We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Private 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."Our core banking process was monolithic. To address this, we transitioned to a microservices-based architecture. Leveraging Microsoft technologies, including Terminals version 23, we’ve revamped our banking operations. Not all services are microservices; some remain monolithic for simplicity. Containerization is pivotal, with OpenShift (based on Kubernetes and Docker) managing our microservices."
"The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability."
"Excellent technical support."
"The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location."
"We have control of the ESXi."
"The product's initial setup is very easy, especially compared to AWS."
"The most valuable feature is the high availability for the applications."
"Self-provisioning support saves a lot of time and unnecessary work from the system administrator who can use this time to run and monitor the infrastructure. For the developer, this means less time waiting for the provisioning and excellent flexibility for development, testing, and production. Also, in such systems it is easy for developers to monitor applications even after deployment."
"Valuable features include auto-recreate of pod if pod fails; fast rollback, with one click, to previous version."
"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 like OCP, and the management UI is better than the open-source ones."
"I have seen a return on investment, and it depends upon the types and the nature of some of the most critical applications that have been hosted on the OpenShift infrastructure."
"The stability has been good."
"One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect."
"I've noticed that the satellite services layer requires some improvement compared to platforms like Azure or Microsoft. While it's in development, I believe the satellite layer has room for enhancement. Additionally, the DevOps layer could benefit from closer integrations, especially for using external applications like Jenkins."
"The support and pricing need to improve."
"lacking in multi-cloud management."
"Auto-scaling and managing pod scaling in the microservices architecture, a core feature of IBM Cloud Private, can pose challenges, especially when dealing with larger volumes of traffic."
"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."
"Its virtual upgrades are time-consuming."
"Not a ten because it's not a standard solution and the endpoint protection user has to prepare with documentation or have training from other people. It's not easy to start because it's not like other solutions."
"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."
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"The metrics in OpenShift can use improvement."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
IBM Cloud Private is ranked 18th in PaaS Clouds with 5 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. IBM Cloud Private is rated 6.8, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Private writes "Reliable platform with significant challenges related to performance capabilities when subjected to high traffic loads". 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". IBM Cloud Private is most compared with Amazon AWS, Google App Engine and Pivotal Cloud Foundry, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and VMware Aria Automation. See our IBM Cloud Private 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.