We performed a comparison between Mendix and Red Hat OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."It is low code, where the developers can still develop in Java. That to us is very appealing."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The user experience is great."
"There are free online learning and certifications if a user would like to learn more and better understand the solution."
"What I found most valuable in Mendix is that it's very much suitable for mobile apps such as native Android or IOS supported mobile apps. The multiple features of the platform are very, very attractive and very popular. Mendix has technical features such as microflows and nanoflows. You can also access data models in the platform. These are the features that are very, very strong in Mendix. I got my hands dirty on other low-code platforms, but I have not seen such strong features in them compared to the microflows, nanoflows, and data model access that are in Mendix, including creating and integration. The platform has out-of-the-box adapters or out-of-the-box-connectors that you can integrate with different interface applications such as SAP, Salesforce, Oracle EBS, etc."
"They are leading in the smart manufacturing, and connectivity space."
"You can scale the solution."
"The development environment is model-driven. We can use the information from this for our business engineers to make the information models, and they can also execute the model."
"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."
"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."
"I would recommend Red Hat OpenShift, especially for its automation capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the auto scalers for all microservices. The feature allows us to place request limits and it is much cheaper than AWS."
"This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"Its interface is good. The other part is the seamless integration with the stack that I have. Because my stack is mostly of Red Hat, which is running on top of VMware virtualization, I have had no issues with integrating both of these and trying to install them. We had a seamless integration with the other non-Red Hat products as well."
"There's no direct tech support."
"Mendix is slightly less scalable than I'd like."
"It needs to provide an overview of model versioning control for the sake of the review process; better SCRUM board; an overview of model changes from the repository through Sprintr (SCRUM board). Also, a choice between versioning control system would be nice."
"It is expensive."
"You need experienced programmers and developers to understand this solution."
"One thing I would like to improve is the support system offered by Mendix. It can sometimes take a while to get the help I need when I'm using Mendix."
"Mendix needs to think about itself offering machine learning and artificial intelligence."
"What is lacking is the support of higher level modeling features, like the modeling you do is relatively low level, yet it is still close to programming. We would like to see a more business-oriented modeling environment, like BPMN."
"The operators need a lot of improvement, with better integrations."
"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."
"The solution only offers support for one server."
"There are challenges related to additional security layers, connectivity compliance for endpoints, and integration."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"It would be great if it supported Bitbucket repositories too."
"We need some kind of a multi-cluster management solution from the Red Hat site."
"OpenShift could improve by providing the ability to integrate with public cloud platforms. This way we can easily use the services that these platforms offer. For instance, Amazon AWS. However, all the three major hyper-scalers solutions offer excellent DevOps and CI/CD tooling. If there was an easy way to integrate with them it would be beneficial. We need a way to easily integrate with the monitoring and dashboard services that they provide."
Mendix is ranked 2nd in Mobile Development Platforms with 48 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 54 reviews. Mendix is rated 8.4, while Red Hat OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Mendix writes "Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability". 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". Mendix is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Oracle Application Express (APEX), Appian and ServiceNow, whereas Red Hat OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Google Cloud.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms 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.