My main use case for Red Hat OpenShift is serving telco customers. A quick specific example of how I use Red Hat OpenShift for my telco customers involves different applications that reside in containers on those particular container platforms. This workload includes different parts such as AMF and UPF, which are the basic functions that I normally use as applications on Red Hat OpenShift.
Red Hat OpenShift Kubernetes Engine
Red Hat LimitedExternal reviews
34 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Hybrid cloud platform has standardized telecom workloads and delivers consistent operations
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
Red Hat OpenShift has positively impacted our organization by adding significantly to our revenues because what we were doing through other vendors shows that with vanilla Kubernetes, there are many features and extra advantages in Red Hat OpenShift. It has had a strong positive impact on our organization by standardizing how we build, deploy, and operate applications across environments. One of the biggest benefits is its operational consistency. It provides a uniform Kubernetes platform across both on-premises and cloud environments. From an availability and reliability perspective, Red Hat OpenShift's built-in lifecycle management and automated upgrades, along with self-healing capabilities, have improved overall system stability.
Currently, I am not equipped with specific outcomes or metrics that demonstrate this positive impact, but it has significantly improved all these parameters.
What is most valuable?
The best features Red Hat OpenShift offers include security, hybrid multi-cloud, and bare metal flexibility. The Operator framework and lifecycle automation are also part of it, along with improved CI/CD and GitOps pipelines, and strong security with compliance features.
In my day-to-day operations, I find lifecycle automation to be the most valuable feature. Additionally, Red Hat OpenShift provides developers with hands-on extra capabilities and experiences.
What needs improvement?
Red Hat OpenShift can be improved by reducing its complexity. We could also have better UX, especially for day two operations. There is always some scope for optimization that we can address.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Red Hat OpenShift for four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Red Hat OpenShift is stable and offers the most stability among all the competitors and enterprise-level solutions available.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability of Red Hat OpenShift is great, with many options available to scale it according to your requirement or demand. The extent to which you can scale depends on the environment you are deploying it in.
How are customer service and support?
The customer support is great, and we have many channels through which we can approach them.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have previously used VMware and Wind River, and while we still use them for some of our customers, we switched to Red Hat OpenShift because we found the best features there.
What was our ROI?
I do not have any readily available data regarding return on investment metrics, but I can say that we see relevant improvements in money saved, time saved, and fewer employees needed.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing involves a different team that handles all these aspects, so as a SRE, I do not need to worry about these things.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing Red Hat OpenShift, we evaluated other options such as Mesos, but Red Hat OpenShift is more futuristic.
What other advice do I have?
My advice for others looking into using Red Hat OpenShift is that you need to first get hands-on experience with the technology. It is based on vanilla Kubernetes, but they have added additional capabilities for which having basic knowledge is essential. You should go through their portals and lab environments available.
Secure integration has become standard as I run complex platforms with streamlined operations
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for Red Hat OpenShift is to set up the TIBCO platform on OpenShift, run applications on OpenShift using the TIBCO platform's data plane, and also being a platform engineer and a Kubernetes expert, I also tune Red Hat OpenShift to the most secure platform.
A quick specific example of how I use Red Hat OpenShift with the TIBCO platform involves the TIBCO platform's control plane and data plane that runs on Kubernetes. TIBCO is a vendor company which provides a lot of integration and messaging products along with various integration capabilities with almost any technology, and all of this makes it easier when the TIBCO platform runs on a Kubernetes platform. Everything is API-based, AI-ready, and everything works seamlessly on top of a Kubernetes platform.
What is most valuable?
The features of Red Hat OpenShift that I have configured include Red Hat OpenShift Security Context Constraints to cater to environments where everything is locked down and everything is monitored. In today's world, where people are trying to hack into the system, these things are quite important for any infrastructure or platform engineer or also a solution architect. Along with various other features of Red Hat OpenShift, it is quite important for me to design this easily and make it more secure.
The features of Red Hat OpenShift that stand out to me include the router configuration, the DNS integration, and many other small features, especially the UI which is out-of-the-box and the API support behind the scenes. All of this is quite handy and useful for many people who are using Red Hat OpenShift.
Red Hat OpenShift has positively impacted my organization by making many things easier to run securely, especially for a vendor company like TIBCO and their customers to run their application securely along with the TIBCO platform on Red Hat OpenShift.
Red Hat OpenShift offers very comprehensive security standards, everything is designed based on a zero-trust security framework, and I appreciate that about it. Most of the monitoring and observability part has been already taken by Red Hat OpenShift, along with the high availability aspects. Even when I am setting up Red Hat OpenShift on Azure or on-prem, it has various options and it is quite a mature platform compared to setting up my own Kubernetes.
