Merge pull request #2994 from replicatedhq/116780

Explain EC built-in extensions in contrast to kurl

Author: paigecalvert

docs/partials/embedded-cluster/_kurl-comparison.mdx

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 import EmbeddedCluster from "../partials/embedded-cluster/_definition.mdx"
-import KurlComparison from "../partials/embedded-cluster/_kurl-comparison.mdx"
 import Requirements from "../partials/embedded-cluster/_requirements.mdx"
 import EmbeddedClusterPortRequirements from "../partials/embedded-cluster/_port-reqs.mdx"
 
@@ -63,7 +62,13 @@ Additionally, for installations that include disaster recovery with Velero, the
 
 ## Comparison to kURL
 
-<KurlComparison/>
+Embedded Cluster is a successor to Replicated kURL. Compared to kURL, Embedded Cluster offers several improvements such as:
+* Significantly faster installation, updates, and node joins
+* A redesigned Admin Console UI for managing the cluster
+* Improved support for multi-node clusters
+* One-click updates of both the application and the cluster at the same time
+
+Additionally, Embedded Cluster automatically deploys several built-in extensions like KOTS and OpenEBS to provide capabilities such as application management and storage. This represents an improvement over kURL because vendors distributing their application with Embedded Cluster no longer need choose and define various add-ons in the installer spec. For additional functionality that is not included in the built-in extensions, such as an ingress controller, vendors can provide their own [`extensions`](/reference/embedded-config#extensions) that will be deployed alongside the application.
 
 ## Requirements