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."
"I like Kubernetes' scalability, built-in redundancy, and ease of deployment."
"Kubernetes is scalable and the elasticity is sustainable."
"Kubernetes provides scalable clustering for containers and other means of deployment."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the scalability."
"If you're switching from VMs to Kubernetes, you will see a return because you can pack more into the Kubernetes architecture using containers rather than VMs. You'll see some more savings on your infrastructure, as well."
"The Desired State Configuration is a handy feature; we can deploy a certain number of pods, and the tool will ensure that the state is maintained in our desired configuration."
"The deployment is one of the most valuable feature."
"There are many good features. I feel that the scale-out features, like replica sets, are very good. The number of running containers can be autoscaled."
"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 price is something they need to improve."
"This solution is not very easy to use."
"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."
"The solution could be more stable."
"We would like to see more validation tools added to this solution, this would provide pre-deployment analysis that developers could use before publishing their infrastructure."
"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 solution lacks some flexibility."
"Absence of a built-in feature for local API creation"
Earn 20 points
Cisco Container Platform is ranked 20th in Container Management while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 73 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 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform and VMware Tanzu Mission Control, whereas Kubernetes is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Amazon EKS, Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform and NGINX Ingress Controller.
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.