We performed a comparison between Red Hat OpenShift and SAP Cloud Platform 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."This solution is providing a platform with OOTB features that are difficult to build from scratch."
"The scalability of OpenShift combined with Kubernetes is good. At least from the software standpoint, it becomes quite easy to handle the scalability through configuration. You need to constantly monitor the underlying infrastructure and ensure that it has adequate provisioning. If you have enough infrastructure, then managing the scalability is quite easy which is done through configuration."
"Scaling and uptime of the applications are positives."
"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."
"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."
"Two stand-out features are the security model and value-add features that don't exist in Upstream Kubernetes."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"The stability has been good."
"One of the best features of this solution is that it is web-based and you can log in and work on it from anywhere."
"The solution is very useful and interactive with a dashboard for viewing other interfaces."
"It's suitable for various sizes of companies. I have used it with big companies and with small ones as well."
"Feature-wise, I like it since it allows you to integrate with multiple applications. There are available connectors that allow you to integrate."
"Scalability is one of the benefits that we have in using the product."
"SAP has provided very good support."
"The product is very stable."
"The ability to build custom applications on the BTP platform, reducing customization on the SAP HANA system and improving performance and management."
"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."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs. Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime. Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud. I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster."
"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."
"There are challenges related to additional security layers, connectivity compliance for endpoints, and integration."
"The metrics in OpenShift can use improvement."
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
"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."
"SAP Cloud Platform's installation is not straightforward. You need a person with knowledge to handle it."
"From what I understand, the SAP Cloud Platform is for implementation on AWS or Azure, and it's not meant to be a full-fledged cloud solution, so while using the platform, an area for improvement is that it has fewer offerings and is less flexible when compared to AWS. AWS has a lot more flexibility than the SAP Cloud Platform. I've also used Azure in college and AWS in between, and I prefer AWS over the SAP Cloud Platform. The only reason I would ever stick with the SAP Cloud Platform is to create applications integrated with SAP or with other companies within SAP, such as SuccessFactors. When you go into the SAP Cloud Platform web page, it's a bit bland and has relatively limited offerings. For example, there doesn't seem to be in-house MongoDB support, but I realize there's in-house support for the PostgreSQL database, so there are fewer offerings in the SAP Cloud Platform. Yes, you can always go for a database on the actual MongoDB server rather than depending on the offerings of the SAP Cloud Platform. However, it's still better to support MongoDB from the platform, so payment is consolidated, rather than going to a different location to make a payment. Another room for improvement in the SAP Cloud Platform is the need to create an SAP subaccount if you need to use the platform unless you have an SSO login by Google or if you're using a different identity provider such as Microsoft or Google. Instead of requiring dependency on SAP, it would be good if users could use the SAP Cloud Platform even without a subaccount on SAP. For example, when hosting an application on AWS or Azure, you don't have to create an account in Amazon or Microsoft. You can still do it using Google. You can use almost anything, so I'd like SAP to improve by removing the dependency, particularly the requirement to create an SAP account to use the SAP Cloud Platform."
"They are still developing this product. It does not really have 100% of the necessary features available to properly service business clients"
"When I started looking at the client's IT architecture, I started by doing a study of their services, DVM, data volume, and management services. According to the results, they could be a lot better at this."
"The areas I think this solution should improve are monitoring and adapting."
"The current pricing model is credit-based. We would like to have more information about the usage of the existing applications."
"The main problem is that there aren't any easy migrations from SAP PO to SAP CPI, so from process orchestration to cloud platform integration."
"One crucial aspect where SAP lags behind in flexibility is customization to suit specific business requirements. SAP needs to understand that customization is inevitable and should be more supportive of business-driven customization."
Red Hat OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews while SAP Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in PaaS Clouds with 38 reviews. Red Hat OpenShift is rated 8.4, while SAP Cloud Platform is rated 7.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Cloud Platform writes "Provides seamless integration with CTI for streamlined data synchronization but complexity and challenges in migrating existing applications to the low-code model for custom application development". Red Hat OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Heroku, whereas SAP Cloud Platform is most compared with Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Mule Anypoint Platform and Pivotal Cloud Foundry. See our Red Hat OpenShift vs. SAP Cloud Platform 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.