Kubernetes Reviews

We use the solution to modernize our IT landscape. We use infrastructure and platform surfaces for our data center. More recently we have added a container as a surface, which is this solution.

The easy deployment of containers is one of the main features I have found useful. In large scale developments, it is less hassle working with containers than virtual machines. It is easier to manage these containers instead of virtual machines, although there is a steep learning curve to graps the benefits of it.

This solution is not very easy to use. We are looking also for some tools surrounding this solution to manage the environment and to secure it better. These two are areas that have caused some issues. We want to integrate it with what you call continuous integration and delivery. 

It must be scalable, cost-effective, more agile when it comes to developing and managing the environment for DevOps. All these things go together, it must be cured to allow better manageability. That is what we all are doing in most large companies.

In a future release, the solution could become more like a core engine, in which tools like OpenShift are centered. You could see how all kinds of tools could help to better improve the management, security, or scalability of the product. Additionally, we will need more than the core in our organization, there needs to be more additional management tools moving forward.

I have been using the solution for approximately one year.

When it comes to my own environment, I have had no issues with scalability but it is not easy. This is just the development environment. Regarding my company, within my department, we are running a sandbox environment just for testing and that is going well. I am not sure how things will go if you go fully into production with this solution.

We will look for additional products to deal with the difficulties with scalability. There are several vendors that offer these products. Although this solution was made for scalability, it does not come out of the box this way.

We currently have approximately 30 users using the solution in my organization.

I am not aware exactly how the on-premises installation went for the IT team at my organization. For my local environment where I am testing this solution myself, the installation has been very easy. This is mostly because it is a local environment. We also have a cloud environment, where we have a hybrid data center and this cloud environment installation was fairly easy too.

The deployment was done by an internal team in my organization. 

Maintenance is required for all software versions. We need to manage different areas of the solution such as the cloud-native landscape tooling, registry, DevOps environment, and security toolings. There are three areas that need upgrades, versioning, scalability, and the toolset surrounding the solution. You can not run it on its own, you need additional tools. All of this maintenance is taken care of by our administration IT department.

The solution is affordable.

We plan on using the solution in the future. We are a large data center and we just need to have several options available. We need to have a traditional deployment of Infrastructure as a service, with virtual machines. We need also a platform as a service for very rapid and smaller applications and container management, container as a service which is this solution for all others. We expect that the virtual machines in the next 10 years will decrease and container-based services will increase.

I recommend the solution to others. It is a very good product and the strength can be that other vendors can create their security and management toolings around it allowing it to become a type of core engine. If those other vendors were not there, I think I would be more critical. Within my department, we were a bit late adopting the solution than other parts of the organization. We are still growing and experimenting, we have some clusters already in production. A lot of the product tools are open source which in some cases means the support is also not readily available. You have to adapt to it, but also be cautious when it comes to the support and the steep learning curve issues that you can expect.

I rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

I primarily use Kubernetes to manage containers.

Kubernetes' most valuable features include scalability and deployment.

Kubernetes' VM functionality and security could be improved. 

I've been using Kubernetes for six months.

I would rate Kubernetes' stability eight out of ten.

I would rate Kubernetes' scalability ten out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward so long as you have an understanding of the product. Deployment takes around forty-five minutes to an hour.

We implemented using an in-house team.

I would recommend Kubernetes to other users and rate it ten out of ten.

Kubernetes is for orchestration. We use it for various large microservice-based architectures and web services. That's the ideal use case, but it's suitable for any kind of service that can be decomposed and needs to be scaled. Of course, it's much easier to deploy services that are stateless. It requires more skills to deploy anything stateful or data-based.

Kubernetes is a bit complex, and there's a steep learning curve. At the same time, I cannot imagine how it could be easier.  You need many add-ons to it, and the commercial releases of Kubernetes should address that. 

For example, Red Hat OpenShift comes with all the add-ons included, but Kubernetes itself is free software so, of course, you need some skills to use it.

I've been using Kubernetes for four years.

Kubernetes is highly stable, but it's a complicated system with complex dynamics, so it needs to be monitored constantly.

Kubernetes' scalability is good. We have participated in operating clusters with hundreds of nodes.

Kubernetes is an open-source solution, so there is no tech support. You have to look up solutions online. You can purchase tech support, but we haven't used that service so far.

We used Marathon Mesos in the past, but it's obsolete these days.

Installing Kubernetes is complex. You need extensive skills and knowledge to do it from scratch.I didn't do install the solution by myself. A colleague is an expert in this, so he handled it. 

You can probably deploy the bare-bones cluster within days, but it requires some study, which can take much longer. And if you want extra features, it will take more time. Kubernetes has a lot of features, so it could take three days or three weeks to deploy if you keep adding to it.

