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."

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

"The architecture is the best. The solution is scalable if you are on a container-based solution."

"It's a good tool and a very comprehensive tool."

"Since we had limited time for our project, this solution was very helpful in getting us into production within a short time frame."

"They have built on top of Kubernetes. Most of the Kubernetes latest technology is already supported by the solution."

"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."

"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."

"OpenShift provides tools that tell me everything I have on a container, and I can make it on-premise or on a cloud infrastructure."

"The most valuable features are the monitoring and logging functionalities."

"If a customer is focused on process automation or API usage, I would not recommend this solution, but it is good to use for Data Science."

"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."

"One area for improvement is that we can't currently run Docker inside a container, as it clashes with security consents. It would be good if we could change that."

"I want to see more incorporation of native automation features; then, we could write a code, deploy it directly to OpenShift, and allow it to take care of the automated process. Using this method, we could write one application and have elements copy/pasted to other applications in the development process."

"OpenShift with Red Hat support is pretty costly."

"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."

"The monitoring and logging could be improved."

"There should be a simplification of the overall cluster environment. It should require fewer resources. Just to run a simple Hello World app, it requires about seven servers, and that's just crazy. I understand that it is fully redundant, but it's prohibitively expensive to get something simple going."

"At the outset, the initial setup was not easy. The learning curve is always there."

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

"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."

"We currently have an annual license renewal."

"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."

"If you buy the product for a year or three, you get a lot of discounts...I feel that the product is worth its cost, especially since setting it up can be done with just a few clicks."

"We paid for Cloud Pak for integration. It all depends on how many VMs or how many CPUs you are using. They do the licensing based on that."

"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."

"OpenShift pricing varies by region. For example, a simple cluster with three nodes in DAL-10 might cost around $560 to $580 per month, subject to specific configurations like memory and CPU cores."

"The pricing is expensive for licensing."