Google Kubernetes Engine and Microsoft Defender for Cloud compete in the cloud services category, with GKE holding an advantage due to its advanced auto-scaling capabilities and ease of use for traffic management and cost optimization.
Features: Google Kubernetes Engine offers exceptional auto-scaling, seamless integration, and is user-friendly, making it effective for managing traffic spikes. It reduces the platform management burden thanks to its managed nature. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is known for its strong security, comprehensive threat protection, and compliance management, especially in regulatory compliance and vulnerability management. Both solutions integrate with various cloud services, broadening their utility across environments.
Room for Improvement: Google Kubernetes Engine needs improvements in pricing, support options, and clearer documentation. Users find the IAM roles integration challenging and seek enhanced security features for enterprise needs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud could improve with better pricing models and fewer false positives. Users seek more intuitive interfaces, clearer documentation, and enhanced alert management with third-party integration.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Google Kubernetes Engine is widely deployed in public cloud settings and appreciated for its ease of deployment, though users express concerns about support responsiveness. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is also deployed in public cloud environments, offering solid AI-driven support, but users note the need for better support response times and consistent customer service.
Pricing and ROI: Google Kubernetes Engine is considered cost-effective with notable time savings, despite being more expensive than AWS for some services. Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers flexible pricing with free and paid versions but is perceived as costly, especially for add-ons. Both solutions have potential for positive ROI, though cost consideration is crucial, particularly for startups using GKE.
By migrating from AWS to Google Cloud Platform, we have saved a lot of time and money.
Defender proactively indexes and analyzes documents, identifying potential threats even when inactive, enhancing preventative security.
Identifying potential vulnerabilities has helped us avoid costly data losses.
The biggest return on investment is the rapid improvement of security posture.
Since security is critical, we prefer a quicker response time.
The support team was very responsive to queries.
They understand their product, but much like us, they struggle with the finer details, especially with new features.
The autoscaling capabilities of Google Kubernetes Engine have significantly impacted our operations.
We are using infrastructure as a code, so we do not have any scalability issues with Microsoft Defender for Cloud implementation because our cloud automatically does it.
It has multiple licenses and features, covering infrastructures from a hundred to five hundred virtual machines, without any issues.
Defender won't replace our endpoint XDR, but it will likely adapt and support any growth in the Microsoft Cloud space.
Defender's stability has been flawless for us.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very stable.
Microsoft sometimes changes settings or configurations without transparency.
When looking at the web interface, it feels kind of slow due to the many features involved.
Log observability could be made easier so someone from high school can use it without having technological expertise.
It would be helpful if I could easily find log information in a particular namespace without needing to write certain labels.
Microsoft, in general, could significantly improve its communication and support.
It would be beneficial to streamline recommendations to avoid unnecessary alerts and to refine the severity of alerts based on specific environments or environmental attributes.
The artificial intelligence features could be expanded to allow the system to autonomously manage security issues without needing intervention from admins.
Google is considered cheaper compared to AWS, making it suitable for smaller to medium companies concerning cost.
The on-demand nodes are quite expensive.
Every time we consider expanding usage, we carefully evaluate the necessity due to cost concerns.
We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters.
The most valuable aspect of Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) is its managed nature, which significantly reduces the burden on our platform team.
GKE is easier to understand and use than Elastic Kubernetes Service.
What I find most valuable is the ability to focus solely on my product without worrying about the Kubernetes infrastructure itself.
The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available.
This feature significantly aids in threat detection and enhances the user experience by streamlining security management.
The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security.
Kubernetes Engine is a managed, production-ready environment for deploying containerized applications. It brings our latest innovations in developer productivity, resource efficiency, automated operations, and open source flexibility to accelerate your time to market.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a comprehensive security solution that provides advanced threat protection for cloud workloads. It offers real-time visibility into the security posture of cloud environments, enabling organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats. With its advanced machine learning capabilities, Microsoft Defender for Cloud can detect and block sophisticated attacks, including zero-day exploits and fileless malware.
The solution also provides automated remediation capabilities, allowing security teams to quickly and easily respond to security incidents. With Microsoft Defender for Cloud, organizations can ensure the security and compliance of their cloud workloads, while reducing the burden on their security teams.
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.