We are focusing on open-source Kubernetes that doesn't require a license, but we use OpenShift for customers. It's a licensed, supported solution by Red Hat.

I rate Kubernetes nine out of 10. I recommend Kubernetes, but it's not for the faint of heart. Deploying Kubernetes from scratch is a real technical challenge because you need to understand lots of technology. 

It's much easier to start with Kubernetes from some cloud provider or use a commercial solution like OpenShift. Doing the pure vanilla open-source Kubernetes is possible but requires expertise, which is hard to come by.

We deploy microservices. We provide the screen namespaces. 

Kubernetes' integration with AWS Lambda is great. I barely had to write any code to connect from EKS to Lambda, so Kubernetes is programmer friendly.

Kubernetes could adopt UI-based approach. A UI-based approach would be really useful in the CI/CD pipeline. They should make everything a little bit more user-friendly.  For example, when I'm deploying, it would be nice to load my code and be able to see which components need to be connected. 

I've been using Kubernetes for more than two years. 

Kubernetes support is fine. That is not a problem.

Deploying Kubernetes is straightforward. Some are using GitLab. However, it does take a little bit of time, and it could be faster. 

Licenses for Kubernetes are on a yearly basis.

I rate Kubernetes nine out of 10. I would recommend it.

We deploy our software solution in the Kubernetes environment. 

Honestly, there is not much I like about Kubernetes. It's very complicated to deal with. I just do it because I have to.

There is plenty of room for improvement with the configuration and runtime monitoring. That would make Kubernetes much easier to use. 

I have been dealing with Kubernetes for almost two years. 

Once you get it configured properly, it's a stable solution. The problem is that getting there is complicated.

Kubernetes is scalable, but again, it's such a complicated product.

I've never had to use the tech support.

I would not say that the initial setup is straightforward: the configuration can take me either 45 minutes or a week and a half. 

I try to do it by myself, but I often wind up having to look up directions.

I have not seen a return on investment with Kubernetes.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have many use cases for Kubernetes. We manage internal microservices, running MinIO from it which is a distributed storage solution. We have GitLab and many other internal tools that we've converted and set up to Kubernetes and microservices. Our users are mainly software developers who currently number around 60, but we're planning to increase to 100 users in the coming year. We are customers of Kubernetes.

A valuable feature of Kubernetes is its high availability. It's really scalable and more efficient for resource management on the bare metal server on which it runs as opposed to vSphere or pretty much anything else that we've tried before. 

The solution is still complex to manage. It requires specialists to the extent that I wouldn't be able to ask a junior employee to manage the software.

I've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable, you can't get more scalable than Kubernetes.

Kubernetes is community-based so we don't pay for support. 

The initial setup is quite complex. 

The solution is free. 

This is a good product but because of the management complexity I rate it eight out of 10.

Kubernetes is used for container management. The use case depends on the project. My company was releasing products that work with Kubernetes.

Kubernetes is scalable and the elasticity is sustainable.

Kubernetes is a complex solution. The product needs to be more manageable and user-friendly.

Currently, I work as a systems engineer. I have been using Kubernetes for two years.

Kubernetes is stable. Usually the solution requires maintenance, however, in my environment, Nutanix covers the maintenance like upgrading and patching.

The solution is scalable. A user can start their business with Kubernetes and the workload can expand as the business expands.

The solution is open source.

Kubernetes is a complex solution. If someone is looking to build Kubernetes in a production environment, I suggest they choose some partners like cloud providers or software solution vendors such as Red Hat or VMware. A lot of system integrators provide a solution, including technical support for Kubernetes. I recommend you find the right partner or provider.

I would rate Kubernetes a nine out of 10 overall.

We use Kubernetes for hosting microservices-based applications. Kubernetes varies depending on which distribution you use. We have distributors that make these custom distributions, and I don't have any special requirements.

I like Kubernetes' scalability, built-in redundancy, and ease of deployment.

I've been working on Kubernetes for maybe five years.

It depends on how you set Kubernetes up, but it's usually stable.

Community-based Kubernetes is quite hard to set up. We usually use a version of Kubernetes provided by some distributor because they have built-in assistance for the installation. It's much easier, and most of the installation is done automatically.

If it's a cloud-based solution, you just set up a cluster, then click a button, and it's done in 20 minutes. But if it's an on-prem solution where you have to configure the hardware and hypervisor, it can take longer. If you have a cloud solution, then it's just to a click of a button, but the on-prem version could be simplified.

I rate Kubernetes seven out of 10. More and more applications will be based on virtual machines using container-based solutions. That's the way forward, so I would recommend Kubernetes.