Side by side

AuroraBoot vs Canonical MAAS

Both stand on bare metal provisioning software. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.

AuroraBoot

Free plan APILinuxMac+3

AuroraBoot combines image building, provisioning, and fleet management for self-hosted deployments. Its unauthenticated plain-HTTP netboot server is an important security limitation to consider.

Visit AuroraBoot

Canonical MAAS

Free plan Open source APILinuxSelf-hosted+1

MAAS provides server provisioning and infrastructure-management tools, with free self-support and paid support tiers. Account for the free plan’s support exclusions and the Ubuntu Pro requirement for controllers.

Visit Canonical MAAS

The facts

	AuroraBoot	Canonical MAAS
Free plan	Yes	Yes
Open source	Not published	Yes
Runs on	API, Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Web, Windows	API, Linux, Self-hosted, Web
Lowest paid plan	Free or on request	See the plans
Plans published	1	5
Maker	Not published	Not published
Website	github.com	canonical.com
On bare metal provisioning software	#3 of 28	#1 of 28

AuroraBoot: what it does well

Builds several image types from Kairos flavors or containers.
Provisions through PXE/netboot, Redfish, or USB.
Provides a browser dashboard for fleet operations.
Includes a REST API and Go client.
Free under Apache License 2.0.

What to know first

Requires Docker or a container engine.
Netboot HTTP server is unauthenticated.
Netboot files are served over plain HTTP.

Canonical MAAS: what it does well

Automates server lifecycle tasks.
Web UI, command line, and API management.
Integrates with Terraform, Juju, and Ansible.
Supports network and storage configuration.
Free plan covers all machines.

What to know first

Free plan has no HA support.
Free plan lacks RBAC and Knowledge Base.
Free plan has no phone or ticket support.
Ubuntu Pro is required for MAAS controllers.

Alternatives to AuroraBoot Alternatives to Canonical MAAS The whole list