Nomad is pretty fantastic!
But again, what specifically are you able to do in Kubernetes that you cannot do in Nomad? You mentioned it's not as "functional" but seems you're unable to actually specify what you mean by this.
> Nomad is built by a for profit company while k8s is purely OSS
Not sure how you can claim Kubernetes somehow is "more OSS" than Nomad? Both are under FOSS licenses (Nomad: MPL, Kubernetes: Apache) but both are mainly maintained by two big for-profit companies (Nomad: HashiCorp, Kubernetes: Google). They are both the same in this regard, both are the "same amount of OSS", whatever that means.
This is deeply untrue of Kube, it's maintained by lots of companies, and is in a totally separate organization than Google with distinctly different governance. Kube goes out of its way to ensure its not dominated by one organization and has stats on this. I haven't looked at the Nomad stats but I imagine its nowhere near that and still under the Hashicorp umbrella and pretty much only works with Hashicorp stuff.
> But again, what specifically are you able to do in Kubernetes that you cannot do in Nomad?
The big thing for me is API extensibility. The Kube CRD is one of the more powerful abstractions to hit infrastructure in awhile. The ability to create your own controllers and offer consistent APIs to an end user is imperfect but incredibly useful.
Other thoughts:
* Kube is supported by every major cloud provider.
* I'm not a fan of HCL, some people like it but I prefer Kube's approach of decoupling the templating from the core app.