Mirantis Container Cloud Reviews

I use it to containerize microservices. It's a comprehensive container solution for managing microservices.

It streamlines the operation of our e-commerce systems for major brands, making deployment easy and cost-effective.

It significantly simplifies our deployment and management processes. We've containerized over ten microservices, improving efficiency and deployment speed.

For Kubernetes management, the key thing is managing containers. It reduces errors compared to traditional servers. Since containers are lighter weight, deploying them is faster. Think about it this way - if an image is smaller and lighter, you can install it much quicker. This is especially beneficial when you need to deploy a large number of containers, potentially in just minutes or even seconds.

The multi-cloud support has positively influenced our maintenance and operational efficiency.

More integrations with other platforms would be beneficial.

I have been using it for more than five years. 

It is a stable solution. It is nearly perfect. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

It was extensively used in our company. There were around a thousand end users using it. 

Deployment time varies depending on the cluster configuration. Sometimes, it can take days. It depends on the configuration of the clusters. In some cases, like the configuration assessment can take longer. But that's not because of Docker itself.

It's just because we might not have information about the Docker configuration, for example. Let's say you have a cluster in another Kubernetes environment, and you want to use a port from that other cluster on your current Kubernetes cluster. That can make things more complex.

We used a consultant's help.

I recommend it.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We use Mirantis for nearly everything, starting with development. The developers use Mirantis to basically package the application. We use Kubernetes, and both Mirantis and Kubernetes are used locally by developers. The container runtime is done by Mirantis.

We use Mirantis for our CICD pipelines as well. For very runner in GitLab, a Mirantis container is spawned and then an application is built and some tests are run, and all of that is done in Mirantis containers.

The same goes for production. An image is promoted and tagged and published to a Mirantis registry, and then later pulled in by another agent that's running in Kubernetes.

Did not use Mirantis Container Cloud in the organization.

I think the volume binding is a really interesting feature. For example, if you're running a Mirantis container on your host machine, you can bind a directory of files by the container and use the overlay file system. 

Swarm is quite okay for smaller cases. You don't need Kubernetes and all the other orchestration tools for everything. It works for that use case pretty well.

I think the build time can be better. There's a lot of work done by Mirantis for BuildKit, for example, or Buildx, and I think there is a lot of stuff that can be done over there. 

Some improvements can be made on the Docker Compose level with some dependencies. For example, if you have a service that's dependent on another service, you can't do that today with Docker Compose.

Also, if Mirantis can leverage open source Kubernetes as part of its own offering, I think it would be a huge hit because every developer uses Mirantis. People know Containers because of Docker, and I feel that if they collaborate or incorporate Kubernetes into the Mirantis runtime it would be a big thing because everybody needs local environments and everybody needs to assemble environments for testing, A/B deployments, or production, and have as much of a reproducible environment as possible. I think that would be a huge success.

I would love to see the QUIC protocol support apart from TCP and UDP in Mirantis. I think that they would be the first one to do it because it's not really there at the moment with any other container runtimes that I know of.

I have been using this solution for about six years now. 

I think it's really stable. There were problems in the past, like you have with every software, but I think it's pretty stable now. I have seen very few crashes of the Docker daemon itself, but I'm not talking about the containers because that's not Docker' s job. The stability of those depends what you have learning in your container. As far as the runtime is concerned, I think it's decently stable.

The solution is definitely scalable, but only to some degree. For example, Mirantis did make an effort to get into the orchestration world by having Docker Swarm, but I don't think a lot of people use it because of the other orchestration tools available. I think that's where the scalability problem comes in.

But now with the Mirantis runtime being removed from Kubernetes, which is the industry-wide standard for orchestration of containers, I think it's going in a direction that is not super scalable. Also, with the recent licensing changing with Docker Desktop, a lot of companies are opting to stop using that and switching to another solution like Rancher Desktop, which gives you a UI. If you want to use Docker Desktop in a commercial environment, you have to pay a per user fee. It might be okay for conglomerates and enterprises, but it's not okay for midsize or small companies, because they're tight on budget.

I think there are some scalability issues from my point of view, from the business model and the tech model, and I think stepping out of Kubernetes is a huge setback.

There are currently 200+ people using this solution in my company. 

I have never had to use tech support because I use the documentation, which is pretty decent from my point of view. Also, the community is huge, so there's QAs and forums and discussions going on.

