HPE Ezmeral Container Platform vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform comparison

"The stability of the HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is good, and I rate it an eight out of ten."

"If customers focus on primary apps or if they are using them for data science, this is a good solution."

"OpenShift's core-based licensing model provides significant benefits regarding enterprise support and scalability."

"I think it's a pretty scalable tool...The solution's technical support has been pretty good."

"The auto scalability feature, which is based on smart agendas, determined from pre-prepared rules is the most valuable feature. You can also create different routes for deployment. Deployment types can be provided with an identifier, such as an ARB deployment. This really helped in rolling out releases without disrupting services for the end-users."

"OpenShift integrates seamlessly with our CI/CD pipelines, offering robust automation and deployment capabilities."

"Some of the primary features we leverage in the platform have to do with how we manage the cluster configurations, the properties, and the auto-scalability. These are the features that definitely provide value in terms of reducing overhead for the developers."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot to offer to developers, so they don't need to care about the infrastructure or basic setup of the containers, so you can just jump in and develop."

"It has been a good solution to deploy all containerized applications."

"The most valuable feature for me in the OpenShift Container Platform is the option to manage different containers and environments and also being able to switch among them."

"HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is not user-friendly and has many parts that are more difficult than Cloudera. It is also a complex solution and has low features for data management."

"The modernization in Ezmeral could be improved."

"In my experience, the issues are not always simply technical. They do stem from technical challenges, but they struggle with the topic of adoption. When you encounter all of the customer pull, there are normally several tiers of your client pop that can adopt either the fundamental features or a little more advanced ones. The majority of the time, the challenge is determining how to drive adoption, how to sell the product to the customer, and how much time they can spend to really utilize those advanced features. If we get into much more detail, but this is from my perspective as the platform engineer and not the end customer, the ability of the end user to be able to debug potential issues with their application That is arguably the most important, let's say, work throughput in my area."

"With the recent trend of cloud-native, fully managed serverless services, I don't see much documentation about how a customer should move from on-prem to the cloud, or what is the best way to do a lift-and-shift. Even if you are on AWS OCP, which is self-managed infra services, and you want to use the ROSA managed services, what is the best way to achieve that migration? I don't see documentation for these kinds of use cases from Red Hat."

"Setting up OpenShift locally can be challenging, particularly because it requires RHL Linux and has specific restrictions."

"One challenge is that sometimes it may be difficult to find the answers to your questions if you are not a Red Hat customer."

"The price must be improved."

"We've encountered challenges when transitioning applications between these environments."

"We encounter difficulties while accessing the environment and managing the cluster. This particular area needs improvement."

"OpenShift needs to improve their container storage."

"The pricing is expensive for licensing."

"We have to pay for the license."

"OpenShift Container Platform is highly-priced."

"Its licensing is completely incomprehensible. We have special people within our company. They discuss with Red Hat subscription managers. It is too complex, and I do not understand it. We are from the government, and we are trying to be as cheap as possible. Sometimes, I am just amazed at the amount of money that we have to pay. It is crazy."

"OpenShift with Red Hat support is pretty costly. We have done a comparison between AWS EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Services) which provides fully managed services from AWS. It's built on open-source-based Kubernetes clusters and it is much cheaper compared to Red Hat, but it is a little expensive compared to ECS provided by AWS."

"It largely depends on how much money they earn from the application being deployed; you don't normally deploy an app just for the purpose of having it. You must constantly look into your revenue and how much you spend every container, minute, or hour of how much it is working."

"The solution is expensive, and I rate it an eight out of ten. There is a subscription called OpenShift Plus, which offers additional features and products the vendor provides to complement the OpenShift Container Platform. These include ACM, Red Hat Quay, and Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation."

"The pricing and licensing are handled on an upper management level, and I'm not involved in that, but I understand the solution to be somewhat pricey."