DigitalOcean Reviews

We worked with DigitalOcean approximately three years ago. We utilized DigitalOcean for providing infrastructure as a service and virtual servers. They also offered a SaaS model, software as a service. These were the types of services we expected on their platform, though we are not focusing on DigitalOcean anymore.

The team was particularly satisfied with the flexibility of the service and the rules for managing virtual machines on DigitalOcean. There were certain restrictions in Microsoft that did not exist in DigitalOcean. This aspect was very important for many customers we were dealing with. Some customers had compliance issues with Microsoft that did not exist in DigitalOcean, which provided more flexibility to use the solution. This was the main reason our team decided to choose DigitalOcean.

There was a significant issue with the business model of DigitalOcean. The main problem was handling sub-accounts for customers on our account and the partnership model. Their business focused on end users rather than partnerships with service providers.

When we tried to explain Microsoft's partnership model, they did not understand. They would respond that implementation was on their roadmap for the next year, but nothing materialized.

As a service provider with multiple customers, each customer should have a separate tenant or account that our team can supervise. We needed accounts with full supervision and accounts where we only monitored customer consumption while giving customers full administrative privileges. This model works straightforwardly with Microsoft, Platform customers, and Amazon, but we could not find this in DigitalOcean.

In DigitalOcean, all accounts were treated as end users. For customers in Egypt who expected invoicing from our company, this was problematic as DigitalOcean would invoice them directly. The lack of a proper service provider model ultimately led us to cease operations with DigitalOcean.

We used the solution for approximately three years.

The technical implementation had no issues.

The solution was mostly stable.

The client was previously working on Azure, but due to technical reasons and obstacles with Azure hosting for their services, we decided to move to DigitalOcean instead.

This is a cloud-based solution used for hosting services for our customers. We had a team in place, though specific information about the team is not currently available.

The technical experience with DigitalOcean was smooth with no problems. Regarding development features and API integration, our development team primarily worked with local market data centers or Microsoft Azure. Information about DigitalOcean's development features is limited as we mainly used it for hosting virtual machines and servers. We did not experience DigitalOcean's capabilities in integration with billing systems, workflows, automation, or document management systems.

On a scale of 1-10, this solution receives a rating of 7.

I primarily use DigitalOcean to deploy applications. I rent the system from them, where I deploy my web servers and application servers. I use it to host my applications since moving from Oracle. It has been serving me well, and I find it cost-effective.

I use only one feature, which is the droplet, and it has been satisfactory. The droplet feature is valuable for hosting my applications as it is particularly cost-effective and serves my needs well. I also have total freedom over what I use, and I have a better user interface and documentation compared to Oracle.

DigitalOcean could offer a pay-as-you-go model similar to AWS, where I would pay for what I use rather than having fixed payments. It would be beneficial to have more flexibility without fixed payments upfront, with a very cheap price structure that adapts to resource usage.

I started using DigitalOcean about six months ago.

DigitalOcean is quite stable, and I would rate its stability at nine out of ten. I have not experienced any outages.

I have not tried vertical scaling yet, but from the documentation, it seems very easy to scale the system. I would rate the scalability at seven out of ten, as it appears straightforward to add more RAM or CPUs.

I have not had any issues that required me to contact customer support. I can handle most issues myself.

Positive

I previously used Oracle yet decided to switch to DigitalOcean due to the cost.

DigitalOcean is much cheaper compared to Oracle, Amazon, and Google, making it a better option for a startup.

The initial setup of DigitalOcean was very easy and took around two hours to complete. I did not encounter any issues during the process.

Two people were involved in the deployment, and now I only need one person for maintenance.

I do not have exact financial statistics, however, using DigitalOcean seems to be more cost-effective. It affects my balance sheet positively.

I am using the cheapest option available, which costs $50 per month. DigitalOcean offers affordable pricing, especially for startups.

I evaluated Hetzner, a company in Germany, but eventually chose DigitalOcean. I plan to stay with DigitalOcean since it offers the best alternative for me. I might consider going back to Oracle in the future for scaling, but I will maintain DigitalOcean.

For new users, I advise taking advantage of DigitalOcean's documentation, which is among the best. It makes it easy to set up, even for novices. The documentation and cost are the main reasons to consider DigitalOcean.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use DigitalOcean mostly for RDS services and cloud-related systems where we want to deploy codes and run them using nginx or other services where it is cheaper to use, and we use it to extract data. For Linux-related tasks, schedulers are easy to implement, so for those purposes we are using DigitalOcean.

We are using the Droplets feature from DigitalOcean. The Droplets feature is beneficial and easy to use.

We haven't used the DigitalOcean API for workload automation, as we only use the DigitalOcean Droplets feature, which we integrate as virtual machines to deploy and run our tasks.