I don't think there's strong reasoning behind why my company decided to go with Mirantis because it used to be, and still is to some degree, the standard for containers. When it comes to containers, what comes to your mind is basically Docker. 

In my organization, we have a lot of developers that are developing applications on top of Kubernetes. Just to keep in sync with the newer version, they decided to switch from Mirantis to Containerd to run their containers, so I think it's changing. In my company, a lot of people are not even using Docker Desktop. Some people are using it because they're used to it and the company had a license for them, but a lot of people switched to an open source alternative to have some DUI for managing their containers.

The initial setup is pretty easy. I think it's super easy with the universal builds offered by Docker for ARM64, Linux, Windows, etc. Even for people who are not familiar with terminal and text files, you can use the Docker Desktop UI to manage all your running containers, images, and modify your Docker daemon JSON file. I think it's really easy as a starting point.

With open source, you can use Mirantis completely free. If you're using Docker Desktop in a commercial environment, you do have to pay a fee, but if you're using the Mirantis runtime, just the daemon and the runtime, you don't have to pay anything. It's all open source. The code is there for BuildKit on GitHub. There's a community, the MOBI project, and you don't have to pay anything.

If you were to use Mirantis for the first time, I would really advise you just to look into the basics of understanding containers in general, anc realize that Mirantis is an abstraction or a way or runtime to run your containers. It is an industry-wide standard now, when it comes to distributing the images, but that's also shifting now to OCI images. I would advise looking into other container runtimes as well, and keep your vision broad and try to make conscious decisions rather than being biased and just following the herd.

I would rate this solution as a seven out of ten because it has really educated users. It created a lot of shift in the industry for using containers. I feel it's stable because it hasn't crashed very much in my experience. The reason I gave this a little bit of a lower number while saying good things about it, is because I don't like how the community' is responding nowadays, especially collaborating with other bigger communities. One of the examples is Kubernetes, for example. There was a backlash and they couldn't agree to stuff. It's really a big thing at the moment, and it will be for the next couple of years.

Using Docker for most of the environments that I worked for. As an expert, I am working on different environments each time depending on the customer requirements. Development, staging, pre-production and production, each one of them having at least 25 servers implemented on different solutions sometimes like VMware, AWS, Azure and Oracle Cloud. 

Docker allows me to automate everything for these environments which saves a lot of time to sync the environment with each other and keep them up to date anytime. 

By using Docker and introducing this tool to different organizations, it provides repeatable development, build, test, and production environments, and allows every team member to work in a production parity environment, include to that, app isolation, simplicity, and faster configurations. And the most important benefits for most organizations is continuous deployment and testing.

Different features, but the most valuable is Docker images that allows you to build your own image and upload it to a repository, and use it again anytime. 

Another feature which is Docker scaling using a docker-compose file: It's very simple and easy to use in preventing any human interaction.

The last one is Docker Swarm that manages a cluster of Docker Engines.

• I would love to see if more supported applications could be used under Docker.
• Improving scalability, technical debt, and making it easier to troubleshoot and monitor.
• One last thing which is the performance tuning issue.

Using this solution for a production environment that should be working 24/7 is the biggest proof of stability.

Very easy to use, all you need to have is the basic knowledge with Docker Compose.

Since I've begun using Docker EE, I have full access to Docker's enterprise technical support team. I can manage cases, and view entitlements using the Docker support site.

I started using Docker more than five years ago and before that, LXC (Linux Containers), also Google Kubernetes as I mentioned before. It all depends on the customer requirement and what they want from the application, and which features they will use. 

Depends on the environment and what you need to use. Most of the features have full online documentation with live examples.

We are the vendor, so technically we are providing the solution for the client each time: different client, different requirements and different infrastructure. 

You will notice a big difference for sure. Also, the below link will allow you to calculate the ROI.

https://www.docker.com/roicalc....

For the features and benefits of using Docker, the price is very reasonable, but the licensing is not easy. But to be honest this is a very promising technology, include to that a very fast growing technology. So within the next five years, the licensing will not be an issue. 

Google Kubernetes.

I recommended the tech guys that haven't used it so far, or if their company is still using the transitional infrastructure, they should give it a try. 

We started using Docker three years ago. All our stack applications are now running on Docker, including GLPI.

Docker has helped greatly by making it possible to achieve high availability for applications that don't naturally support it.

