We performed a comparison between Google Kubernetes Engine and Kubernetes based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The main advantage of GKE is that it is a managed service. This means that Google is responsible for managing the master node in the Kubernetes cluster system. As a result, we can focus on deploying applications to the slaves, while Google handles any updates and security patches. The fact that GKE is fully integrated into the Google ecosystem, including solutions such as BigQuery and VertexAI. This makes it easier for us to integrate these tools into our process. This integration ultimately speeds up our time to market and reduces the time and effort spent on managing infrastructure. The managed aspect of GKE allows us to simply deploy and utilize it without having to worry about the technicalities of infrastructure management."
"Before using this solution, it was a lot of manual tasks and a lot of people participated in the process."
"Stability is perfect for me."
"The product’s dashboard is very intuitive."
"Google Kubernetes Engine is used for orchestrating Docker containers. We have 30 or 40 customers working with this solution now. We'll probably see 10 to 15 percent growth in the number of customers using Google Kubernetes Engine in the future."
"The scalability is the best feature."
"It's easy to manage and deploy. It's the best."
"We appreciate that it is quite easy to set up a Kubernetes cluster in Google Cloud, using the managed services within this solution."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Docker containers."
"The most valuable features of Kubernetes have been autoscaling and its resilience mechanisms."
"Offers automated rollouts and storage orchestration"
"The best feature is autoscaling. It's effortless to use for scaling deployment parts, CI/CD, etc."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the scalability."
"The cluster is very stable with outward scalability and good performance."
"Kubernetes' most valuable features include scalability and deployment."
"The solution is easy to use."
"We would like to see some improvement in the ease of integration with this solution."
"The pricing could be more competitive. It should be cheaper."
"I would like to see the ability to create multiple notebook configurations."
"The user interface could be improved."
"Our critique is that we have to do too much work to get the cluster production-ready."
"It needs to support load balancing."
"There are some security issues, but it might just be because we are not up to speed yet as much as we should be and so we haven't found it in the documentation yet. That's why I don't want to confuse this. Still, it could be a little bit easier to understand and implement."
"The user interface is a bit confusing sometimes. You need to navigate between the various consoles we have. It's hard to figure out where things are. It's frustrating. The documentation could be a bit better."
"The solution has some issues regarding availability during high loads. Worker nodes are sometimes unavailable, affecting the overall availability of the applications. This is a bug or underlying problem with the tool, and Azure and other providers are looking into improving this by releasing new versions of Kubernetes that fix some of the platform's issues."
"It would be great if Kubernetes could handle a level of data backup."
"Some Kubernetes technical support would be helpful."
"It would be useful to have a basic and stable interface for monitoring and quick deployment purposes, especially when the deployments are big like a proof of concept or proof of technology. Currently, you need to use the Kubernetes console for all functionalities. It is not a quick-to-learn product if you are not from a Linux background. You need to be very skilled at Linux to learn it quickly. It took me two to three months because I mostly work with Microsoft products. For people who are not from a Linux background, the learning curve is a little bit longer."
"The management needs to be improved."
"Kubernetes should improve its consistency across different types of deployments. My customers tell me that they get much better performance when Kubernetes is deployed on VM versus PaaS services from Azure."
"I'm a beginner, and I recently started working with Kubernetes. As of now, I don't see any bugs. However, it would be better if it could be deployed without coding."
"They need to focus on more security internally."
Google Kubernetes Engine is ranked 9th in Container Management with 32 reviews while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 69 reviews. Google Kubernetes Engine is rated 8.0, while Kubernetes is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Google Kubernetes Engine writes "The auto-scaling feature helps during peak hours, but the support is not great". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kubernetes writes "Container orchestrator that deploys our machine learning solutions". Google Kubernetes Engine is most compared with Linode, Rancher Labs, VMware Tanzu Mission Control, OpenShift Container Platform and Amazon Elastic Container Service, whereas Kubernetes is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Amazon EKS, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, OpenShift Container Platform and HPE Ezmeral Container Platform. See our Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Kubernetes report.
See our list of best Container Management vendors.
We monitor all Container Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
