postgres to AWS RDS). We are still in the process of moving our main website workloads to EKS, however we have successfully migrate all our staging and testing PR apps to run in a staging cluster. We developed a Slack chatops application (also running in the cluster) which automates all the common tasks of spinning up and managing a production-like cluster for a pull request. This allows our engineering team to iterate quickly and safely test code in a full production environment. Helm plays a central role when deploying our staging apps into the cluster. We use CircleCI to build docker containers for each PR push, which are then published to Amazon EC2 Container Service (ECR). An
upgrade-operator process watches the ECR repository for new containers and then uses Helm to rollout updates to the staging environments. All this happens automatically and makes it really easy for developers to get code onto servers quickly. The immutable and isolated nature of our staging environments means that we can do anything we want in that environment and quickly re-create or restore the environment to start over.
The next step in our journey is to migrate our production workloads to an EKS cluster and build out the CD workflows to get our containers promoted to that cluster after our QA testing is complete in our staging environments.
Over time I think more and more that Codeanywhere is a waste of money.
They prioritise absolutely pointless features over general UX. Let's take a very simple situation... you're coding a page and suddenly you're logged out and redirected to the homepage login form, so everything you've coded leading up to that redirect is lost for good. You can't go back, even after you log in, and you can't get the code back because it didn't save (because you were not logged in).
I can think of at least 4 different, more practical ways in which session expiration could be handled to stop this frustration for users, but Codeanywhere would rather have their developers working on additional container support or new syntax highlighting for languages nobody has even heard of.
Do not waste your money on this garbage. I've been with them long enough to go through at least 2-3 serious situations that could have been prevented if the platform was properly developed.
We use the container service so that we can deploy our application services with Dockerfiles, so that we can test locally and deploy to AWS simply.
Additionally, the ability to scale containers and have them automatically restart in case of failure is very helpful to our operations.
We use the EC2 registry for secure private container registration. When used in combination with I AM roles we can control customer access to repos on and individual basis.
Amazon EC2 is our primary application hosting solution. Most applications are not exposed on the internet and use a virtually private cloud to interact with each other.
With a little forethought, ECS can handle a good portion of my development stack as though it were production. 12 Factor configuration makes this a breeze.