Google Kubernetes Engine vs HPE Ezmeral Container Platform comparison

"The initial setup was very easy because it's like a Google platform as a service. It's just one button to set it up. The deployment took only a few minutes."

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

"GKE's plugin management and configuration sync are excellent features. The amount of data it provides is good, and I've been able to integrate it with the things I need."

"The product has valuable security features. It can connect with multiple DevOps tools."

"I am satisfied with the stability offered by the solution."

"We hardly have a breakdown. It's been very stable."

"Stability-wise, this solution is really good."

"The product has no downtime."

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

"The management UI could be improved. When looking at the web interface, it feels kind of slow due to the many features involved."

"I would like the solution to integrate with another Kubernetes product. I would also like it to monitor other platforms. It needs to also include scale-up container in the tool's next release."

"There are some security issues, but it might just be because we are not up to speed yet as much as we should be and so we haven't found it in the documentation yet. That's why I don't want to confuse this. Still, it could be a little bit easier to understand and implement."

"It needs to support load balancing."

"I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten."

"I use the Firebase tool with GKE and it would be helpful if the solution can give notifications when we reach the budget limit."

"The network configuration has to be simplified."

"We would like to see some improvement in the ease of integration with this solution."

"The modernization in Ezmeral could be improved."

"I would rate Kubernetes' pricing four out of five."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

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

"The price for Google Kubernetes Engine could be lower - I'd rate its pricing at three out of five."

"It is competitive, and it is not expensive. It is almost competitive with AWS and the rest of the cloud solutions. We are spending around 3K USD per month. There are four projects that are currently running, and each one is incurring a cost of around 3K USD."

"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."

"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."

"The pricing for GKE is dependent on the type of machine or virtual machine (VM) that is selected for the nodes in the cluster. There is a degree of flexibility in choosing the specifications of the machine, such as the number of CPUs, GPUs, and so on. Google provides a variety of options, allowing the user to create the desired cluster composition. However, the cost can be quite steep when it comes to regional clusters, which are necessary for high availability and failover. This redundancy is crucial for businesses and is required to handle an increase in requests in case of any issues in one region, such as jumping to a different region in case of a failure in the Toronto region. While it may be tempting to choose the cheapest type of machines, this may result in a limited capacity and user numbers, requiring over-provisioning to handle additional requests, such as those for a web application."