What needs improvement?
There are a couple of sections related to security context constraints which can be improved in Red Hat OpenShift, wherein I am creating multiple Security Context Constraints for the same service account in Kubernetes. That can be improved.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Red Hat OpenShift for almost two years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Red Hat OpenShift is stable. It creates multiple master nodes as a design, so I have a good experience with it.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I have not tested Red Hat OpenShift's scalability, but I have checked the configuration, and it seems it is quite scalable and configurable.
How are customer service and support?
I have never had to use customer support in my case.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have previously used AKS, and I still use AKS. I did not switch, but for new clusters, I have been using Red Hat OpenShift.
How was the initial setup?
My overall impression is that a lot of time is saved while setting up Red Hat OpenShift Kubernetes. It definitely has a big ROI in terms of maintenance, having to hire many people to set up Kubernetes in a right way.
What about the implementation team?
Not me, but for customers, they purchased Red Hat OpenShift through the AWS Marketplace.
What was our ROI?
My overall impression is that a lot of time is saved while setting up Red Hat OpenShift Kubernetes. It definitely has a big ROI in terms of maintenance, having to hire many people to set up Kubernetes in a right way.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing shows that Red Hat OpenShift comes out as an expensive solution compared to having AKS, GKE, or EKS.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I have evaluated AKS, GKE, EKS, and setting up my own Kubernetes platform, especially using Red Hat OpenShift itself.
What other advice do I have?
My advice to others looking into using Red Hat OpenShift is to go into the details and set up Red Hat OpenShift in the right way. I would rate this product an 8 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Private AI agents have been deployed securely and integrate smoothly with observability tools
What is our primary use case?
I'm changing to AI, so I'm implementing platforms for agents, specifically for artificial intelligence and agentic platforms.
It is to deploy agents in a sovereign and private tenant. Basically, when customers don't like to share their information with any cloud provider, they prefer to keep the information local. So they deploy their own private cloud, and most of them are using Red Hat OpenShift.
What is most valuable?
I find support for Kubernetes and security are the most useful features in Red Hat OpenShift.
What I appreciate from Red Hat OpenShift is the capacity to provide an integrated and secure environment that is more or less better than creating the environment from scratch or based on standard Kubernetes. Red Hat OpenShift provides a lot of features that help us to operate the platform in a very professional and efficient way, instead of using low-level tools provided with the open-source capacities. For us, it is a very practical environment in which we can quickly develop features—not using directly AI capacities from Red Hat OpenShift, but our own capacities, in a very integrated way.
The main benefits Red Hat OpenShift provides for me as a final user include the capacity to integrate third-party tools and also the integration between observability, security, and monitoring capacities.
What needs improvement?
Red Hat OpenShift is very expensive. I am starting to evaluate the capacities specifically related to artificial intelligence. The suite also integrates a lot of open source, which is more or less aligned with my strategy that always tries to use open source. However, as far as I know, it's not so flexible using the components by themselves, but I don't really have firsthand experience. That's what I've been told by the people working with them. It's not so flexible, but you win in integration and lose a little in the capacity of flexibility or making your platform more flexible.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been working with Red Hat OpenShift for maybe one year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I rate the stability of Red Hat OpenShift as quite robust. I'm satisfied with it.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
From one to ten, I would rate the ability to scale as nine.
How are customer service and support?
I would also rate the technical support from Red Hat as nine.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I no longer use VMware and Tanzu data solutions because I changed my profile and my department.
How was the initial setup?
For us, the initial setup for Red Hat OpenShift is complex. It's complex, but also powerful.
What about the implementation team?
In my case, I directly work with Red Hat for purchasing the license.
What was our ROI?
Overall, I would give Red Hat OpenShift a final mark of nine.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
As a competitor to Red Hat OpenShift, I think Rancher may be a possibility, but it's very, very far from what Red Hat OpenShift provides. I don't really know any other commercial distribution of Kubernetes. The alternative would be to create the cluster by yourself, using the components or the open-source components, but it would be really, really complicated. Also, alternatives in cloud exist, using the Kubernetes services from cloud providers like Fargate or AKS. But I would rather prefer to create Red Hat OpenShift on top of the cloud instead of using it. It's more expensive, obviously, but we have good experiences.
What other advice do I have?
In terms of functionality, I'm working with Red Hat OpenShift in terms of infrastructure and monitoring, so in these capacities, we are very satisfied.
