We performed a comparison between IBM Public Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Oracle and others in PaaS Clouds."What I like most in IBM Public Cloud is how easy it is to create serverless functions. They are called IBM functions, but in AWS, they are called Lambda functions. Those are pretty standard, and another thing I like the most is that you have fewer restrictions on the amount of data you can transfer across those functions. IBM Public Cloud is way more flexible than AWS. I also like that IBM Public Cloud is pretty straightforward to integrate. As long as you have all the tools IBM provides you, getting everything up and running is straightforward."
"It's straightforward, has a good environment and is cost-effective."
"The availability is second to none. Customer support is very good."
"The price of IBM Cloud is most valuable for us. The service is personable and gives us a good rapport. I can't say it's the best, but it was enough for our needs."
"I've found the stability to be excellent. The performance is good."
"This product is very good because it is accessible in remote locations, and anyone can deploy from any place."
"One of the features that I really like about IBM Cloud is the flexibility where you can order your own hardware."
"The beauty of cloud service providers, especially public cloud service providers, is that they are scalable every time when you need them because their payment model is pay-as-you-go."
"The most valuable feature is the single sign-on with multifactor authentication."
"Feature-wise, I like its stability. Also, it is easy to access the solution and its options."
"One feature I like in Microsoft Azure is its ability to host and run applications on virtual machines. It is a basic yet crucial capability for our team."
"The management part of it is good. Its UI is simple to use. The cost management and billing part is also good. These are the top things that I like in Azure."
"Azure Active Directory: Has powerful security and auditing capabilities that we use to secure all our apps."
"Virtual machine services, in SaaS services, M365, and Data Lake are all popular with our clients."
"The user interface is very nice and makes everything easy to use."
"The ability to scale down is a big thing."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the great customer service and the ability for our team to get assistance when we need it."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"In terms of implementation, OpenShift is very user-friendly, which is an advantage. We are using it along with GitLab for implementing CI/CD pipelines. That's a feature that other products also have, but in OpenShift, we find it good."
"Its interface is good. The other part is the seamless integration with the stack that I have. Because my stack is mostly of Red Hat, which is running on top of VMware virtualization, I have had no issues with integrating both of these and trying to install them. We had a seamless integration with the other non-Red Hat products as well."
"The solution provides a lot of flexibility to the application team for running their applications in the container platform, without needing to monitor the entire infrastructure all the time. It automatically scales and automatically self-heals. There is also a mechanism to alert the team in case it is over-committing or overutilizing the application."
"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."
"Key features are WildFly, because it standardizes infrastructure and the git repository and docker. Git is essential for source code and Docker for infrastructure."
"It is a stable platform."
"I would like to see a more user-friendly deployment process in the next release of this solution."
"It could be more secure."
"The solution needs to be more autonomous. It should let the DL go to allow for more jobs on the cloud. It could have a better interface as well."
"Maybe performance enhancers and reports could be better improved. If they do so, it would be better. Of all the drawbacks I saw, this would be the biggest enhancement."
"They could improve on customizing reporting capabilities."
"Normally, for any cloud, we get a lot of information on the web, but that is missing in the case of IBM Public Cloud. We need some technical support documents. That is the only thing missing in IBM Public Cloud."
"Recently, we just faced some issues with the operating system due to the end of life of CentOS 6...So, then the client wanted to try it out under AWS instead of IBM. In short, it has some complexities."
"The product should offer more computing, similar to Amazon."
"We like that they have the new capabilities, but sometimes they're deprecating capabilities faster than we can handle. If we had to improve it, we would want to stay on some of these older capabilities a bit longer."
"The pricing can be reduced."
"One key area for improvement is the Azure load balancer. Currently, it only supports virtual machines (VMs) running in the same virtual network (vNet) on the backend. They should definitely support machines or IPs running on-premises (prem) or in other Azure VNets. GCP and AWS already support that. So, Azure Load Balancer should support that as well"
"I would prefer Microsoft Azure to increase the free trial, then developers can take advantage, and it could increase their sales."
"The price could be improved as well as the interface speed, and technical support."
"The main issue is the lack of notifications for updates. Processes for certain operations, like connecting to Git repositories, have changed without sufficient communication. A system to announce or update users about these changes would be very helpful."
"Integration with other services could be much better."
"The documentation can be outdated and is not as clear in Microsoft Azure as it is in AWS or Google."
"OpenShift's storage management could be better."
"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."
"The solution only offers support for one server."
"Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
"It would be great if it supported Bitbucket repositories too."
"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 solution needs to support the new features in Kubernetes more quickly."
