What advice do you have for others considering Kubernetes?

I would recommend using it. I would rate it an eight out of ten, with one being bad and ten being very good.

Kubernetes is a good solution, but consider the cloud platform carefully. GCP or AWS are better options. Kubernetes is just one component; the cloud provider is crucial. Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Kubernetes presents several challenges, particularly with internal culture and operational changes. One significant challenge is transitioning to a DevOps approach, which requires adapting how you monitor and manage applications. With the tool, applications can be updated frequently without downtime, necessitating a shift in operations and monitoring practices. This change is a big adjustment, especially for teams used to traditional methods. I would recommend the tool. The solution is relatively simple to understand and deploy across various environments, including Azure, AWS, on-premises, and Google Cloud. Kubernetes also provides good support, even for smaller companies, making it a valuable option regardless of company size. I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

If you are building an MVP or you are starting small, then Kubernetes might not be the best option because there are some charges associated with it.\ But if you are building an application that might scale rapidly, then you should definitely go with Kubernetes. If your deployments happen very frequently, then it is definitely the solution you should use, because you can restore previous versions if something fails. I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

I advise others to work with Kubernetes if they are developing or running the cloud native configuration. However, there are more cost-effective solutions. I rate it a nine out of ten.

There's no one-size-fits-all solution. It depends on a few factors. First, I'd consider the skill set of your existing workforce. Transitioning to a new technology is a journey, so make sure you have people who are familiar with the cloud provider you choose. I have some bias toward Microsoft, not because I prefer it, but because integrating different on-premises devices, resources, and systems is already available within Azure due to Azure Active Directory or Entra ID. Aside from that integration, I've experienced zero trust, and it works well with other components, like HashiCorp's Vault and Azure service principals. In general, when you work with the cloud, you should have a trust-based model. It's easy to spin up resources, but without a trust model—like understanding which client ID is working on a resource with a specific object ID—it's hard to track incidents end-to-end. I haven't experienced that with other cloud providers, and it's even challenging to implement on-premises. With Microsoft, you can integrate and implement zero-trust architecture (ZTA). As for AKS itself, you have deployment options. You can isolate an AKS that's internet-exposed, build one accessible only within the corporate network, or create one accessible only from on-premises. There are different requirements for how to track security issues for your cloud resources, regardless of the provider. That's one of the main considerations nowadays. Kubernetes is not for everyone, especially if people aren't skilled enough to work on it. Kubernetes itself is just a plain blanket, and you still need to add more components to make it more useful. So, I'd say it's an out of ten, but it depends on maturity. If you have good, technically skilled people, then I'd say you can rate it as a ten, especially if you have a lot of self-service processes in your overall landscape. It's about reducing manual work, basically.

I would rate the product a seven out of ten.

I would encourage you to start with Docker containers first, get the hang of it, and then move on to Kubernetes. Understand the Docker concepts, software, container networking, and how container images are built. Once that's done, it becomes easy to enter into the Kubernetes world. Kubernetes is an orchestration tool that builds on top of Docker containerization. I would rate it as excellent because it is very easy to deploy applications, manage ports, and expose applications both within and outside the cluster. Kubernetes also has a good reach and can be used in both private and public clouds, and there is plenty of support in terms of documentation and online forums to help users who run into any issues.

It is easy to maintain distributed systems and applications using the solution. Although, it requires a few new features to improve managing the volumes. I rate it ten out of ten.

I give the solution a nine out of ten. There is a large amount of overhead associated with maintenance, as we have to maintain everything from the operating system to the application. The cycle of updates and patches for the platform itself is very frequent, with a new version released every four months and various security patches in between. This makes the maintenance task very large if we have to do it ourselves. The main benefit of Kubernetes is that it is currently the standard for container orchestration. Kubernetes is available across different cloud providers, providing consistency in management and portability that is not available with other products. In the beginning, the solution may feel as if it has a lot of moving parts that are confusing and overwhelming.

I rate the solution ten out of ten. The tool does everything we need, and we believe we have made the best choice. I'm hesitant to recommend the platform as I prefer people to decide for themselves what is best for them, and I don't want to push a solution if someone doesn't need it. Some users will have issues only Kubernetes can solve, and they should find out how to leverage it.

For the maintenance of Kubernetes, one person is more than enough because it's an orchestration platform. They only manage the container or microservices. My advice to others is for them to gain a basic understanding and training in Kubernetes and also develop some management skills. If they are willing to learn and can manage the technology, Kubernetes is a good choice as it is an emerging and leading technology in the cloud industry. I rate Kubernetes a nine out of ten.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, if you have a small infrastructure, do not go with full Kubernetes. Instead, use smaller solutions like K3s or Rancher and full Kubernetes if you have a vast infrastructure.

It's important to learn the architecture of Kubernetes and know what each and every component of Kubernetes does. It makes the deployment easier. Whether or not you choose Kubernetes depends on your use case. If you have a business model that requires minimal changes with fixed requirements then Kubernetes might not be the way to go. If you're constantly needing to make changes, Kubernetes is a great solution. I rate the solution eight out of 10.

