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 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 more time we use Komodor the more we save. Currently, we have seen around a ten percent return on investment."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a container orchestrator. It has a huge user base and it is easily incorporated into all of the public clouds."
"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."
"This solution is cost effective and fast. We are able to use Kubernetes to orchestrate hundreds of container images which has been a major benefit."
"The most valuable feature of the platform is the ability to load some of the containers that were previously managed by humans."
"It is a very good solution for deploying microservices in an application. It has a lot of freedom in it, which makes it very interesting. It is also web-enabled. You can run services in other virtual applications and virtual machines."
"If you don't have resources, you can certainly add another worker node and expand the cluster."
"We find the smooth, instant fail-safes in this solution to be very useful, as this allows for easy revival of dying quads or failing applications."
"It's really scalable and efficient for resource management."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Komodor's visibility could be improved."
"In the financial service sector, I'd rate scalability an eight out of ten. But do it in a controlled manner, not auto-scaling. If your application has a bug and you enable the autoscaler, it will spike your costs. If someone deploys an application with a bug, that's automatically a problem."
"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."
"I'm a beginner, and I recently started working with Kubernetes. As of now, I don't see any bugs. However, it would be better if it could be deployed without coding."
"The solution lacks some flexibility."
"The tool needs to improve its UI. The tool is very complex and basic."
"Kubernetes is a complex solution. The product needs to be more manageable and user-friendly."
"The pricing could be improved. It would be ideal if it was a bit less."
"They should make documentation simpler for learning."
Komodor is ranked 12th in Container Management with 5 reviews while Kubernetes is ranked 4th in Container Management with 68 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 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.