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 June 2026, in the Container Virtualization category, the mindshare of Canonical LXD is 21.2%, down from 39.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mirantis Container Cloud is 32.9%, up from 26.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Mirantis Container Cloud32.9%
Canonical LXD21.2%
Other45.900000000000006%
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."
"I like the automation in deployment. I can deploy whenever I want based on the environment, and I can easily roll back to a previous version for testing."
"You need to make an architectural runway before actually starting to implement Docker Compose, especially in a distributed environment."
"The UI is very useful."
"The product is easy to use."
"Using this solution for a production environment that should be working 24/7 is the biggest proof of stability."
"On the deployment front, we saved about six developers worth of effort for every 64 people."
"The product's initial setup phase is simple."
"Mirantis Container Cloud provides significant features such as real-time vulnerability scanning and patching for container images and Kubernetes components, reducing security risks."
 

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."
"It will be better if the product provides dynamic load-balancing capabilities."
"Docker is not stable itself because it is an engine to run containers, and whenever a container is shut down, your data is lost, and you need to restart the containers."
"On the MacBook, it was a little difficult, probably because of the version that my company is using."
"I would love to see if more supported applications could be used under Docker."
"The only problem is that they are too complicated for what we are trying to accomplish."
"The solution's stability could be improved."
"Areas for improvement are the privacy of container management and the documentation. In the next release, I would like to see best practices on how to manage distributed containers and networks."
"I think this solution needs better security due to rising threats from the outside world."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Mirantis Container Cloud is free. However, there are features for which you need to pay."
"The pricing and licensing really depends on what your needs are. You could be paying $100 a month to $100,000. It depends on the needs you have from the solution, and the agreement you make."
"The solution is open-source and free to try."
"With open source, you can use Mirantis 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."
"Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The community edition does not require a license and is completely free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
27%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Marketing Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
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.
What is your primary use case for Mirantis Container Cloud?
We are using Mirantis Container Cloud ( /products/mirantis-container-cloud-reviews ) for production builds. It is integrated with Mirantis, and we use it in the insurance industry.
 

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