We performed a comparison between Google Kubernetes Engine and VMware Tanzu Mission Control 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 logs are important for detecting problems in our clusters."
"The product has valuable security features. It can connect with multiple DevOps tools."
"The initial setup was very easy because it's like a Google platform as a service. It's just one button to set it up. The deployment took only a few minutes."
"Before using this solution, it was a lot of manual tasks and a lot of people participated in the process."
"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."
"I am satisfied with the stability offered by the solution."
"We used automation for the initial setup. It was okay. So it wasn't too complex."
"GKE's plugin management and configuration sync are excellent features. The amount of data it provides is good, and I've been able to integrate it with the things I need."
"It definitely gives the end customer a good overview and perspective of running applications in terms of overall workload footprint. TMC provides a very detailed description of your cloud-native application in the form of graphical visualization."
"The multi-tenancy with the VCD is great."
"Defining security metrics has proven beneficial for customers in maintaining a safe environment."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Tanzu Mission Control has quite a set of rich features when compared to OpenShift."
"The most valuable feature of VMware Tanzu Mission Control is the management functionality of the cluster life cycle. Additionally, the solution integrates well with other vendors, such as Velero for backups and Sonobuoy for compliance. Additionally, it works well in multi-cluster environments."
"A feature we find valuable is that other products can also be integrated with Mission Control. This means that we can see the status of specific clusters, as well as view the monitoring application logs all from one point."
"The most important feature of Tanzu Mission Control is its integration with the other products, especially with ESX and vSAN. This is a strong part of Tanzu Mission Control. In other solutions, such as OpenShift or Kubernetes, you can find similar features, but they don't have similar integration. With Tanzu Mission Control, you get a total solution with only one provider. You have the integration with the infrastructure, virtualization of networking, and virtualization of storage. You have a natural integration, and you don't have the problem of integrating it with different products or providers. Sometimes, different companies have good integration, but it is not always guaranteed. For example, many years ago, Cisco and VMware were good partners in networking, but when VMware started to sell ESX, the relationship was broken. This is the problem that you can face when you are using solutions from two different companies."
"The network configuration has to be simplified."
"The notifications are not informative."
"The solution does not have a visual interface."
"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."
"I use the Firebase tool with GKE and it would be helpful if the solution can give notifications when we reach the budget limit."
"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."
"We would like to see some improvement in the ease of integration with this solution."
"The user interface could be improved."
"The solution could improve by having better integration with other solutions such as HPE."
"Another area of improvement is pricing."
"The network control and security policies must be improved."
"Cost is always a concern. Smaller companies might find the price a bigger issue."
"We want to see a new feature that helps build more security architecture like Zero Trust Security or shifting left in Kubernetes."
"This product doesn't have a GUI. In order to use it properly, I need to connect it to a new GUI or build a GUI to manage it — it's pretty difficult."
"The infrastructure is quite challenging."
"It is not easy to build a solution with containers. It has a graphical user interface, but you need to have a lot of knowledge of Linux and how to work in the command mode. Its support can also be improved. Currently, its biggest disadvantage is that it is a new product, and the clients prefer to go for a solution that has been in the market for a long time. There are not that many people who know this product."
Google Kubernetes Engine is ranked 9th in Container Management with 32 reviews while VMware Tanzu Mission Control is ranked 3rd in Container Management with 12 reviews. Google Kubernetes Engine is rated 8.0, while VMware Tanzu Mission Control is rated 7.8. 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 VMware Tanzu Mission Control writes "Gives a single pane to manage multiple Kubernetes environments and has competitive pricing". Google Kubernetes Engine is most compared with Linode, Kubernetes, Rancher Labs, OpenShift Container Platform and Amazon Elastic Container Service, whereas VMware Tanzu Mission Control is most compared with Rancher Labs, Kubernetes, OpenShift Container Platform, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE and Amazon Elastic Container Service. See our Google Kubernetes Engine vs. VMware Tanzu Mission Control 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.