We compared OpenShift and Pivotal Cloud Foundry based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
OpenShift and Pivotal Cloud Foundry both offer scalable, secure, and user-friendly platforms with efficient automation capabilities. While OpenShift excels in customer service and integration options, Pivotal Cloud Foundry is praised for its flexibility and extensive documentation. However, OpenShift users have raised concerns about the complex interface and setup process, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry users have highlighted scalability and support as areas for improvement. Both platforms have proven to be profitable investments with fair pricing structures.
Features: OpenShift stands out with its robust scalability, efficient containerization, strong security measures, extensive automation capabilities, and seamless integration. Pivotal Cloud Foundry excels in its scalability, flexibility, strong automation, simplified development process, and extensive documentation and resources.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for OpenShift is reported to be smooth and hassle-free, with no negative comments from users. In comparison, Pivotal Cloud Foundry also has reasonable setup costs, according to user feedback. Both products have straightforward and easily manageable licensing processes., OpenShift users have reported it as a profitable investment, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry has yielded a positive ROI with valuable features, scalability, streamlined processes, and increased productivity.
Room for Improvement: OpenShift could benefit from improvements in its user interface, initial setup process, error handling, customization options, and integrations. Pivotal Cloud Foundry would benefit from enhancements in scalability, documentation, support resources, features, flexibility, and performance optimization.
Deployment and customer support: Based on the user feedback, it appears that the implementation process for OpenShift can vary, with some users reporting spending separate timeframes on deployment and setup. In contrast, feedback for Pivotal Cloud Foundry suggests that these terms may refer to the same period, and the duration can range from weeks to months depending on specific circumstances., OpenShift's customer service received praise for its promptness, effectiveness, and expertise. Customers deemed the experience exceptional. Pivotal Cloud Foundry's service was also praised for being responsive, helpful, and reliable with knowledgeable and friendly representatives. Overall, customers seem satisfied with both services.
The summary above is based on 41 interviews we conducted recently with OpenShift and Pivotal Cloud Foundry users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"Great integration with Jenkins for constant integration and development. Supports all the major languages and environments - PHP, Java, Node.js, Ruby, etc."
"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."
"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."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"Security is also an important part of this solution. By default, things are running with limited privileges and securely confined to their own resources. This way, different users and projects can all use the same infrastructure."
"The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
"It is a scalable product...We are not facing any particular issues since most of the applications in our company are written in Java and .NET."
"The solution is stable and resilient. In our company, we do not even see any challenges with the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is auto-healing and the plenty of other features that are provided."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very easy to use compared to other cloud technologies. It has a very good performance."
"PCF is open, so the applications run really smoothly and with little downtime."
"It supports CI/CD, and is integrated with the CI/CD very well."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to scale. The services that connect to the database are also very good."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very robust, especially for building Java."
"If we can have a GUI-based configuration with better flexibility then it will be great."
"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."
"OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"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."
"We need some kind of a multi-cluster management solution from the Red Hat site."
"I'd like to see a larger service offering."
"Something that can be done better is canary deployment. So, right now, we're using blue-green deployment. The support for canary deployment would be nice."
"In the next release, they should offer additional applications for the databases, and improve the deployment experience."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is not scalable, infinitely, because when you install it on a set of virtual machines it is very hard to scale. It's easy to scale on an application level, but not it is not similar to if you were using Amazon. Amazon you can scale thousands of applications."
"It should offer more security features."
"It is not straightforward to setup."
"There is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the future of Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
"The Pivotal Cloud Foundry's initial setup has a learning curve for my team, but it was easy to use."
OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is ranked 7th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews. OpenShift is rated 8.4, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is rated 7.6. 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 Pivotal Cloud Foundry writes "Easy to use, simple to sign-in, but lacking graphical interface". OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Pivotal Cloud Foundry is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud, VMware Tanzu Application Service and Cloud Foundry. See our OpenShift vs. Pivotal Cloud Foundry 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.