We performed a comparison between Komodor 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 event timeline has been super helpful, enabling us to overlay node events in the same timeline as deployment events... That helps an engineer very quickly troubleshoot without having to do too much digging."
"The service overview is definitely the most valuable feature. With it, I can see all the services and see if they're healthy or not without having to go specifically into each workflow individually. It has been immensely helpful for us whenever we've had network issues or other such issues. We've been able to use Komodor and see at a glance where there might be potential issues."
"The most valuable aspect is the speed with which I can narrow down what's going on. Usually, I look at the overview of events and then the timeline of an event and the status of the logs to quickly check what's happening or what has happened."
"Komodor's multi-cluster centralized event timeline is the most valuable feature."
"The more time we use Komodor the more we save. Currently, we have seen around a ten percent return on investment."
"If you don't have resources, you can certainly add another worker node and expand the cluster."
"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 most valuable features of Kubernetes are the integration with Docker and there is plenty of documentation available. We work with Docker as a container, and it is more integrated with Docker than VMware Tanzu."
"The most valuable feature of the platform is the ability to load some of the containers that were previously managed by humans."
"I like Kubernetes' scalability, built-in redundancy, and ease of deployment."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Kubernetes is the integration with other solutions, such as Formative and Grafana."
"Auto-scaling and self-healing features are very good."
"I like the alerts that Komodor provides, but I think the alert interface could be improved."
"I would like to see improvements in how the product is installed. We've already communicated these things directly to Komodor. One feature we would like to see is for Komodor to be highly available on the clusters. Currently, it's only able to run in one instance within the cluster."
"I hope that the cost analytics and resource usage allocation areas will see further development. For example, where we can now see if the pods are over- or under-provisioned, I wouldn't mind higher-level development."
"Komodor's visibility could be improved."
"One thing we don't have visibility into, which I would love to have, is metrics, such as user logins and usage. It's really hard to know what people are doing when I don't have any metrics on that directly."
"We would to have additional features related to security within the API, instead of needing to install add-ons."
"It would be great if Kubernetes could handle a level of data backup."
"The support could be faster at resolving issues."
"The price is something they need to improve."
"Having a thread dump and memory dump, and seeing how many objects were created would be useful."
"The first time it was a little bit complex to setup the solution."
"Kubernetes is a bit complex, and there's a steep learning curve. At the same time, I cannot imagine how it could be easier. You need many add-ons to it, and the commercial releases of Kubernetes should address that."
"It's good for bigger organizations, but for smaller organizations or a few workloads, it may be too heavy, not easy to deploy, and the ROI may be less because it requires a control plane, worker nodes, and multiple VMs to run."
Komodor is ranked 12th in Container Management with 5 reviews while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 68 reviews. Komodor is rated 8.8, while Kubernetes is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Komodor writes "Provides extensive visibility into our nodes and has been incredibly useful in freeing up our DevOps staff for other projects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kubernetes writes "Container orchestrator that deploys our machine learning solutions". Komodor is most compared with Portainer, Amazon EKS and Rancher Labs, whereas Kubernetes is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Amazon EKS, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Google Kubernetes Engine and OpenShift Container Platform. See our Komodor 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.