Crontab UI vs Conductor OSS
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Crontab UI
Web interface for editing and managing crontab jobs
VS
Conductor OSS
Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
| Feature | Crontab UI | Conductor OSS |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,277 | ★ 32,066 |
| First released | 2016 | 2016 |
| Replaces | cron | AWS Step Functions, Camunda |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Crontab UI or Conductor OSS better?
Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Crontab UI is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Crontab UI and Conductor OSS free and open-source?
Yes. Crontab UI is licensed under MIT and Conductor OSS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Crontab UI and Conductor OSS with Docker?
Crontab UI: yes. Conductor OSS: yes.