The most important feature for me is the capacity to isolate applications while sharing the environment. It has saved us a lot of computing resources.

Some improvements are needed, particularly related to internal network management compared to Kubernetes.

We have been using Docker for three years.

I don't remember having any problems with stability while using Docker.

The scalability features have helped a lot. Some applications that don't inherently have capacity for high availability have been made possible with Docker.

I have not contacted their support team.

Positive

We used another solution but switched to Docker as it became my preferred choice due to its ease of use and deployment.

There were some challenges in the beginning. That said, overall the initial setup was manageable.

I am aware of pricing related to Docker Hub, as we may need to host container images, although we do not use it right now. That was the only price research I conducted.

I recommend Docker based on the advantages I've experienced so far.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use the solution in my company since we have some in-house applications, and to spin up those applications, we use Docker Enterprise.

The most valuable features of the solution are its fairly good UI design and its ability to let users view logs.

Though I am unsure, I feel that the product lacks to offer a proper health status of the images which are running, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Mirantis Container Cloud for six months. I work with the tool's desktop version. I am just a user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Around 20 people in my company use the product.

The solution offers a good online community that offers users the option to ask questions related to the product and get answers to troubleshoot the issues.

The product's initial setup phase is simple.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I rate the product price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one means low price and ten means high price.

Maybe the other people in my company's environment might be using Doctor Enterprise to manage multi-cloud Kubernetes environments, but I don't use it for that.

The product optimizes and makes DevOps workflow better since it spins up images very fast, and it is a good thing that I have seen in the tool. It is easy to manage which Docker needs to be run and which one needs to be stopped, and it is an area where I use the product the most.

I don't use the tool's centralized management console. I use it individually.

I use the single dashboard option provided by the tool, and if I need to be helpful.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

The solution containerizes software. 

Mirantis Container Cloud needs to improve its documentation. 

I have been using the solution for half a year. 

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate Mirantis Container Cloud's scalability a ten on ten. I am the only one using it. 

Mirantis Container Cloud's installation is straightforward and is completed in half an hour. 

Mirantis Container Cloud is free. However, there are features for which you need to pay. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is for electronic commerce.

It took us 30% faster to implement the solutions that we used to have with other platforms, and the flexibility has increased by 50%.

The most valuable aspect is the excellent support. In addition, the billing system is really easy to understand.

Sometimes the basic support is a bit difficult if you have a firewall and cloud servers behind the firewall and then try to implement the backup solution, it can be a bit difficult to do by yourself. If you have a Rackspace engineer, it is easier, because they know the procedures, but that service is not cheap. It can be an extra $500 for that extra service, per month. It would be nice to see that cost decrease.

The product is stable. Any problems that we have noticed have been with the customer doing something wrong. For instance, they may have two versions of the application that do not match, which will cause errors. But, we can never blame Rackspace Docker for this. It is an internal problem. 

The scalability is a bit difficult. Rackspace has beautiful tools to make scaling pretty easy. Usually, it is our customer that is afraid to scale too fast. At times, we have to convince our clients to move towards the cloud, because the cloud function is very different from the on premise solutions. Once they understand this, they are eager to jump to the next level. 

We currently have two customers that have 8,000 users connected to the solution. They are in the automotive industry. The users are a combination of sales people, service representatives and executives.  There is a tremendous ability for Docker to support a lot of users.

The customer service is good. 

The setup was very easy, but if you get into something with the backup agent or the API, that is when you may begin to stumble. Sometimes this causes a slower time for implementation and ultimate deployment. 

Our standard procedure is to look at the requirements, set of a pilot, do some testing, and then release the solution. It can take several weeks, and it depends on understanding our customers' needs. We have our own staff who complete the process.

At times, my customers are upset with the cost of the product. Other solutions seems inexpensive, in comparison. But, I tell my customers that once you start putting the solution together, will you realize that it will cost more than Rackspace Docker. 

We looked at VMware and Hyper-V, as well as Amazon. But, we stayed with Rackspace Docker becuas ewe already know that this is doing the best in terms of what it is offering.

My advice is in regards to the security. Many of my customers do not care enough about security, they have a disbelief that once you are in a cloud, you are automatically secure. This sis not the case at all. You need to understand that nothing is guaranteed if you do not follow the right rules. You need proper monitoring tools to keep the work-site safe and secure. It may cost the customer more, but it is worth every penny.