We performed a comparison between OpenShift and Rackspace Cloud [EOL] 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."It is a stable platform."
"Valuable features include auto-recreate of pod if pod fails; fast rollback, with one click, to previous version."
"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."
"Two stand-out features are the security model and value-add features that don't exist in Upstream Kubernetes."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"We want to build a solution that can be deployable to any cloud because of client requirements and OpenShift allows us to do this."
"The product's initial setup is very easy, especially compared to AWS."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"Image backup is a valuable feature. Even though this is a common feature, it is very helpful for us."
"There is easy integration with multiple providers and third-party services."
"The most valuable feature for us is the support, which is really efficient."
"The product’s integration with Windows containers and other third-party products needs improvement."
"Its virtual upgrades are time-consuming."
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
"One of the features that I've observed in Tanzu Mission Control is that I can manage multiple Kubernetes environments. For instance, one of my lines of business is using OpenShift OKD; another one wants to use Google Anthos, and somebody else wants to use VMware Tanzu. If I have to manage all these, Tanzu Mission Control is giving me the opportunity to completely manage all of my Kubernetes clusters, whereas, with OpenShift, I can only manage a particular area. I can't manage other Kubernetes clusters. I would like to have the option to manage all Kubernetes clusters with OpenShift."
"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."
"This is a fairly expensive solution."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"It would be nice to have more built-in suites compared to others. It would enable easier integration."
"It doesn't offer Elastic IP like AWS. And also we can't configure our server based on region."
Earn 20 points
OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews while Rackspace Cloud [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in PaaS Clouds. OpenShift is rated 8.4, while Rackspace Cloud [EOL] is rated 8.6. 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 Rackspace Cloud [EOL] writes "There is easy integration with multiple providers and third-party services". OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), whereas Rackspace Cloud [EOL] is most compared with .
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.