I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10 because it doesn't have any competitors. It's a container orchestrator with a huge user base. My advice is to make sure that the services are hooked up properly. If they aren't, your ports won't be able to properly communicate. Secondly, you should set up the entire cluster properly so that the nodes also communicate between each other. If some ports aren't open, then the nodes may not be able to communicate.

I would tell potential users that Kubernetes is a very good solution and they should use it. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Kubernetes a nine.

I rate Kubernetes 8.5 out of 10. My advice is to hire people who have demonstrated experience or are prepared to spend significant time taking courses because it's deep and broad, and there's a lot to learn. It isn't straightforward, but it would be hard to simplify it, considering what it does.

I'm a reseller. I've been reading a lot about the subject since it is new to me. There is a lot of good documentation. Of course, some of the Kubernetes webpage documentation is sometimes confusing as it's not that straight in terms of what you have to do. Still, it helps to take some lessons from some platforms Microsoft has. People need some training on the subject. Overall, I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten.

There are many ways of doing things, typically you would need to ask yourself few things. 

1. what is the problem which needs resolution and how large is it?

2. when do we need to solve it, timing is very critical.

3. How mature is my organization and what is the level of technical debt? 

when I started off in the transformation world, Life started with dockers, basically used in most of the transformation projects back in the days and then the container orchestrators. But that is then and now it is more of Kubernetes.

I would say, a container is a portable environment that simplifies the hosting and managing of the life cycle of web applications. It is designed to deliver efficiency, productivity, and consistency.

for me Kubernetes is an open-source container orchestration platform that supports numerous containers to work together, thereby reducing operational load. Features of this platform include rolling deployment, auto-scaling, volume storage, and computer resource. It can run in a data center, or in a public, private, or hybrid cloud.

for example one of the areas which I would start looking at If your applications are not efficiently packed on the servers, you might end up overpaying for the heavy load. This is applicable irrespective of whether your application is deployed on the cloud or on-premise. Kubernetes promotes server usage efficiency, thereby ensuring that you do not increase or under-do the load.

from the point of "what are the Tips and Advice"  point of view 

Kubernetes offers a lot of benefits, as I stated at the beginning of my response there is always a challenge that could turn into a scenario. 

Kubernetes could be complex and hard to set up and use; you will need someone who has the skills to setup and manage it in the way your roadmap/objectives are. For someone who is not familiar with containers or Kubernetes in particular, the setup might look simple and easy to implement and run in reality, you will require additional functionality such for example maintenance, backups, and disaster recovery to make it production-ready. Therefore, if you are contemplating opting for Kubernetes, make sure you have the right skilled resources to give an edge to your organization.

I give the solution eight out of ten. I suggest anyone who would like to use this solution first get the certification. You must be knowledgeable with Linux and comfortable with the command line interface.

I rate Kubernetes eight out of 10. If your team has experience with containerization, they should work on Kubernetes. It will make development and deployment easier. I recommend first containerizing your application and running it in a dev environment to test it and get some experience before implementing it in a production environment.

Kubernetes is the leader in this category, and are very good. However, if the platform they want to implement is VMware, I would advise using VMware 10. I rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

If you need to take care of proxies and configuration you may find the use of the GitHub repo Cube install helpful. It can help deploy and administrator the Kubernetes platform. I rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are end-users. We use the solution both on-premises and in the cloud. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We're not a partner. We are end-users. I'm not sure of the exact version of the solution we are using. Microsoft is hosted on their environment. We can't host it in our own environment. We are using the Azure Kubernetes AKS. If it's Azure, it needs to be hosted on its own Azure Cloud. We can't host it, for example, on-premises. I would advise potential new users to learn about it and try it out. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I would rate Kubernetes as eight out of ten.

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.

I haven't tried all the advanced features of Kubernetes, but I feel it is meeting most of the requirements of a new design architecture for applications to be hosted. I don't see any particular functionality which is not available for me as of now. The open-source ecosystem is providing lots of ideas to solve all kinds of problems. The open-source ecosystem of developers, implementers, and integrators is providing lots of ideas. If there is something I may not know, I look up to the community forum and receive answers. There are no issues of finding something, however, Kubernetes by itself has to improve. It is a matter of the implementer to discover ideas to solve the problem. The Kubernetes engine is designed very well. I would highly recommend this solution to others. I rate Kubernetes a nine out of ten.

I would rate Kubernetes as ten out of ten.

