We performed a comparison between OpenShift and Oracle Java 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."The virtualization of my APIs means I no longer have to pay VMware large amounts of money to only run in-house solutions."
"It is a stable platform."
"The product's initial setup is very easy, especially compared to AWS."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud. I also find the design of OpenShift good."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the security context constraint (SCC). The solution’s security throughout the stack is good. And security context constraints provide port-level security. It's a granular level of control, where you can give privileges to certain users to work on certain applications."
"This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The automated features of auto-purging in 12c helps clear disk space on a routine basis."
"The framework supports auto-configuration. A lot of features are already there. It is reliable and user-friendly to develop code, back-end engineering, or locate specific information such as addresses."
"One key feature is getting to choose the Virtual Machine configurations while setting up the server, which is an automated process."
"Cloud has provided less maintenance."
"Backing up and recovery for my domain is very easy and fast. In addition, applying patches and undoing applied patches is effective and easy to do."
"Self-provisioning, easy to choose from WebLogic 11g to 12c."
"The ability to manage security and access the server from any location with complete security using SSH is perfect for performing crucial tasks, even while travelling."
"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."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"The solution only offers support for one server."
"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."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
"The software-defined networking part of it caused us quite a bit of heartburn. We ran into a lot of problems with the difference between on-prem and cloud, where we had to make quite a number of modifications... They've since resolved it, so it's not really an issue anymore."
"The latest 4.0 version of OpenShift disabled a few of the features we previously made use of, although this wasn't a huge deal."
"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."
"Needs better integration with other Oracle/non-Oracle products."
"There are issues with the application's development, including small glitches and errors."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The product is satisfactory but we need more training on managing the machine itself. For example, how do we add more storage, how do we extend a specific portion? I would like to see videos illustrating some of the technical tasks that we often need to do."
OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews while Oracle Java Cloud Service is ranked 19th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews. OpenShift is rated 8.4, while Oracle Java 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 Java Cloud Service writes "User-friendly code development solution needing enhancements addressing glitches". OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), whereas Oracle Java Cloud Service is most compared with Amazon AWS, Oracle Visual Builder Cloud Service and Microsoft Azure. See our OpenShift vs. Oracle Java 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.