We performed a comparison between OpenShift and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) 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."Two stand-out features are the security model and value-add features that don't exist in Upstream Kubernetes."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"I love to automate everything and OpenShift was been born for that. It takes care of the network layer itself and I don't need to dive into it; I can work on a top level. Our project has numerous services designed to run in Docker containers, and we have run almost all pieces in OpenShift."
"In terms of implementation, OpenShift is very user-friendly, which is an advantage. We are using it along with GitLab for implementing CI/CD pipelines. That's a feature that other products also have, but in OpenShift, we find it good."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"It is a stable platform."
"Valuable features include auto-recreate of pod if pod fails; fast rollback, with one click, to previous version."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"Our recommendations are good, and we also have a bidding platform that is helpful for managed service providers. This platform can save customers up to 2-3 weeks in billing time, from 25 days to 3-4 days. We have two products: a basic product and a cloud optimization product. Both products help customers improve the performance and cost-efficiency of their cloud environments."
"Oracle is a very useful tool in terms of usability and customization."
"The most valuable features are the manageability and the user interface."
"I have found Oracle Cloud to be a scalable solution."
"Oracle Cloud is reasonably scalable - I'd rate it seven out of ten."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Apart from the licensing, there's support from Oracle Cloud Platform which improved our day to day operations. Time is reduced. Based on this service, we are able to scale up dependent applications as quickly as we can."
"It is a stable solution since it offers a very powerful performance to its users."
"OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"It would be great if it supported Bitbucket repositories too."
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
"It could use auto-scaling based on criteria such as transaction volume, queue backlog, etc. Currently, it is limited to CPU and memory."
"One of the features that I've observed in Tanzu Mission Control is that I can manage multiple Kubernetes environments. For instance, one of my lines of business is using OpenShift OKD; another one wants to use Google Anthos, and somebody else wants to use VMware Tanzu. If I have to manage all these, Tanzu Mission Control is giving me the opportunity to completely manage all of my Kubernetes clusters, whereas, with OpenShift, I can only manage a particular area. I can't manage other Kubernetes clusters. I would like to have the option to manage all Kubernetes clusters with OpenShift."
"My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs. Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime. Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud. I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster."
"The product's technical support is an area with shortcomings that need improvement."
"More technical papers could be published to help out professionals."
"The solution’s support could be improved."
"I would like more technical expertise."
"There is room for improvement for stability."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
"The solution does not follow a retention policy while taking ad hoc backups. Since it does not follow the retention policy, we had to do the manual task to check the backups."
"Sometimes when we install something, we need to partition and maybe rebuild the index. This can cause some issues for performance. In the future, I would like to see more stability and fewer bugs."
More Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews while Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is ranked 3rd in PaaS Clouds with 91 reviews. OpenShift is rated 8.4, while Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) writes "Cost-effective and can be used to host OIC and APEX". OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and VMware Tanzu Application Service, whereas Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud, IBM Public Cloud and Alibaba Cloud. See our OpenShift vs. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) 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.