We performed a comparison between Mendix and OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."The integrated security saves a lot of time, especially when it comes to setting up user-roles and security. Also, database updates work automatically. There is no need to write queries to update the database, once you make an update."
"Suite allows you to easily and smoothly integrate with pretty much anything. It is also cloud-enabled. It provides a full Cloud Foundry-driven cloud environment with one-click deployment."
"You can scale the solution."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution is stable."
"The user experience is great."
"It's amazing that you can build web apps and mobile (hybrid) apps with one code base in a few clicks. It's a full continuous integration environment."
"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."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"Overall, the solution's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is excellent."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"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."
"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 am impressed with the product's security features."
"We want to build a solution that can be deployable to any cloud because of client requirements and OpenShift allows us to do this."
"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."
"I would also like to see automatic adjustment to the Java Heap, whenever an application load becomes too much for the application. It could also use hot database replication."
"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."
"The platform still has many areas for improvement. If I compare apples to apples, the PWA features of Mendix could be improved, for example, I wouldn't recommend creating a B2C or B2B marketplace or web portals on Mendix, but there's a tendency for people to still do it through the systems provided by my company, particularly implement B2B or B2C marketplace, versus using eBay or Shopify. On the web portal front, Mendix still needs to improve."
"While the community is great, they need to work on making their direct technical support services better."
"It could use a more comprehensive widget creation studio in the IDE."
"There should be more integration with engineering applications and tighter integration for user authentication, such as single sign-on, etc. They have some of that. It just could be stronger."
"You need experienced programmers and developers to understand this solution."
"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."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"We want to see better alerting, especially in critical situations requiring immediate intervention. Until we go to the dashboard, it can be challenging to quickly recognize that there's an issue for us to deal with. Therefore, a popup of the event or a tweaked GUI to catch our attention when it's alerting would be a welcome change. Everything else is good. We don't need any additional features. From the operations perspective, as an administrator, there is nothing concerning."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
"The operators need a lot of improvement, with better integrations."
"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."
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
Mendix is ranked 2nd in Mobile Development Platforms with 48 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Mendix is rated 8.4, while 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 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, Appian, Oracle Application Express (APEX) and ServiceNow, whereas 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.