I don't understand why people still waste so much money on making some perfect search engine when they can just filter on tags. Every retail product sales website in the world works by filtering on tags, not deciphering search terms in the "right" way.
Want black shoes? I could search for "black shoes", and receive shoes with the brand/product name "Black". Or I could select 'category: shoes' and 'color: black' in the drop-down box. Hey, look, now I have a list of black shoes.
The standard refrain in companies is "don't talk about your competitors, talk about yourself". And that's fine, unless nobody wants to buy your product because your competitor is all anyone talks about. At a certain point you do need to tell people why you're better than the competition.
But actually, they're not competitors. Hashicorp supports K8s clusters for their customers. Nomad is just a product they built that is an alternative to K8s, and plugs into their whole product suite. Someone has probably asked them many times, "Why should I use Nomad instead of K8s?" So they have a page about it.
Was it not possible in ECS? Or did your teams just want to use K8s, and decided they would use the opportunity of wanting to organize things better as a reason to switch? It seems to me that with SSO and IAM you could create virtually any kind of access controls around ECS. K8s doesn't solve the multi-account problem, and federation in K8s can be quite difficult.
Poor design. It's been cobbled together slowly over the past 7 years. They built it to work only a certain way at first. But then somebody said, "oh, actually we forgot we need this other component too". But it didn't make sense with the current design. So they'd strap the new feature to the side with duct tape. Then they'd need another feature, and strap something else to the first strapped-on thing. Teams would ask for a new feature, and it would be shimmed in to the old design. All the while the design was led by an initial set of "opinionated" decisions that were inherently limiting. The end result is a mess that needs more and more abstraction. But this isn't a problem when you are already a billion-dollar company that can pay for other teams to build more abstractions and internal tools to deal with it.
This is business as usual in any quasi-monolithic Enterprise project. Typically the way you escape that scenario is to have major refactors where you can overhaul the design and turn your 50 abstractions into 5. But instead, K8s decided to have very small release and support windows. This way they can refactor things and obsolete features within a short time frame. The end result is you either stick with one version for eternity (a security/operability problem) or you will be upgrading and deal with breaking changes every year for eternity.
They're both complex. But one of them has 10 times the components than the other, and requires you to use them. One of them is very difficult to install - so much so that there are a dozen different projects intended just to get it running. While the other is a single binary. And while one of them is built around containers (and all of the complexity that comes with interacting with them / between them), the other one doesn't have to use containers at all.
Want black shoes? I could search for "black shoes", and receive shoes with the brand/product name "Black". Or I could select 'category: shoes' and 'color: black' in the drop-down box. Hey, look, now I have a list of black shoes.