VMware Tanzu Mission Control alternatives and competitors

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.

Kubernetes could improve by having better integration with VMware solutions.

I have been using Kubernetes for approximately three years.

Kubernetes is stable. They are the leader in their category.

If the platform for Kubernetes is VMware it is not scalable, but if the platform is Linux, it's scalable.

There are approximately 15 developers and five network administrators using the solution in my organization.

The technical support from Kubernetes is good.

I have used VMware Tanzu previously and I would like to work with it more because it is better integrated with other VMware solutions, such as vCenter, vSphere, vSAN, and NSX.

I have done the initial setup of Kubernetes many times, for me the setup is easy. If I am focused I can complete the full implementation in one or two days.

We have received a return on investment from using Kubernetes.

The price of Kubernetes could be lower. However, it is less expensive than VMware Tanzu. Additionally, technical support is expensive. The overall cost of the solution is approximately $1,000 annually.

Kubernetes is the leader in this category, and are very good. However, if the platform they want to implement is VMware, I would advise using VMware 10.

I rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

Our company supports most of the banks in India. We use four kinds of solutions broadly categorized as UPI and IPI deployed on AWS called ROSA and on Azure called ARO.

The most valuable features of OpenShift are the advanced cluster manager and advanced cluster security with the StackRox.

OpenShift needs to improve their container storage. In the next release of OpenShift I would also like to see simplification of Calico BGP with the container network and integration with MinIO, Portworx, and Rubrix.

I have been using OpenShift Container Platform since 2016.

OpenShift is a stable solution.

The platform is easy to scale as it supports Windows worker node.

Technical support at Red Hat is good.

Positive

The initial setup of OpenShift is straightforward.

When I compare the platform's deployment to other solutions like Kubernetes, OpenShift is good. When comparing with Rancher or VMware Tanzu, OpenShift is better than both. Specifically, the support and documentation of OpenShift is better than VMware.

I would rate OpenShift an 8 out of 10 overall.

We are using Rancher Labs' for the overall management of our Kubernetes cluster. For example, we manage the production and UAT environment of all our applications or containers.

The solution has a lot of good features, such as you can access the console and edit through the GUI. The dashboard and the UI are designed well, user-friendly, and easy to manage, and access.

The solution could improve by adding more features in the dashboard, such as monitoring, scanning, and security. This would be a great benefit.

I have used Rancher Labs for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

We have not had any issues with scalability.

We have not paid for the support for the solution.

The initial setup is easy.

We did the implementation of the solution.

The solution is free and open source but there is a fee for support.

We have been evaluating Red Hat OpenShift, Kubernetes, Tanzu, and Nirmata.

I rate Rancher Labs an eight out of ten.

Google Kubernetes Engine's most valuable features are microservices and its acquisition rate, which is very useful for scaling perspective.

The user interface could be improved. In the next release, I'd like to see better notifications.

I've been using Google Kubernetes Engine for a few years. 

Kubernetes is stable because it has scalable architecture, so if any part goes down, it starts from the other parts. 

Kubernetes is scalable.

The initial setup was simple.

I would rate Kubernetes' pricing four out of five.

I also evaluated VMware, which is more expensive than Kubernetes.

I would give Kubernetes a rating of eight out of ten.