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."The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location."
"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."
"Excellent technical support."
"The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability."
"We have control of the ESXi."
"The stability has been good."
"We are able to operate client’s platform without downtime during security patch management each month and provide a good SLA (as scalability for applications is processed during heavy client website load, automatically)."
"This solution is providing a platform with OOTB features that are difficult to build from scratch."
"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."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
"The initial setup is simple, and OpenShift is open-source, so it's easy to install on any cloud platform."
"One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect."
"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."
"lacking in multi-cloud management."
"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."
"This is a fairly expensive solution."
"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."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
"The product’s integration with Windows containers and other third-party products needs improvement."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"It could use auto-scaling based on criteria such as transaction volume, queue backlog, etc. Currently, it is limited to CPU and memory."
"The monitoring part could be better to monitor the performance."
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, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) 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.