Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Quali CloudShell

AKS works very well for running containerized applications that require high availability and scalability. This includes systems like our HRIS platform and customer-facing web applications. AKS is a good choice when applications are broken into multiple services that need independent scaling and deployment. It provides the flexibility needed to manage these architectures effectively. But for single, low-traffic applications or simple internal tools, AKS can be overkill. For scenarios like that Azure App Service would be better.

Incentivized

• LaaS
• IaaS
• PaaS
• CRaaS
• Training
• DevOps
• DevSecOps
• Demo Portals
• TaaS

Almost any workflow and any infrastructure are supported.

• AKS makes it easier to replicate data to multiple regions
• Azure portal make it easier to manage the resources of the organization

Incentivized

• Self service single pane of glass for any workflow and infrastructure
• Complete lifecycle management of your workflow and infrastructure
• Vendor agnostic cloud, service, application, appliance support

• Steep learning curve
• Expected charges are unclear until you see real production usage
• Operations teams need to learn an entirely new skill set

Incentivized

• Requires SME to get the full ROI first year
• Requires a culture change for Agile Automation
• Price could be less (not cheap)

As already said, the UI/CLI and even terraform are perfectly fine, but certain details could be documented better. For instance, if I want to secure the whole Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) with my own managed keys, then it is very complex and hard to get there. Not really a single source that gives you the whole picture. Besides that, it is still good to use, in most cases intuitive but details mentioned as above can be tricky.

Incentivized

Microsoft support was really good, whenever we raise any ticket they come back to us within a couple of hours.

Incentivized

The tool can automate almost any workflow and infrastructure consumption. It has state of the art develop and support with great online training, online full manual set, and a comprehensive support team and network of SIs/VARS that are very qualified.

Amazon EKS stacked up very well and had better performance in some areas. However, Azure Kubernetes Service was a better fit given our Azure environment.

Incentivized

VMware is too hard to use, too expensive to support, and not a full lifecycle tool for workflows and Infrastructure (no support of physical either). AWS or Azure or Google solutions are good if you are only in the cloud and only using their tools. Not good if you have on-prem or non-Cloud based tools/infrastructure. Build it yourself automation frameworks can be good for people with unlimited funds, but they are not the best way to go and missing many capabilities typically.

• We had to spend more time on Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) than on AWS and GCP to get our kubernetes cluster up and running
• The resources on nodes need to be left out unused, so effectively it is wasting money there
• It definitely made us spend more time into maintaining kubernetes

Incentivized

• Our customers have an average ROI of less than 6 months.
• Our customers renew their maintenance almost 100% of the time.
• It has allowed us to build specific solutions across many use cases enabling us to profit.