Bare Metal OpenShift: Why companies are now looking for real alternatives to VMware

Since VMware was acquired by Broadcom, the market has seen significant movement. Many companies are facing rising licensing costs and new contractual models. At the same time, there is a growing desire to regain stronger control over infrastructure. In this context, an approach that long played only a marginal role is coming into focus: running OpenShift directly on physical hardware.

A shift the industry is clearly feeling

For many years, virtualization was the standard. It offered stability, well-defined processes, and a cost model that was easy to plan. However, organizations relying on VMware today are increasingly aware of how much the conditions have changed. For many IT decision-makers, the issue is no longer purely technical but also about long-term predictability. The key question is how to remain flexible without being drawn into ever more restrictive licensing models.

Bare Metal OpenShift is one possible answer. By removing the virtualization layer entirely, workloads run directly on the server. This increases independence while providing a solid foundation for modern container platforms.

What Bare Metal OpenShift changes in practice

The most obvious difference is immediate: there is no hypervisor. Computing power is used directly by workloads, the platform becomes leaner, and many recurring licensing costs disappear.

At the same time, responsibility shifts. Topics such as network design, hardware provisioning, and storage architecture become more prominent. When these areas are handled properly, the result is a highly stable platform that can be automated effectively. When they are not, operational disruptions are almost inevitable.

Why the transition is demanding

Many IT teams have worked with VMware for years and know the ecosystem in depth. Moving to bare metal is fundamentally different. It requires Kubernetes expertise, a solid understanding of hardware, and a clearly structured operating model.

It is not enough to simply get a cluster up and running. It must perform reliably in day-to-day operations. Updates need to be repeatable, failover concepts must be robust, and replacing a node should not disrupt operations. This aspect is often underestimated.

Where CONOVTIS makes the difference

At CONOVTIS, we have not only evaluated Bare Metal OpenShift in theory but have implemented it in real customer environments. This includes automated server provisioning, suitable network and storage architectures, and an operating model that works in practice.

Our experience shows that technology alone is not enough. Success depends on how well it is integrated into daily operations. A cleanly built cluster avoids many issues later on and significantly reduces follow-up costs.

Who this approach is particularly suitable for

Bare Metal OpenShift is especially attractive for organizations looking to reduce their dependency on VMware or closely monitor cost developments. Companies that require high computing performance or use Kubernetes strategically also benefit significantly.

At a time when virtualization is becoming more expensive and less flexible, it makes sense to evaluate alternatives that are technically and economically sustainable in the long term.

Conclusion

Bare Metal OpenShift is not a quick replacement for VMware but a genuine architectural decision. When implemented correctly, it offers greater freedom, a leaner infrastructure, and a platform designed for modern applications.

CONOVTIS is one of the few providers that has already successfully supported this transition multiple times. We know what it takes to build an environment that not only starts successfully but also operates reliably in everyday use.