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."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."
"The most valuable feature of Heroku is the continuous integration and applications it provides."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the auto maintenance of databases."
"The platform is very Node.js-friendly, which is something that is important to us."
"One of the best things about Heroku is that it is very easy and straightforward to deploy an application."
"Valuable for us was the fast deployment. This means the time to market is improved without pain for developers."
"We use Heroku to run generic data. We also use it for our customer development environment. It helps us to build and test websites."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"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."
"This solution is providing a platform with OOTB features that are difficult to build from scratch."
"Excellent GUI support, so one does not need to use the command line client for almost any tasks. Great support for building images directly from Git repositories with hooks."
"Valuable features include auto-recreate of pod if pod fails; fast rollback, with one click, to previous version."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the high availability for the applications."
"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."
"Their support is good, but they can improve their response time."
"The tool's configuration is complex."
"We have to do daily restarts of some processes, which is annoying, and the support for custom CI could be better."
"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."
"The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management."
"There have been some issues with security, in particular, that we had to address. At times they make it “clunky." I am quite confident these parameters will appear in the next releases. They have been reported as bugs and are actually in process."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"Needs work on volume handling (although this is already better with GlusterFS). Security (SSSD) would also be an improvement."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
"The metrics in OpenShift can use improvement."
"Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."
"This is a fairly expensive solution."
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 "Used for server deployment and provides auto maintenance of databases". 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.