I can recommend it to other users. Overall, I would give Red Hat OpenShift a final mark of nine.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Private Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Modernization to secure microservices has improved uptime and observability for critical apps
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for Red Hat OpenShift is that we had several security tools that we deployed to Red Hat OpenShift platform, specifically when we were migrating our applications from monolithic architecture to microservices, and our OpenShift platform was using some of the AWS VMs as master and worker nodes, so it was completely on AWS, and we actually set it up from scratch, setting up those projects to be used for our applications and then deploying them with Red Hat OpenShift version 4, which we started using five years back, as it was the latest at that point in time, and then we continued to operate and run our applications there.
A quick, specific example of an application I deployed on Red Hat OpenShift is a banking-based application which we moved from a monolithic architecture to a microservices architecture, and we completely deployed it end-to-end, split into 10 plus microservices, and then it was deployed to Red Hat OpenShift platform 4.
What is most valuable?
The best features that Red Hat OpenShift offers in my experience include being a pre-assembled product where Red Hat actually makes choices for you, which for example, as a CloudOps Engineer, means I don't have to explicitly go into CLI because the web-based UI is simple and helpful for debugging, and they've integrated the logging of the application within Red Hat OpenShift. I really appreciate the automated updates, built-in observability comes with pre-configured Prometheus and Grafana stack for monitoring our cluster health, and the native tooling it has such as Red Hat OpenShift GitOps, which is a Red Hat supported Argo CD, and the integration into clusters are based on role-based access control with security by default, where Red Hat OpenShift is quite secure out of the box, having those strict permissions and using Security Context Constraints, and especially the immutable OS and Red Hat OpenShift virtualization, which is something that is really helpful.
Red Hat OpenShift has positively impacted my organization primarily through observability, as for us, application uptime matters a lot when providing public-facing products consumed by customers, and hence, we're using that to keep refining our application and products through observability metrics and keeping pace with market trends, as we promised 99.99% uptime to our customers, and the observability in Red Hat OpenShift is really helping us a lot with that.
What needs improvement?
Areas where Red Hat OpenShift can be improved include the licensing being a bit complex and maybe expensive, as that is something in the hands of the organization's higher management, especially when those licensing agreements are done, and I think Red Hat OpenShift is quite resource-heavy because the control plane and default monitoring stack consume significant resources, meaning for small clusters, a large percentage of compute goes just to running Red Hat OpenShift itself, not our apps.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Red Hat OpenShift for close to six years across those different organizations.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Red Hat OpenShift is stable in my experience.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Red Hat OpenShift's scalability is really good.
How are customer service and support?
Customer support is really good because so far in our case, we have always received a prompt response, and they have been really helpful to us. I would rate the customer support a 10 out of 10.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We did not use any other solution before Red Hat OpenShift.
How was the initial setup?
Red Hat OpenShift is deployed in my organization on AWS.
What was our ROI?
We have saved a lot of time with Red Hat OpenShift.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing would suggest that it was more into a high cost, but then again, I'm an engineer, so this is taken care of by the higher management, and I don't have any definitive answer.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We did not evaluate any other solution before choosing Red Hat OpenShift because we wanted to use a licensed product for Kubernetes that has enterprise support.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate Red Hat OpenShift a 9 out of 10 overall. I choose a nine for Red Hat OpenShift because for such kind of tools, there is always room for improvement, as I already mentioned the things that can be improved in my previous answer. I would suggest that it's quite better if you're using Red Hat OpenShift for an enterprise solution, as it's really better to have the enterprise support which Red Hat OpenShift offers, and it's easy to use for Kubernetes-based applications.
Enables seamless workload management and supports enterprise-grade integration
What is our primary use case?
Our primary use case for Red Hat OpenShift involves leveraging its container orchestration platform to enhance application modernization efforts. We host containerized applications and integrate GPU capabilities for optimized deployment of AI workloads.
How has it helped my organization?
Simplifies transitioning from legacy systems to containerized environments, enabling better scalability and flexibility.
Provides GPU integration and infrastructure that support the deployment and scaling of data-intensive AI workloads.
Accelerates delivery pipelines with robust CI/CD features, helping teams bring applications to market faster.
What is most valuable?
Scalability and High Availability: OpenShift makes it easy to scale applications horizontally or vertically based on demand. Its high-availability capabilities ensure reliability and minimize downtime.
Built-in Security Features: Enhanced security tools like role-based access control (RBAC), network segmentation, and image vulnerability scans protect containerized applications.
Operator Framework: This simplifies the management of Kubernetes applications, automating tasks like installation, upgrades, and maintenance.
What needs improvement?
