Google Kubernetes Engine vs HPE Ezmeral Container Platform comparison

"The initial setup process is simpler and more user-friendly than other cloud providers."

"Google Kubernetes Engine's most valuable feature is container deployment."

"The solution is available across AWS, GCP and Azure and is seamless."

"The feature that I like the most is the ease of use as compared to AWS. Its ease of use is very high, and I can quickly deploy clusters with a simple template."

"The solution is more user-friendly than AWS or Azure. I can also easily scale out the service in the future when the number of customers grows. GKE is the leader of Kubernetes service and it can be easily updated. I love the tool's user interfaces."

"The most valuable feature of Google Kubernetes Engine is how you can automatically scale and load balance."

"The solution simplified deployment, making it more automated. Previously, Docker required manual configuration, often done by developers on their computers. However, with Google Kubernetes Engine, automation extends to configuration, deployment, scalability, and viability, primarily originating from Docker rather than Kubernetes. Its most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."

"Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) takes care of managing Kubernetes, including the main control plane. It also offers solutions for monitoring resources and handling external traffic, which is essential for us. Being a cloud-native solution, it relieves us from worrying about these operational aspects."

"If customers focus on primary apps or if they are using them for data science, this is a good solution."

"While the GKE cluster is secure, application-level security is an essential aspect that needs to be addressed. The security provided by GKE includes the security of communication between nodes within the cluster and the basic features of Kubernetes security. However, these features may not be sufficient for the security needs of an enterprise. Additional security measures must be added to ensure adequate protection. It has become a common practice to deploy security tools within a Kubernetes cluster. It would be ideal if these tools were included as part of the package, as this is a standard requirement in the industry. Thus, application-level security should be integrated into GKE for improved security measures."

"The product's integration with third-party vendors needs improvement."

"The pricing could be more competitive. It should be cheaper."

"I would like to see the ability to create multiple notebook configurations."

"The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"One of the things I missed a bit is the visibility and availability of solutions. If I compare it to a different solution, it is a bit behind."

"The solution does not have a visual interface."

"The product could be cheaper."

"The modernization in Ezmeral could be improved."

"Initially, Google Kubernetes Engine was a little bit cheaper, but now its prices have been increased compared to the pricing model and the features that are made available by its competitors."

"I rate the product's price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price. The product is competitively priced."

"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten. The tool costs around 3000 dollars per month. There are no additional costs apart from these."

"We are planning to use external support, and hire a commercial partner for it."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."

"Its pricing is good. They bill us only per user. That's nice."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

"This is an open source solution, so there is no pricing or licensing."