The features of DigitalOcean are advantageous, as it is cheaper to use compared to others. It also has an easy installation process for obtaining a lab or system. They provide direct and easy access to these resources.

It is easy to integrate with third-party services through the DigitalOcean marketplace. The most significant aspect is that we can connect directly to the system from anywhere.

There are disadvantages, such as machines getting stuck or disconnected, requiring restarts. Sometimes we lose connection and need to check with the IT service provider from the DigitalOcean service team to reboot. There are issues where even with 8 GB RAM, the performance doesn't meet expectations. The lower cost comes with more issues and disadvantages.

We have been working with DigitalOcean since 2021.

Regarding performance for DigitalOcean, I would rate it 6 to 7, as sometimes when we run bots, they get stuck or we need to reboot, and we lose the data which we ran until that point. Issues occur when we need to back up data, as running the bots often leads to disconnection from the instance and inability to reconnect, which requires intervention from the support team.

It is approximately 50 to 60% stable, reaching 60 to 70% depending on usage levels. We use it for 8 GB RAM for Linux-based services, and that meets our requirements.

There are no limitations in scalability; we can scale up or down without issues.

DigitalOcean support is rated lower than AWS's because we encounter issues more frequently, indicating that we are not receiving enough effective support.

Positive

There are technical differences between services. AWS provides a vast number of services, including AI services, whereas DigitalOcean services are limited. DigitalOcean primarily provides a few related services, mostly around machinery.

Regarding DigitalOcean's cost-effective pricing model, while I don't have in-depth knowledge, it is cheaper compared to AWS. Our DevOps team confirms this is the more economical option. For RDS, increasing tables and memories leads to higher prices on AWS, while costs remain lower in DigitalOcean.

As a service provider, there aren't any returns from DigitalOcean.

I am using AWS as a cloud provider.

I am a lead developer, currently working in that role. We are a customer of DigitalOcean. They can reach me via email to confirm anything regarding my review. I am willing to be a reference for DigitalOcean and can be referenced as an expert.

I would rate the overall experience with DigitalOcean an 8, indicating it is sufficient.

It's been a good choice for us for some services. We generally have several deployments. For instance, for some static Angular applications, it was a clear choice to run them on Cloudflare, which performs very well in this context. All the assets go on DigitalOcean.

Additionally, we already have a VPN with our solar farm in Italy. In terms of quality of service, it is fairly good.

The issue with DigitalOcean is primarily the latency. So, when you have a mixed system with some components staying here, and then we encounter network latency, it's not optimal. Our present Kubernetes installation, which has been running for three months, is on DigitalOcean. 

However, we experience latency when communicating between the CRM server in Milano, our premises, and the cloud system.

Otherwise, with Google, we have three data centers, including one in Milano, so everything is much faster.

So, network latency could be improved in DigitalOcean.  

I have been using DigitalOcean for three years now. 

The main thing is that when you're betting your company on a cloud solution, you want to be sure you have reliable support. That's why we chose DigitalOcean over Google Cloud.

The support that we had from them was mostly really pretty good. But there is still room for improvement in support. We could get better local technical support from DigitalOcean.

Positive

We started using DigitalOcean based on word-of-mouth recommendations. DigitalOcean has been one of the early providers in the field, and I've been involved in internet setups since the early 1990s.

We liked the solution's history and expertise, and we've been working with them on some developments.

The initial setup was very friendly, and we had no major problems setting up things.  

The deployment took a couple of weeks of full-time work. But before, we had to do all our own preparation in preparing, in moving to containerized applications and all these other things. 

Then, when we were set, first, we did the test with systems in our office, and then we moved to DigitalOcean. Now, we have removed everything from Amazon. That's basically the savings that we have. 

So, the process took a couple of weeks or so of setup, and this is no big deal. Now, once we have knowledge of what the matter is, containerized applications are so easy, much better than virtual machine handling and stuff like that by any Microsoft. 

It's a learning curve, but then you go downhill. So now we are basically downhill. The learning curve for a company is that it took six months to start analyzing and moving the piece to the other piece and all the interconnection of subsystems. It includes the different containers of different kinds that you are deploying.  

We had a team of five people for deployment.

I would rate DigitalOcean's pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is very expensive. They are competitive, but they are a bit on the pricey side.

Another area of improvement is support. 

We haven't evaluated Azure yet, but it's certainly an option. At some point, we have to decide whether we want fish or meat, meaning we can't have everything. We may keep some services on DigitalOcean, and we'll see about pricing for Azure.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The only issue is the lack of local support.

We use the cloud platform for software development, including CI/CD implementations.

The platform is straightforward and stable. It offers a reliable cloud service for software development, making it a valuable asset.

The platform could enhance its features, particularly for ETL processes. Additionally, more integration features would be highly beneficial.