Simplified Networking: While OpenShift has advanced networking features, simplifying configurations for complex setups could make it more accessible to users with varying expertise levels
Resource Management Visibility: Improving the display of limits and quotas issues can help developers better manage resources and avoid bottlenecks.
Availability and capacity reporting
For how long have I used the solution?
We have approximately two years of experience with Red Hat OpenShift.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Red Hat OpenShift is a stable solution.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I would rate the scalability of Red Hat OpenShift as an eight or nine out of ten. The platform has shown significant improvement with each new version, adding valuable features while making it easy to scale by adding or removing worker nodes and storage.
How are customer service and support?
Red Hat's technical support is good, and I would rate it a nine out of ten.
What about the implementation team?
We provide a range of services, acting as implementers, integrators, and partners with Red Hat OpenShift.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Red Hat OpenShift has a high price, and the licensing model can be prohibitive for smaller customers. Initially, licensing was per CPU, with a memory cap, but the price has doubled, making it difficult to justify for clients with smaller compute needs.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Not tested any other solution
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate Red Hat OpenShift a nine out of ten. Despite the higher price and needed improvements, OpenShift is an enterprise-grade solution that meets most business needs. I would rate the overall solution a 9 out of 10.
Migration success with improved security and integration features
What is our primary use case?
I used OpenShift for the enterprise service cost system of a bank. We completed the migration of the bank's core banking system using OpenShift as the infrastructure. OpenShift acts as an orchestration platform and is used as our private cloud.
What is most valuable?
OpenShift is a spin-off of Kubernetes, built on top of Kubernetes. It has features that enhance security, ease of deployment, and service exposure compared to Kubernetes. It also provides good integration with GitOps and ArgoCD.
Additionally, OpenShift offers an easy-to-use graphical user interface for cluster management, making it more accessible for administrators.
What needs improvement?
I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive. Making updates a yearly occurrence could be beneficial. In terms of self-service for developers, there is room for improvement. The removal of Grafana and HPA from monitoring caused some issues. Observability could be more robust.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been working with OpenShift for four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
OpenShift is very stable. I've had my cluster running for over four years, with issues caused more by poor monitoring or user error rather than the product itself.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
OpenShift is highly scalable, allowing us to manage thousands of pods effectively. We've implemented features like Horizontal Pod Autoscaling to adapt based on demand and integrated with F5 for high availability.
How are customer service and support?
Red Hat's technical support is responsive and effective. I had 50 to 59 support cases, many of which were resolved quickly depending on the urgency and expertise needed.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We moved from a legacy system to OpenShift due to its stability and capabilities provided by being backed by Red Hat.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was straightforward, especially on the cloud where it was set up quickly. The on-premises setup was more challenging due to additional configurations required.
What about the implementation team?
We handled the implementation internally with our team, which consisted of three engineers managing the analytics environment.
What was our ROI?
Moving to OpenShift resulted in increased system stability and reduced downtime, which contributed to operational efficiency. Although it increased costs, it helped modernize our infrastructure.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing for OpenShift includes support and licensing, which costs approximately $400.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We did not evaluate any other options aside from our legacy system before choosing OpenShift.
What other advice do I have?
If you have the skill and experience, Kubernetes can be used in production. OpenShift provides extra coverage in terms of security and management. Have a disaster recovery plan due to frequent updates.
I rate OpenShift at nine out of ten.
Automation boosts load management with promising growth in application modernization
What is our primary use case?
The main goal is the modernization of our applications. We have a few applications running on mainframes, which increase costs. We aim to modernize them on containers and microservices. We are shifting towards Kubernetes or Docker. As an enterprise client, the best solution is Red Hat OpenShift paired with support from Red Hat.
What is most valuable?
A valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift is its ability to handle increased loads by automatically adding nodes. This automation impresses us and benefits us in managing loads on applications.
Although we have just started the transition and are moving slowly, OpenShift has been helpful in modernizing our applications, and it is a positive step forward.
What needs improvement?
The GUI could have more capabilities, particularly around virtualization. Some features are missing, such as storage migrations, when compared with VMware.
As we use both Red Hat virtualization and OpenShift together, differentiating between them becomes challenging. We should aim to include VMware-like capabilities to be competitive, especially considering cost factors.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with OpenShift for a year now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Right now, I would rate the stability of OpenShift as eight out of ten. It performs well under load, providing the desired output.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Red Hat OpenShift scales excellently, with a rating of ten out of ten. It allows for scaling as much as needed, which is a significant advantage.
How are customer service and support?
