We performed a comparison between Cisco Container Platform and Kubernetes based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), VMware and others in Container Management."The most valuable feature is definitely the fact that you can use a single platform to deploy to different resource providers. Right now, the version I'm using has vSphere and AWS, but I know in the future they're planning on adding more. The ability to deploy clusters on-prem or to any number of public cloud providers is really valuable because you don't need to relearn or switch platforms to switch resource providers."
"Kubernetes offers a lot of great features such as scalability and great portability of applications."
"The most important feature is container orchestration."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a container orchestrator. It has a huge user base and it is easily incorporated into all of the public clouds."
"The scalability seems quite good."
"Scalability is the most valuable feature."
"I am impressed with the product's coupling of resources and flexibility."
"The solution has many valuable features but the most impressive is the ability to scale an application and continuously monitor if all the components of the application are functioning correctly."
"Auto-scaling and self-healing features are very good."
"One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice."
"The initial setup of Kubernetes is difficult. However, if you are used to the flow then it is easier. The length of time it takes for the implementation depends on the project."
"Kubernetes can improve by providing a service offering catalog that can be readily populated in Kubernetes."
"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."
"There are features in Google Cloud or AWS that aren't in Azure. They need to implement a couple more tools in Azure."
"The solution could be more stable."
"Kubernetes could improve security. The security is really hard to deploy with proxies and other elements. Additionally, We have had some issues downloading repos and libraries."
"I'm expecting more improvement on the UI development side, which can be reflected in each object that is part of Kubernetes, like the Pod, deployment set, ReplicaSet, ConfigMap, Secrets, and PersistentVolume."
"Management features could be simplified."
Earn 20 points
Cisco Container Platform is ranked 20th in Container Management while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 67 reviews. Cisco Container Platform is rated 8.0, while Kubernetes is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Container Platform writes "Enables the deployment/management of Kubernetes clusters from multiple resource providers at one location". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kubernetes writes "Container orchestrator that deploys our machine learning solutions". Cisco Container Platform is most compared with OpenShift Container Platform and VMware Tanzu Mission Control, whereas Kubernetes is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Amazon EKS, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Google Kubernetes Engine and Portainer.
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.
