We performed a comparison between Azure Red Hat OpenShift and IBM Cloud Private 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."In Kubernetes, when traffic goes out of a pod, it has to have its own IP address. Every service that's going out requires another IP. But with OpenShift, you don't have to deal with any of those IPs because they use NAT."
"The solution's support and its automation tool that ensures we are secure and appropriately configured are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"It has a feature to automatically scale up or scale down. If my application is running in peak hours, it will automatically increase."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability."
"Excellent technical support."
"Our core banking process was monolithic. To address this, we transitioned to a microservices-based architecture. Leveraging Microsoft technologies, including Terminals version 23, we’ve revamped our banking operations. Not all services are microservices; some remain monolithic for simplicity. Containerization is pivotal, with OpenShift (based on Kubernetes and Docker) managing our microservices."
"We have control of the ESXi."
"The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location."
"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"There is room for improvement in terms of orchestration. While Azure orchestration offers valuable features, it's worth noting that it may not match the level of orchestration provided by Kubernetes itself."
"The product is expensive."
"Automation could be improved."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"lacking in multi-cloud management."
"The support and pricing need to improve."
"I've noticed that the satellite services layer requires some improvement compared to platforms like Azure or Microsoft. While it's in development, I believe the satellite layer has room for enhancement. Additionally, the DevOps layer could benefit from closer integrations, especially for using external applications like Jenkins."
"One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect."
"Auto-scaling and managing pod scaling in the microservices architecture, a core feature of IBM Cloud Private, can pose challenges, especially when dealing with larger volumes of traffic."
Azure Red Hat OpenShift is ranked 10th in PaaS Clouds with 7 reviews while IBM Cloud Private is ranked 18th in PaaS Clouds with 5 reviews. Azure Red Hat OpenShift is rated 8.4, while IBM Cloud Private is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of Azure Red Hat OpenShift writes "Runs on every platform; makes it easy to adapt to Kubernetes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Cloud Private writes "Reliable platform with significant challenges related to performance capabilities when subjected to high traffic loads". Azure Red Hat OpenShift is most compared with OpenShift, Amazon AWS and VMware Tanzu Application Service, whereas IBM Cloud Private is most compared with OpenShift, Amazon AWS, Google App Engine and Pivotal Cloud Foundry. See our Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. IBM Cloud Private 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.
