We performed a comparison between OpenShift and Oracle Developer Cloud Service 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."Great integration with Jenkins for constant integration and development. Supports all the major languages and environments - PHP, Java, Node.js, Ruby, etc."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"This solution is providing a platform with OOTB features that are difficult to build from scratch."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"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."
"There is a quick deployment of the application, and we can scale out efficiently."
"Valuable features include auto-recreate of pod if pod fails; fast rollback, with one click, to previous version."
"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 solution's technical support is really good."
"The APEX solution is the most interesting part of the Oracle Developer Service. APEX is the most cost-effective and most popular service for developers. Kubernetes and Docker services are also important and very much cost-effective, and helpful for developers. If we compare Oracle to other cloud services providers, they'll also be cost-effective. The financial involvement is also a good point because other cloud services charge for Docker and Kubernetes solutions. Oracle's offering is almost free. They only charge for the VM or virtual machine. This is also an interesting part for the developers as well."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"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."
"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."
"Needs work on volume handling (although this is already better with GlusterFS). Security (SSSD) would also be an improvement."
"The solution only offers support for one server."
"Its virtual upgrades are time-consuming."
"There are challenges related to additional security layers, connectivity compliance for endpoints, and integration."
"Autoscaling is a very unique feature, but it could be useful to have more options based on traffic statistics, for example, via Prometheus. So, there should be more ready solutions to autoscale based on specific applications."
"t would be better if the open-source databases were managed. Some managed services for open-source databases are available in other cloud solutions, but Oracle doesn't have any. They should provision more managed services for open-source databases like MongoDB and PostgreSQL. These types of managed database services should be available in Oracle Cloud Service and others. There are other technical issues like the CDN network that is not directly configured to Oracle and needs support from a third party. There are also some services available in AWS and Azure that should be included in Oracle Cloud Service."
"Improvements are needed in terms of the usage of the map chart and risk management services."
More Oracle Developer Cloud Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews while Oracle Developer Cloud Service is ranked 17th in PaaS Clouds with 2 reviews. OpenShift is rated 8.4, while Oracle Developer Cloud Service is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Developer Cloud Service writes "An easy-to-install tool with good technical support that offers features like map searching and risk management services". OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Google Cloud, whereas Oracle Developer Cloud Service is most compared with Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure. See our OpenShift vs. Oracle Developer Cloud Service 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.