We are currently dealing with both local support and Red Hat support, and they have been amazing.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were a VMware house for a long time, about ten to 15 years. However, the cost for VMware skyrocketed, making it hard to continue using it.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is complex.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The cost is a crucial factor, particularly with licensing. As things evolve, companies increasingly focus on cost-effectiveness.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Kubernetes, as an open-source option, is a significant competitor, particularly for those dealing with cost concerns.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate OpenShift nine out of ten overall.
It is suitable for any company, regardless of size. Smaller companies may opt for open-source solutions like Kubernetes. However, OpenShift offers comprehensive support, which is appealing to enterprise clients.
Containerized applications scale efficiently and has flexible pricing
What is our primary use case?
We are building an application that is a containerized application, and we are using Red Hat OpenShift for that application.
What is most valuable?
The concept of containers and scaling on demand is a feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat OpenShift.
Our solutions can easily scale to any number of users or requests if we are running on the cloud. The cloud also supports the pay-as-you-go model, so scalability is the biggest benefit.
What needs improvement?
They could work on the pricing model, making it more flexible and possibly lower.
For how long have I used the solution?
It has been almost one and a half years, maybe a little more.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability somewhere around eight to nine out of ten. It is very stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is easy to scale Red Hat OpenShift. The on-demand provisioning of pods and auto-scaling, whether horizontal or vertical, is the best part.
How are customer service and support?
I have been pretty happy in the past with getting support from Red Hat. We haven't had many cases regarding the support for OpenShift, however, we opened a couple of tickets, and they were satisfactorily answered.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have also used the VMware environment in our setup.
How was the initial setup?
I would say the initial setup is not very complex, but moderately complex, similar to other containerized platforms like Kubernetes. Compared to what we are used to running, such as other virtualization platforms like VMware, it is moderately complex.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Red Hat can improve on the pricing part by making it more flexible and possibly on the lower side.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
For the very basic features, I can compare it with VMware Tanzu as we are running a basic setup at the moment.
What other advice do I have?
I rate Red Hat OpenShift somewhere around eight out of ten.
AI integration sounds like a good idea as AI is the future, and a lot of products in the market are benefiting from AI integration.
Faster time to market and vendor flexibility with room for smoother application deployments
What is our primary use case?
We help some operators implement the container platform. Some of the operators use other software, such as VMware or Whitestack. Our focus is on pushing Red Hat products. We also use OpenShift for containerized applications in IT and networks, including applications like My Mobistar, My Carlos, and Smart Wi-Fi.
How has it helped my organization?
The solution primarily benefits our organization by reducing time to market, avoiding vendor lock-in, and facilitating multi-cloud environments. These capabilities allow us to leverage various cloud providers and integrate seamlessly between on-premise and public cloud solutions.
What is most valuable?
Valuable features include time to market, avoiding vendor lock-in, and the ease of working in a multi-cloud environment. This flexibility allows the use of multiple cloud platforms such as AWS, Microsoft, Google, and IBM.
What needs improvement?
The speed of deploying new applications can be improved. Additionally, enhancing the process for changing to DevOps models from Waterfall workflows would be beneficial. There are issues with capacity planning and lifecycle management that need to be addressed, particularly in avoiding problems due to congestion or misunderstanding between software factories and Red Hat experts.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using OpenShift for more than three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
In general, customers are very happy with the stability of the solution. In Argentina, the main three operators are using OpenShift and find the stability to be quite good.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
All customers are very happy with the scalability of OpenShift. The main three operators in Argentina use OpenShift, and they find the stability quite good, contributing to its scalability.
How are customer service and support?
Customer service is effective, particularly with the TAM (Technical Account Manager) service, which includes highly experienced personnel. Operators are very happy with the TAM services.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is moderately complex. While it is not extremely difficult, operators typically require assistance from Red Hat experts.
What about the implementation team?
Operators usually need the help of Red Hat experts during the setup phase.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I don't have detailed knowledge about the setup costs or ROI. However, I know it is cheaper than some other platforms.
What other advice do I have?
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
Robust platform with valuable automation capabilities
What is our primary use case?
We use the product primarily for CI/CD activities across different platforms using Argo CD and Tekton to deliver applications.
What needs improvement?
The platform's documentation could be more comprehensive to cover the full spectrum of user needs. Sometimes, achieving specific goals is challenging due to a lack of detailed guidance.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using Red Hat OpenShift for about six months.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the product stability as an eight.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The platform is scalable.
How was the initial setup?
I'm not directly involved in the deployment process, but from what I've observed, it seems manageable.
What other advice do I have?
I would recommend Red Hat OpenShift, especially for its automation capabilities. It's a solid platform, backed by reputable companies like IBM, ensuring stability and security.
I rate it an eight.
showing 1 - 10