We performed a comparison between OpenShift Container Platform and Rancher Labs based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Openshift is a very developer-friendly product."
"OpenShift is a user-friendly container platform with a solid GUI that helps you follow what is going on and gives you an overview of all your clusters. It's more user-friendly than the Kubernetes itself. The interface helps you learn the platform and provides access to some features or specific comments."
"Some of the primary features we leverage in the platform have to do with how we manage the cluster configurations, the properties, and the auto-scalability. These are the features that definitely provide value in terms of reducing overhead for the developers."
"The initial setup process is easy."
"It is very lightweight and can be deployed very fast, especially when it comes to containers."
"The console or the GUI of OpenShift is awesome. You can do a lot of things from there. You can perform administration tasks as well as development tasks."
"Autoscaling is an excellent feature that makes it very simple to scale our applications as required."
"The stack in the software supply chain is one of the main reasons that we use OpenShift. When I came to this company, we bought hardware from IBM named Bluemix, and they used ICP, which stands for IBM Cloud Private."
"The solution is stable."
"Rancher Labs is a very user-friendly tool."
"The tool's UI is very convenient enough to help you manage multiple clusters in the cloud or the company, making it a product with which you can manage different clusters and locations."
"The most valuable feature is its comprehensive support, easy resource scaling, compatibility with various OEMs, and seamless service integration."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is an open-source solution that is easy to deploy."
"The initial setup is simple and straightforward."
"The product is simple to use for a beginner."
"The scalability potential is very good."
"It is difficult to deploy the OpenShift cluster in a bare-metal environment."
"I want to see more incorporation of native automation features; then, we could write a code, deploy it directly to OpenShift, and allow it to take care of the automated process. Using this method, we could write one application and have elements copy/pasted to other applications in the development process."
"From a networking perspective, the routing capability can be matured further. OpenShift doesn't handle restrictions on what kind of IPs are allowed, who can access them, and who cannot access them. So it is a simple matter of just using it with adequate network access, at the network level."
"Getting the solution quickly and troubleshooting quickly are both areas where I think it needs some work."
"OpenShift has certain restrictions in terms of managing the cluster when it's running on a public cloud. For example, identity and access management integration with the IM of AWS is quite difficult. It requires some open-source tools to integrate. This is one area where I always see room for improvement."
"It can take 10 to 15 minutes to deploy a microservice. The CI/CD process takes a long time, and if it's because of OCP, that is something that can be changed."
"The solution does not work on a route-wise NFS."
"There should be a simplification of the overall cluster environment. It should require fewer resources. Just to run a simple Hello World app, it requires about seven servers, and that's just crazy. I understand that it is fully redundant, but it's prohibitively expensive to get something simple going."
"We're looking for something that is even easier to use. It's a bit complicated."
"I can't migrate to the newer version."
"They should improve application visibility along with code visibility."
"The solution could improve by adding more features in the dashboard, such as monitoring, scanning, and security. This would be a great benefit."
"Could be more intuitive."
"The biggest room for improvement in Rancher Labs would be to have a proper upgrading plan."
"If you have poor infrastructure, you will have issues with the tool."
"We have found that the auto-secure feature of this solution doesn't always work, and could be improved to be more reliable, particularly when working with business critical applications."
OpenShift Container Platform is ranked 1st in Container Management with 36 reviews while Rancher Labs is ranked 5th in Container Management with 13 reviews. OpenShift Container Platform is rated 8.2, while Rancher Labs is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenShift Container Platform writes "Provides automation that speeds up our process by 30% and helps us achieve zero downtime". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rancher Labs writes "An easy-to-use user interface, which makes it easy to work with Kubernetes and containers". OpenShift Container Platform is most compared with Amazon EKS, VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Amazon Elastic Container Service and Kubernetes, whereas Rancher Labs is most compared with VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Docker, Amazon EKS, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE and Google Kubernetes Engine. See our OpenShift Container Platform vs. Rancher Labs report.
See our list of best Container Management vendors.
We monitor all Container Management 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.