The company I am working for is just a customer and end-user. 1.20 is a quite stable version at this moment, however, Kubernetes does have another more recent version of 1.24. For us, 40% of customers are working on the cloud and 60% of customers that have compliance policies are deployed in their own cluster and are not using a managed service from the cloud. There are a lot of caches available. Using the cloud-based instances as one of the nodes in the Kubernetes cluster is acceptable. The question would be how many people are using manage services by any cloud provider for Kubernetes, and that is 30% or 40% of customers. They said they don't want to manage their cluster on their own. They don't want to have the headache of managing the cluster. They are focused on their business application and their business. This is what they want. That's why they are going for managed services. They don't have to do anything at all. Everything can be controlled by the cloud provider. On the other hand, 60% of people are looking for something that offers full control. That way, at any given point of time, if they want to upgrade Kubernetes, they can. For example, there is an open policy agent, which is a policy enforcement utility or framework, which is available on the top of Kubernetes. By default, if I want to use policy enforcement on the top of the cloud, I do have multiple choices on the top of the cloud. There are some restrictions, however. With on-premises, people want everything to be their hand so they can implement anything. One of the major things I would recommend to users is that whenever they are doing capacity planning if they are looking at deploying the Kubernetes on top of their on-prem solution, it will likely require the purchase of hardware. In those cases, I recommend they make sure they understand what type of workload they are putting on the top of their cluster, and calculate that properly. They need to understand how much consumption is in order to understand their hardware requirements in order to get the right sizing on the one-time purchase. They need to know the number of microservices they are using and the level of power consumption in terms of CPU and memory. They will also want to calculate how much it'll scale. Kubernetes will provide all the scalability a company needs. You can add the node and remove the node quickly. However, if you miscalculate the hardware capacity itself the infrastructure may not be able to handle it. That's why it is imperative to make sure that capacity planning is part of the process. I'd also advise companies to do a POC first before going into real production. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this Kubernetes to others, it is a good technology. I rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

I highly recommend this solution and rate it 10 out of 10.

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

I would highly recommend this solution to anyone who is considering using it. I would rate Kubernetes a nine out of ten.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been very happy with its capabilities so far. I would recommend the solution to other users.

There are around 300 people using the solution in my organization. I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Kubernetes as a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

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 would recommend it because of the microservices architecture that allows you to write cloud-native code in the Kubernetes environment. Kubernetes has become a leading choice for most big companies, and they are making their own products based on the underlying Kubernetes architecture. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Kubernetes a nine.

I would definitely recommend this product. I rate this solution a nine out of 10.

I would definitely recommend Kubernetes for others who want to start using it. I would say it is no longer in its inception phase, but it is still in the early phase. The product hasn't matured enough. There are customers who are looking to take this maybe around two years down the line. On a scale of one to ten, I would give Kubernetes an eight.

I would advise new users to take the managed solution. Don't deploy it by yourself. Just take a managed service. It's really worth it. I advise this due to the fact that it's a lot of time and effort. It's not that expensive in terms of overhead. It may be $100 or $200 or something like that monthly. When you pay $3,000, let's say, the $100 doesn't really matter. However, the work that your DevOps will have will be costly. They will initially invest to maintain your unmanaged deployment. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution a ten.

I like the solution but it depends on the size of your workload. For example, Docker is good for a very small workload or maybe if you are just deploying using Docker, building and deploying your CICD-based tasks. But if you require a more complex solution, using containers or maybe when you have a high traffic workload, even with simple architecture, you might be looking at Kubernetes to optimize the workload. There are other solutions on the market like Serverless, I would use that in preference to Kubernetes which can sometimes be difficult to manage. You can always make use of Serverless. For that reason, I would rate Kubernetes a seven out of 10.

This is a good product and I can recommend it. That said, it will be better in the future. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would recommend going through the training to see what the limitations are within Kubernetes. There's not a lot of training, but what training is available should be used so people can understand the difference between Docker and Kubernetes. If somebody has used Docker previously, they can see the difference even though the methods are the same. It's the same madness, but it will help you to better position things like command line interfaces. We had a bit of a struggle when I was trying to implement it in Azure. But if you look at the Oracle implementation, it worked really well so I would rate this solution a seven out of 10.

I would recommend this product. It is very close to being a 100% agnostic solution. It is just a step away from becoming a server-less solution like Fusion, which, although, is designed for running for a short time. I use Kubernetes on the platform layer to deepen a platform. In some cases, when the same solution was developed without Kubernetes, some customers had issues on platforms like AWS, Azure, and Google. I would rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten.

Kubernetes is a great product. I am currently also helping a customer with the implementation of AKS because they only have a private cloud, and they want to have a hybrid cloud. I highly recommend to use this feature, and not to install Kubernetes manually or use some third-party tools. The Azure community service is better implemented than AWS community service. They are not good at planning the upgrades for Kubernetes. So, you really need to constantly upgrade the cost. The upgrade is automatic, but Azure changed the integration of load balancing, and I was forced to re-deploy all costs, which costed my company. We need two clusters at the same time from every environment. So, this was not good. I contacted the support, but there was no way to change the integration of the load balancer. I hope this will never happen again in the future. I would rate Kubernetes an eight out of ten. The dashboard and support could be better.

I am a consultant, and I am just providing information about how to use this kind of software within specific companies. Kubernetes is evolving now. 1.18 is the latest version, however, we don't have the newest version everywhere. That's the one we choose for new installs when we do them. When it's deployed on the cloud, some of my customers are using public clouds such as Amazon, Google, or Microsoft. There are also some customers that use private clouds here in Switzerland. I work together with them. If people are using modern technologies like containers or developing software by themselves, I would recommend this solution. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.