We performed a comparison between Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and Red Hat OpenShift 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."Oracle Cloud Infrastructure is about as stable as the other CSPs, but Oracle Cloud is more common in Korea."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Interface."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The object storage and managed backup solution are valuable."
"The feature I think should be improved is the option to rename the machines."
"The product is easy to use and deploy."
"It is a stable solution since it offers a very powerful performance to its users."
"The technical support is good, they have been responsive and helpful."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"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."
"I like OCP, and the management UI is better than the open-source ones."
"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."
"Key features are WildFly, because it standardizes infrastructure and the git repository and docker. Git is essential for source code and Docker for infrastructure."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"Valuable features include auto-recreate of pod if pod fails; fast rollback, with one click, to previous version."
"We are able to operate client’s platform without downtime during security patch management each month and provide a good SLA (as scalability for applications is processed during heavy client website load, automatically)."
"With the Oracle Cloud Platform, they have to give first some proper documentation with a step-by-step process. Then the customer is able to use it properly. Nowadays, the Oracle Cloud Platform requires lots of floor work."
"Technical support does not offer the best service and should be improved."
"With Oracle you have to create your own roles and it is more complex."
"Oracle Cloud is not a user-friendly tool. From an improvement perspective, I want Oracle Cloud to be more user-friendly."
"The solution is expensive. So we try to use MySQL on AWS to push the data. The tool’s support could be improved."
"The solution does not follow a retention policy while taking ad hoc backups. Since it does not follow the retention policy, we had to do the manual task to check the backups."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
"The integration tools that they offer are quite complex to use."
"The metrics in OpenShift can use improvement."
"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."
"This is a fairly expensive solution."
"There are challenges related to additional security layers, connectivity compliance for endpoints, and integration."
"We experienced issues around desktop security, that stopped us implementing a new feature that had been developed."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"The platform's documentation could be more comprehensive to cover the full spectrum of user needs. Sometimes, achieving specific goals is challenging due to a lack of detailed guidance."
"If we can have a GUI-based configuration with better flexibility then it will be great."
More Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is ranked 3rd in PaaS Clouds with 91 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 54 reviews. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is rated 7.8, while Red Hat OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) writes "Cost-effective and can be used to host OIC and APEX". On the other hand, 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". Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud, IBM Public Cloud and Alibaba Cloud, whereas Red Hat OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and VMware Tanzu Application Service. See our Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) vs. Red Hat OpenShift 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.