We performed a comparison between Kubernetes and Rancher Labs 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 performance is good."
"It is a stable and scalable product."
"We find the smooth, instant fail-safes in this solution to be very useful, as this allows for easy revival of dying quads or failing applications."
"Offers a crucial feedback process"
"The most valuable feature of Kubernetes is container orchestration."
"The scalability seems quite good."
"You have different pods that interact with each other, so you can identify problems with one pod and replace it."
"If you're switching from VMs to Kubernetes, you will see a return because you can pack more into the Kubernetes architecture using containers rather than VMs. You'll see some more savings on your infrastructure, as well."
"The scalability potential is very good."
"The product is simple to use for a beginner."
"The most valuable feature of Rancher Labs is its user interface, which makes it easier to work with containers and deployment."
"The most valuable feature is its comprehensive support, easy resource scaling, compatibility with various OEMs, and seamless service integration."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is an open-source solution that is easy to deploy."
"A great UI with very good integrations."
"This solution is not vendor-locked, which means that we we are able to use it across all of our resources; this feature is of great value to us."
"The customized deployment process is the most valuable feature in Rancher Labs."
"Absence of a built-in feature for local API creation"
"The management needs to be improved."
"Currently has a very minimal UI for certain things."
"Management features could be simplified."
"The virtual machines should be GUI-based"
"Currently, in Kubernetes, all of the health deployments or monitoring, and the discrete tools need to be configured. Changing this would make it much easier. Otherwise, we have to rely on a external tool to implement the monitoring."
"There are features in Google Cloud or AWS that aren't in Azure. They need to implement a couple more tools in Azure."
"It would be great if Kubernetes could handle a level of data backup."
"If you have poor infrastructure, you will have issues with the tool."
"Could be more intuitive."
"I can't migrate to the newer version."
"We're looking for something that is even easier to use. It's a bit complicated."
"The solution could improve by adding more features in the dashboard, such as monitoring, scanning, and security. This would be a great benefit."
"One area for improvement in Rancher Labs is the development aspect."
"They should improve application visibility along with code visibility."
"There needs to be an improvement in observability and microservice monitoring tools in Rancher Labs."
Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 73 reviews while Rancher Labs is ranked 5th in Container Management with 14 reviews. Kubernetes is rated 8.6, while Rancher Labs is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Kubernetes writes "Container orchestrator that deploys our machine learning solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rancher Labs writes "An easy-to-use user interface, which makes it easy to work with Kubernetes and containers". Kubernetes is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Amazon EKS, Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform and HashiCorp Nomad, whereas Rancher Labs is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform, Docker, Amazon EKS and Robin Cloud Native Storage for Kubernetes. See our Kubernetes vs. Rancher Labs 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.