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 product has no downtime."
"We appreciate that it is quite easy to set up a Kubernetes cluster in Google Cloud, using the managed services within this solution."
"Google Kubernetes Engine's most valuable features are microservices and its acquisition rate, which is very useful for scaling perspective."
"The initial setup is very easy. We can create our cluster using the command line, or using our console."
"The deployment of the cluster is very easy."
"On the tip of a command, you can scale in or scale out, and it offers every robust platform to implement DevOps processes for your automation solutions. The product fully supports the IaC concept."
"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 impressed with the product's output scaling."
"All the current features are quite harmonic."
"I like that it has really boosted cloud-native development and stood the test of time. The underlying architecture allows one to scale as per the business KPIs much faster."
"The best feature is autoscaling. It's effortless to use for scaling deployment parts, CI/CD, etc."
"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."
"It's scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Kubernetes is automation. It is the best tool for automation."
"The most valuable feature of the platform is the ability to load some of the containers that were previously managed by humans."
"There are features that come out of the box with Kubernetes, with respect to scaling, reliability, etc. It's the leading container management platform. There are other competing ones, but this is the leading one. It has multiple instances of the application running. If one of them goes down, the other one automatically spins up."
"The notifications are not informative."
"The user interface could be improved."
"The monitoring part requires some serious improvements in Google Kubernetes Engine, as it does not have very good monitoring consoles."
"The network configuration has to be simplified."
"The tool's configuration features need improvement."
"Google Kubernetes Engine is less stable in some highly complex deployments with many nodes."
"The product’s visible allocation feature needs improvement."
"It needs to support load balancing."
"Kubernetes can be used for most companies, but for some companies that may be too small, it may not be worth the investment, as it is expensive."
"The lack of native support for billing and self-service capabilities is an area Kubernetes could improve. This requires the use of third-party integrations or managed services in order for customers to be able to deploy clusters on their own. It would be beneficial to have these features built-in into the Kubernetes platform."
"The Kubernetes dashboard can be improved. It is currently a mess. We were using Rancher earlier, and everyone was happy with the dashboard. Right now, we are using Kubernetes, and it's not working with Microsoft workstations. We still have problems with the dashboard. It's terrible."
"The dashboard, monitoring, and login need improvements."
"The network policies and RBAC management across multi-clusters could be improved. This is an issue we're trying to solve in the market."
"It would be great if Kubernetes could handle a level of data backup."
"I think that the GUI dashboard in Kubernetes is very simple and that there are no great options."
"Security could be improved. It would be helpful if there were other security modules built into Kubernetes."
Google Kubernetes Engine is ranked 9th in Container Management with 32 reviews while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 67 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.
