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

Cisco Container Platform [EOL] vs Kubernetes comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kubernetes
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

CM
Cloud Architect, Feltus Lab at Clemson University
Enables the deployment/management of Kubernetes clusters from multiple resource providers at one location
One thing I have not really had the chance to explore too much is the Cisco Container Platform command-line interface. I've been told that exists and it's functional, but I'm not sure if it's really made for end-users. It might just be for admins or developers. One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice. What's really nice about most platforms is that they have command-line interfaces where you can just copy a single command which has all the flags with all the configurations you want and put that in a text file. Then, when you want to create another cluster you can just paste that in and edit one or two flags if you want to. You don't have to go through a web form every time and that is a feature that I would like to see in the future with CCP. It would be nice, at the end, once you create a cluster using the web form, if it would give you a single command that you could copy and put somewhere and then paste it, in the future, to create an identical cluster or an almost identical cluster. I would like the ability to save cluster configurations to CCP. I've provided that feedback to the development team. There might even be a version that is out which already has that functionality integrated into it. I think it's safe to say that at some point in the future that feature will be provided.
RV
DevOps Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Automated deployments and self-healing have transformed how I run reliable chat services
For improvements, I would definitely suggest some enhancements to Kubernetes. While Kubernetes is very powerful, there are still a few areas where it could be improved. Our challenge is the learning curve and operational complexity. For new team members, concepts such as networking, RBAC, Ingress, and troubleshooting distributed systems can take time to understand. Better built-in onboarding tools or simplified abstractions would help. Another pain point is debugging and observability. While kubectl provides good basic visibility, deep debugging across multiple services, pods, and nodes often requires external tooling such as Prometheus, Grafana, or centralized logging. Stronger native observability features would be very helpful. Networking and Ingress configuration can also be complex, especially when dealing with certificates, routing rules, and cloud-specific integrations. A more standardized experience across environments could reduce operational overhead. From a cost perspective, managing and optimizing resource usage at scale still requires careful monitoring and tuning. Better built-in cost visibility would be very helpful. For the needed improvements, I think that covers most of my main concerns. The biggest areas for improvement are still around simplifying operations, better native observability, and easier cost visibility. If I had to add one more point, it would be around standardization and developer experience. Sometimes different clusters, cloud providers, or tooling setups behave slightly differently, which increases maintenance efforts. More consistent defaults and opinionated best practices could help teams adopt Kubernetes faster and with fewer surprises. Overall, despite these challenges, Kubernetes is a very mature and reliable platform, and the benefits clearly outweigh the limitations for most production use cases. An additional area that could be improved is upgrade and version management. While managed services help coordinate Kubernetes version upgrades, API deprecations and compatibility with add-ons can still be time-consuming and risky for production environments. Better tooling and clearer migration automation would make upgrades safer and easier. Another improvement could be around documentation, consistency, and discoverability. Kubernetes documentation is very comprehensive, but for beginners, it can sometimes be overwhelming to navigate and identify best practice paths.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is definitely the fact that you can use a single platform to deploy to different resource providers. Right now, the version I'm using has vSphere and AWS, but I know in the future they're planning on adding more. The ability to deploy clusters on-prem or to any number of public cloud providers is really valuable because you don't need to relearn or switch platforms to switch resource providers."
"The cloud-managed Kubernetes allow us to take care of a big system and deployment and container management without having a big operational team."
"The product is highly scalable."
"One of the most valuable features is the ability to manage containers and pods."
"Provides auto rollback and scale-up and scale-down functionalities."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the scalability."
"The most valuable feature of Kubernetes is the integration with other solutions, such as Formative and Grafana."
"If you don't have resources, you can certainly add another worker node and expand the cluster."
"Kubernetes offers a lot of great features such as scalability and great portability of applications."
 

Cons

"One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice."
"They need to focus on more security internally."
"There are definitely challenges in Kubernetes, if you are managing the cluster yourself."
"In the financial service sector, I'd rate scalability an eight out of ten. But do it in a controlled manner, not auto-scaling. If your application has a bug and you enable the autoscaler, it will spike your costs. If someone deploys an application with a bug, that's automatically a problem."
"The pricing could be improved. It would be ideal if it was a bit less."
"There is not a large ecosystem surrounding Kubernetes, making it difficult to identify the right problem due to the vast number of solutions."
"The network policies and RBAC management across multi-clusters could be improved. This is an issue we're trying to solve in the market."
"Kubernetes can improve by providing a service offering catalog that can be readily populated in Kubernetes."
"The solution does not work with third-party tools, or alternative cloud providers, which limits the extent that we can utilize it to."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"In addition to Kubernetes, you have to pay for support."
"Kubernetes is open-source. Kubernetes is free, but we're charged for AWS utilization."
"Kubernetes is open-source."
"There is no licensing fee."
"This is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs associated with its use."
"Kubernetes is open source. But we have to manage Kubernetes as a team, and the overhead is a bit high. Compared with the platforms like Cloud Foundry, which has a much less operational overhead. Kubernetes, I have to manage the code, and I have to hire the developers. If someone has a product, a developer should know exactly what he's writing or high availability, and all those things may differ the costs."
"Google Kubernetes Engine is free in the simplest setup, AWS Kubernetes Engine costs about $50 (depending on the region), in a three master setup, so it's almost the same as the cost of the EC2 instances and it's totally fine from my point of view."
"The solution requires a license to use it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise50
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kubernetes?
My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of Kubernetes is that it is well-priced, and the features it offers are very good, making the price worth it.
What needs improvement with Kubernetes?
Kubernetes has a fairly steep learning curve. Concepts including networking, RBAC, Ingress, storage, controllers, and troubleshooting can be very difficult for beginners. Better built-in diagnostic...
What is your primary use case for Kubernetes?
In our organization, we primarily use Kubernetes for running and managing containerized applications in production environments. I use it for deploying microservices, service discovery, scaling app...
 

Also Known As

Cisco CCP
K8
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Clemson University
China unicom, NetEase Cloud, Nav, AppDirect
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Red Hat, Kubernetes and others in Container Management. Updated: August 2026.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.