We performed a comparison between Oracle Java Cloud Service and Red Hat 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 ability to manage security and access the server from any location with complete security using SSH is perfect for performing crucial tasks, even while travelling."
"The automated features of auto-purging in 12c helps clear disk space on a routine basis."
"One key feature is getting to choose the Virtual Machine configurations while setting up the server, which is an automated process."
"The auto-backup, incremental backup and restoration features can be invaluable for management."
"Backing up and recovery for my domain is very easy and fast. In addition, applying patches and undoing applied patches is effective and easy to do."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The framework supports auto-configuration. A lot of features are already there. It is reliable and user-friendly to develop code, back-end engineering, or locate specific information such as addresses."
"Self-provisioning, easy to choose from WebLogic 11g to 12c."
"The product's initial setup is very easy, especially compared to AWS."
"The initial setup is simple, and OpenShift is open-source, so it's easy to install on any cloud platform."
"There is a quick deployment of the application, and we can scale out efficiently."
"Key features are WildFly, because it standardizes infrastructure and the git repository and docker. Git is essential for source code and Docker for infrastructure."
"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 security is good."
"OpenShift is based on Kubernetes and we try to use all the Kubernetes objects of OpenShift. We don't use features that are specific to OpenShift, except internal certificates for the services. The one feature that is missing from Kubernetes and that is really useful in OpenShift is the lifecycle of the cluster and the ease of installation. We use VMware and VMware integration internally with the OpenShift installer, which is very good. With OpenShift it's easy to spin up or scale out a cluster."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"There are issues with the application's development, including small glitches and errors."
"The product is satisfactory but we need more training on managing the machine itself. For example, how do we add more storage, how do we extend a specific portion? I would like to see videos illustrating some of the technical tasks that we often need to do."
"Needs better integration with other Oracle/non-Oracle products."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
"There is no orchestration platform in OpenShift."
"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."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"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."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"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."
"The platform's documentation could be more comprehensive to cover the full spectrum of user needs. Sometimes, achieving specific goals is challenging due to a lack of detailed guidance."
Oracle Java Cloud Service is ranked 19th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 54 reviews. Oracle Java Cloud Service is rated 8.0, while Red Hat OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Oracle Java Cloud Service writes "User-friendly code development solution needing enhancements addressing glitches". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Oracle Java Cloud Service is most compared with Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure and Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service, whereas Red Hat OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Google Cloud. See our Oracle Java Cloud Service vs. Red Hat 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.