No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Canonical LXD vs Mirantis Container Cloud comparison

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Canonical LXD
Ranking in Container Virtualization
2nd
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Mirantis Container Cloud
Ranking in Container Virtualization
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Container Virtualization category, the mindshare of Canonical LXD is 21.5%, down from 38.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mirantis Container Cloud is 32.3%, up from 27.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Mirantis Container Cloud32.3%
Canonical LXD21.5%
Other46.2%
Container Virtualization
 

Featured Reviews

Siddhit-Renake - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Architect at Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Container operations have become more efficient with reduced manual intervention and reliable performance
Canonical LXD's snapshotting system is not being used. The REST API in Canonical LXD is not being utilized. Direct management using the online interface is preferred because REST API integration is required for some application-level integration, and Canonical LXD is being used as an infrastructure component rather than requiring REST API communication. A standard interface is sufficient for administering Canonical LXD container. Device pass-through has not been used. Migration features of Canonical LXD are not being utilized. Administration through a graphical user interface or graphical-based administration would definitely help for managing Canonical LXD. Currently, only command-line tool features are available, but if optical tools are introduced, that would also help. More detailed documentation in terms of deployment and manageability of Canonical LXD container is needed.
Hitesh D - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager at pnb metlife
High availability and self-healing mechanisms ensure seamless production builds
The most useful feature of Mirantis Container Cloud for our container management is Kubernetes. It provides a cluster, high availability, and a self-healing mechanism. Its multi-cluster management capability enhances our operational efficiency as it is easy to use, and every deployment is from the CI/CD, which automatically builds and deploys without human interference, reducing our deployment time to a few seconds.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Canonical LXD is a very stable solution."
"By using Docker Engine and the environment, they can easily run their application in different containers and schedule different hosts."
"Using this solution for a production environment that should be working 24/7 is the biggest proof of stability."
"You need to make an architectural runway before actually starting to implement Docker Compose, especially in a distributed environment."
"Docker is very helpful for taking the code from development and applying it to the end user."
"Mirantis Container Cloud operates similarly to how we interact with databases. It provides a comprehensive platform for deploying and managing containerized applications across cloud environments."
"If we compare legacy application support to Docker, it's a superior product."
"The most important thing that my clients focus on is rapid deployment, and in this regard, Docker wins hands-down."
"The most valuable feature is its ease of use."
 

Cons

"Administration through a graphical user interface or graphical-based administration would definitely help for managing Canonical LXD. Currently, only command-line tool features are available, but if optical tools are introduced, that would also help."
"I have consulted Mirantis support for some issues, but the support quality is not good. I suffer from support delays due to timezone differences between India and USA."
"There are a couple of things. Firstly, the vaultStore database within Container isn't as efficient as a standalone Container vault. This needs improvement."
"This product will only be useful if it can successfully run legacy applications in the cloud."
"On the Mac, Docker is far from perfect."
"I think this solution needs better security due to more risks from the outside world."
"I also feel that it is not a 100% secure product and I'd say there is room for improvement in the security area and functionality."
"There could be an automation feature included in the product. It will speed up application processes and will not require scripting codes."
"More integrations with other platforms would be beneficial."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"This solution is free."
"With open source, you can use Mirantis completely free."
"Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"Docker is a free solution."
"The community edition does not require a license and is completely free."
"It is more costly than other products, but it is worth every penny."
"I rate the product price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one means low price and ten means high price."
"Mirantis Container Cloud is free. However, there are features for which you need to pay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Canonical LXD?
Canonical LXD's snapshotting system is not being used. The REST API in Canonical LXD is not being utilized. Direct management using the online interface is preferred because REST API integration is...
What is your primary use case for Canonical LXD?
Canonical LXD is used as a technology for spinning containers for infrastructure requirements. Canonical LXD is deployed in my organization on an on-premise cloud and private cloud. It helps to mai...
What advice do you have for others considering Canonical LXD?
Canonical LXD is not sold separately. It comes as part of the operating system license or a cloud solution license, so it is not an independent product. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mirantis Container Cloud?
Regarding the cost, Mirantis Container Cloud is cheaper than other solutions like Red Hat. The license costs around 10,000 Indian rupees per year.
What needs improvement with Mirantis Container Cloud?
Mirantis Container Cloud should have AI integration tools, which are not available right now. These tools should assist in app scalability and deployment error handling.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Docker Enterprise
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GNU, Ubuntu, MySQL, Bugzilla, Debian, MariaDB, Drizzle, Inkscape, Gwibber, Squid Cache, Launchpad, BitlBee
illumina, Groupon, PayPal, ebay, ING, New Relic