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."Komodor's multi-cluster centralized event timeline is the most valuable feature."
"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 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 more time we use Komodor the more we save. Currently, we have seen around a ten percent return on investment."
"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."
"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."
"Auto-scaling and self-healing features are very good."
"The implementation, and the way that they can, with a few clicks, load hundreds of machines without any trouble is very useful."
"This product has a rich toolset from the community including CNI plug-ins, Helm packages, operators, dashboards, various integrations, etc."
"The best feature is autoscaling. It's effortless to use for scaling deployment parts, CI/CD, etc."
"I like that it gives you all the flexibility, for example, auto-scaling. Everything is figured out exactly right. It manages all your workloads without much intervention. It can scale in, scale out, and with security. Everything looks pretty good compared to the old legacy way of working."
"The self-serving feature allows our developers to grab a container and complete testing."
"We use this solution for the hosting of micro-services. Kubernetes helps us to orchestrate all the containers hosting these micro-services."
"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."
"Komodor's visibility could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"Kubernetes can improve by providing a service offering catalog that can be readily populated in Kubernetes."
"The solution could be more stable."
"The solution has some issues regarding availability during high loads. Worker nodes are sometimes unavailable, affecting the overall availability of the applications. This is a bug or underlying problem with the tool, and Azure and other providers are looking into improving this by releasing new versions of Kubernetes that fix some of the platform's issues."
"Kubernetes is incredibly complicated, so one area of improvement is the ease of administration. I would like a user interface that you can run to help you debug and diagnose problems and suggest how to configure things."
"The dashboard, monitoring, and login need improvements."
"The platform could be more convenient to use."
"Kubernetes can improve pod escalation."
"The solution does not work with third-party tools, or alternative cloud providers, which limits the extent that we can utilize it to."
Komodor is ranked 12th in Container Management with 5 reviews while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 67 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 and Amazon EKS, whereas Kubernetes is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Amazon EKS, Google Kubernetes Engine, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE 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.
