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."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Kubernetes have been autoscaling and its resilience mechanisms."
"The best thing about Kubernetes is orchestration. It is very good. We will not see much downtime unless there are some human errors. We do not see much downtime or issues with the container or automation."
"Provision of a managed platform as a service."
"Once you get it configured properly, it's a stable solution."
"I am impressed with the product's coupling of resources and flexibility."
"The scanning and support network."
"The most valuable feature is the Zero Touch Operations, which involves a new way of performing operations and support. We do not have to do maintenance, the operations are very simple."
"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."
"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."
"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 like the alerts that Komodor provides, but I think the alert interface could be improved."
"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."
"Absence of a built-in feature for local API creation"
"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 pricing could be improved. It would be ideal if it was a bit less."
"The support could be faster at resolving issues."
"Setup was not straightforward."
"Kubernetes could adopt UI-based approach. A UI-based approach would be really useful in the CI/CD pipeline. They should make everything a little bit more user-friendly. For example, when I'm deploying, it would be nice to load my code and be able to see which components need to be connected."
"The first time it was a little bit complex to setup the solution."
"Kubernetes' VM functionality and security could be improved."
Komodor is ranked 12th in Container Management with 5 reviews while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 70 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 Red Hat 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.