We performed a comparison between Heroku and OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The platform is very Node.js-friendly, which is something that is important to us."
"I like the tool's scalability, CLI, and dashboards."
"It is easy to deploy applications, and we don't need to bother about software updates on the server. We don't need to bother about machines, servers, and hardware. We only need to care about the system and functionality that we need or want to develop. They take care of everything else. It provides high availability. It is a pretty good solution that provides everything that we need. It has everything that we need to run our applications. We have many different applications, and we generate three million bills for a company in Brazil. We see more than a billion requests per day in another application. Everything works just fine, and it is very good."
"One of the best things about Heroku is that it is very easy and straightforward to deploy an application."
"The most valuable feature of Heroku is the continuous integration and applications it provides."
"It's easy to push a change and to deploy new things."
"Thanks to Heroku, we don't need to do as much direct management in AWS."
"We use Heroku to run generic data. We also use it for our customer development environment. It helps us to build and test websites."
"The security is good."
"Great integration with Jenkins for constant integration and development. Supports all the major languages and environments - PHP, Java, Node.js, Ruby, etc."
"The virtualization of my APIs means I no longer have to pay VMware large amounts of money to only run in-house solutions."
"What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud. I also find the design of OpenShift good."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"Overall, the solution's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is excellent."
"We are able to operate client’s platform without downtime during security patch management each month and provide a good SLA (as scalability for applications is processed during heavy client website load, automatically)."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"I improved the application performance by monitoring and adjusting the cleaner configuration to help set better lightweight limits on containers that run the app instances."
"I think this solution would be improved if free demos were available indefinitely."
"Heroku doesn't support Docker images on the CI infrastructure."
"Heroku should increase its slug size limits."
"We don't find the pipelines intuitive. The user experience could be better. Having to set up multiple apps, then a pipeline, seems like an overkill on the amount of work to do."
"Their support is good, but they can improve their response time."
"We have to do daily restarts of some processes, which is annoying, and the support for custom CI could be better."
"They could flesh out some of their analytics a little more."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"The monitoring part could be better to monitor the performance."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"One area for improvement is the documentation. They need to make it a little bit more user-friendly. Also, if you compare certain features and the installation process with Rancher, Rancher is simpler."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"The software-defined networking part of it caused us quite a bit of heartburn. We ran into a lot of problems with the difference between on-prem and cloud, where we had to make quite a number of modifications... They've since resolved it, so it's not really an issue anymore."
Heroku is ranked 13th in PaaS Clouds with 28 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Heroku is rated 8.4, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Heroku writes "Useful for mobile and web applications, and helps with rapid development cycle ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Heroku is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Google App Engine, Pivotal Cloud Foundry and Amazon Lightsail, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and SUSE Cloud Application Platform. See our Heroku vs. OpenShift report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.