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.
"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 security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
"The security is good."
"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."
"I love to automate everything and OpenShift was been born for that. It takes care of the network layer itself and I don't need to dive into it; I can work on a top level. Our project has numerous services designed to run in Docker containers, and we have run almost all pieces in OpenShift."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"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."
"We have found the cluster management function to be very good with this product."
"I find the ease of deployment and management of microservices to be the most valuable features. The platform also has good auto-scaling capabilities."
"PCF is open, so the applications run really smoothly and with little downtime."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is the UI, it is easy to use."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring and the deployment is easier."
"It provides a set of developer-friendly tools that simplify application deployment."
"We find its stability and scalability valuable."
"The most valuable features of Pivotal Cloud Foundry are its ease of use and the command line interface has the ability to push instances to the cloud easily."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to scale. The services that connect to the database are also very good."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
"One area for improvement is the documentation. They need to make it a little bit more user-friendly. Also, if you compare certain features and the installation process with Rancher, Rancher is simpler."
"The software-defined networking part of it caused us quite a bit of heartburn. We ran into a lot of problems with the difference between on-prem and cloud, where we had to make quite a number of modifications... They've since resolved it, so it's not really an issue anymore."
"The tool lacks some features to make it compliant with Kubernetes"
"Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."
"We need some kind of a multi-cluster management solution from the Red Hat site."
"OpenShift's storage management could be better."
"There is no orchestration platform in OpenShift."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve on the technology it is a bit complex."
"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."
"The user interface should be simpler to navigate because it t can take time for users to learn it."
"The Pivotal Cloud Foundry's initial setup has a learning curve for my team, but it was easy to use."
"Regarding the setup phase, every step is a hurdle. With Pivotal Cloud Foundry, I won't get any proper resources for that. Even if I Google it, there is no proper solution for Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
"There are no synthetic application monitoring and real-time monitoring features."
"There is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the future of Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
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.