The product has good stability. 

The product is scalable. 

The technical support services are good. 

The initial setup process is easy.

The pricing is moderate and reasonable for a mid-tier cloud platform.

For users looking for a cost-effective cloud platform, DigitalOcean is a good choice.

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

I was using DigitalOcean for VMs and Kubernetes clusters because it offers Kubernetes at the cheapest amount with the same data services but with limited services. Other cloud solutions like AWS and Google Cloud provide many ML and AI services.

The user interface is nice, and it is very easy to use. Anyone can use it.

Other solutions are proving the monitoring feature, like AWS having GuardDuty and SAP having services for logs and monitoring. DigitalOcean doesn’t have any other benefits.

I have been using DigitalOcean as a customer.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine-point five out of ten.

I use this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine-point five out of ten.

I have used cloud services like AWS, GCP and Oracle. We switched to DigitalOcean because of the low pricing for the Kubernetes clusters.

The initial setup is very easy and takes five minutes. Even a ten-year-old kid can use it.

The solution provides the cheapest cloud in comparison to the other cloud solutions.

DigitalOcean has to beat the other cloud giants. They provide many services at high prices. It will offer many services to the AI and ML with GPUs. We'll go with the DigitalOcean.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I am using DigitalOcean for the handling of static files and domains. I use the DNS part to create droplets and develop the backend with OGS.

I don't use the deploy aspect of the application because there is a script running on the system that does it.

The most outstanding aspect of DigitalOcean is its user interface and ease of use. Compared to more complex solutions, such as AWS, DigitalOcean's platform is highly intuitive and user-friendly.

The solution could improve by having integration with GitHub.

I have been using DigitalOcean for approximately three years.

DigitalOcean is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup of DigitalOcean is easy and it can be done in half a day.

The price of DigitalOcean could be lower. It is expensive. it's higher than other solutions available in the market. We pay approximately $20 to $25 a month to use the solution. The price we pay is for the shared CPU option.

I am using the solution because a friend recommended it to me.

If you require a digital machine and intend to develop your code without the need for infrastructure, DigitalOcean could be an excellent option due to its straightforward setup process. However, for smaller client projects, DigitalOcean may be too robust, and alternatives, such as AWS, Google Cloud, or Filebase may offer similar features at a lower cost.

I rate intuitive an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is testing employees' awareness of malicious email content.

Employees were made aware of the threats of phishing emails using DigitalOcean has improved our organization by lowering the number of malicious content entering the company's infrastructure.

The most valuable feature is the ease with which you can create a phishing server and use it.

I have been using DigitalOcean for two years.

It is stable.

The solution is scalable depending on your subscription and selection of how much RAM and storage you require.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The implementation was done in-house and only took 30 minutes.

There is no licensing fee but there is a subscription cost based on how much RAM and storage you require.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

For anyone interested in the solution I recommend going to YouTube where there is a lot of training content that is helpful.

We primarily use the solution as a service cloud for DNS management. 

The solution is easy to set up.

For DNS server management, we haven't had any problem scaling. 

It is stable. 

The solution doesn't provide many features. 

I'd like to have more integration features. 

We found the solution to be a bit expensive. 

I've used the solution for around two years. I haven't used it for too long.

The stability is okay. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is fine. It can scale pretty easily. 

We have three to four users on the solution at this time. They are mostly managers. 

We've never reached out to technical support. 

This solution was here when I arrived at the company. 

I did not use other solutions previously. 

The setup is straightforward.

The initial setup only took a few days. We just needed one person, an admin, to handle the maintenance and setup. 

We handled the initial setup in-house. 

I do not have access to ROI information. I'm not sure if the company witnessed any ROI while using the product. 

The solution is a bit expensive. There are no extra costs beyond the initial licensing fee.

I'm an end-user.

We are not using the latest version. 

I would recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate it eight out of ten. 

We are developing an app on React and Node and we needed a cloud solution which is what we use DigitalOcean for.

The technical support for this solution could be improved. 

We have been using this solution for six months. 

So far, we have not experienced any issues with stability. There was a bit of downtime last month for a few minutes but it was fixed quickly. Other than that, adding servers, droplets and containers work seamlessly. 

We are currently still using this solution in a testing environment with 20 users. We will only know how we can scale this solution once it goes live. 

The customer support team are very responsive. 

The initial setup was straightforward. There is one person from our DevOps team and he manages the cloud deployment and optimization. 

This is a pay as you go solution. There is no license and it is usage based.

We went through rough pricing estimates when evaluating our options. We didn't have a huge technical requirement and so pricing was our main consideration. This solution was the lowest and was one of the top three recommended companies next to Azure and AWS.

DigitalOcean is a good solution and I would recommend it to others. I would rate it a ten out of ten.