We performed a comparison between Google Kubernetes Engine and Trend Micro Deep Security 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."We appreciate that it is quite easy to set up a Kubernetes cluster in Google Cloud, using the managed services within this solution."
"It is easy to use and deploy."
"The solution simplified deployment, making it more automated. Previously, Docker required manual configuration, often done by developers on their computers. However, with Google Kubernetes Engine, automation extends to configuration, deployment, scalability, and viability, primarily originating from Docker rather than Kubernetes. Its most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"Before using this solution, it was a lot of manual tasks and a lot of people participated in the process."
"I am satisfied with the stability offered by the solution."
"Stability-wise, this solution is really good."
"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."
"The scalability is the best feature."
"The most valuable feature of the product is vulnerability detection."
"The VPN is the most prized characteristic of Trend Micro Deep Security, which in addition addresses all zero-day vulnerabilities. This allows us to confidently transfer our system physically, as it presents to the external world, whether it be an intruder or a hacker, that our system is completely secure without any weak spots. Even if the latest security patches have not been installed or updated, the software virtually covers them for you."
"DLP, Data Loss Prevention, and the complexity of how we manage the console and how this client, or this tool, will notify us when there is something going wrong within the server and endpoint, is good."
"There's useful monitoring on offer."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the virtual path function, which is the reason we chose to implement it."
"It integrates well with the cloud; for example, AWS, and Google Cloud Provider."
"The agentless protection is very nice in Trend Micro."
"We use the solution to detect malicious threats, secure the endpoints, and disable the UFT."
"Their documentation is a little here and there. Sometimes, the information is not clear or updated. Their documentation should be a little bit better."
"Google Kubernetes Engine's cost should be improved because it is high."
"The solution does not have a visual interface."
"The notifications are not informative."
"The user interface could be improved."
"The pricing could be more competitive. It should be cheaper."
"I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten."
"While the GKE cluster is secure, application-level security is an essential aspect that needs to be addressed. The security provided by GKE includes the security of communication between nodes within the cluster and the basic features of Kubernetes security. However, these features may not be sufficient for the security needs of an enterprise. Additional security measures must be added to ensure adequate protection. It has become a common practice to deploy security tools within a Kubernetes cluster. It would be ideal if these tools were included as part of the package, as this is a standard requirement in the industry. Thus, application-level security should be integrated into GKE for improved security measures."
"I would like to see an EDR function for the servers, as that would be useful for us."
"We are not very happy with Trend Micro Deep Security since it is not able to detect many viruses and bugs."
"Pricing is on the expensive side and could be more affordable. The technical support for Trend Micro Deep Security also needs improvement."
"The price could be reduced."
"A minor issue in Trend Micro Deep Security is that once the tool is upgraded, it shows some machines as offline or not reported while showing a recent update as outdated. The tool has some server connection issues."
"The licensing structure could improve."
"They need to build in a central console because central integration is not very good right now."
"Some of the reporting and integrations could be more robust."
Google Kubernetes Engine is ranked 9th in Container Management with 32 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. Google Kubernetes Engine is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Deep Security 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 Trend Micro Deep Security writes "High availability, effective VPM, and responsive support". Google Kubernetes Engine is most compared with Linode, Kubernetes, Rancher Labs, Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform and Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security. See our Google Kubernetes Engine vs. Trend Micro Deep Security report.
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.
