TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    IBM Terraform

    Score8.7 out of 10
    N/AIBM Terraform (formerly Hashicorp Terraform) is a cloud infrastructure automation tool used to create, change, and improve production infrastructure, and it allows infrastructure to be expressed as code. It is available Open Source, and via Cloud and Self-Hosted editions.

    $0

    Red Hat OpenShift

    Score9.1 out of 10
    N/AOpenShift is Red Hat's Cloud Computing Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering. OpenShift is an application platform in the cloud where application developers and teams can build, test, deploy, and run their applications.

    $0.08

    per hour

    Pricing
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Editions & Modules
    Open Source
    $0
    Team & Governance
    $20/user
    per user/per month
    Enterprise
    Contact sales team
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    YesYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Considered Both Products
    IBM
    No answer on this topic
    Red Hat
    Chose Red Hat OpenShift
    AAP is one of the great deployment tool , it is the most efficient way to deploy apps by creating a quick self manage playbooks.
    Incentivized
    Chose Red Hat OpenShift
    OpenShift is the clear winner. It contains all components necessary to deliver a truly Enterprise ready K8s solution and developer experience.
    Incentivized
    Chose Red Hat OpenShift
    Red Hat OpenShift is a container as a service platform. Ever since we started using it, we have saved a lot of money and time. OpenShift is outstandingly easy to use, manage and install, and It presents little learning curve for developers familiar with Git and administrators …
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    95%
    Would buy again
    21 Answers
    97%
    Would buy again
    315 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    20 Answers
    96%
    Delivers good value for the price
    268 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    95%
    Happy with the feature set
    21 Answers
    99%
    Happy with the feature set
    322 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    14 Answers
    97%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    218 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    95%
    Implementation went as expected
    18 Answers
    90%
    Implementation went as expected
    255 Answers
    Features
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Platform-as-a-Service
    Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of IBM Terraform and Red Hat OpenShift
    Feature
    IBM Terraform
    -
    Ratings
    Red Hat OpenShift
    8.4
    324 Ratings
    8% above category average
    Ease of building user interfaces00 Ratings8.6275 Ratings
    Scalability00 Ratings9.3309 Ratings
    Platform management overhead00 Ratings8.3290 Ratings
    Workflow engine capability00 Ratings8.6262 Ratings
    Platform access control00 Ratings8.3291 Ratings
    Services-enabled integration00 Ratings8.5273 Ratings
    Development environment creation00 Ratings8.6283 Ratings
    Development environment replication00 Ratings8.3270 Ratings
    Issue monitoring and notification00 Ratings7.9284 Ratings
    Issue recovery00 Ratings8.1279 Ratings
    Upgrades and platform fixes00 Ratings8.5285 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Small Businesses
    HashiCorp Vagrant
    Score9 out of 10
    IBM Cloud Foundry
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    HashiCorp Vagrant
    Score9 out of 10
    IBM Cloud Private
    Score9.6 out of 10
    Enterprises
    AWS CloudFormation
    Score8.2 out of 10
    AWS Elastic Beanstalk
    Score8.6 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.8
    (33 ratings)
    9.1
    (339 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    9.3
    (26 ratings)
    Usability
    8.8
    (8 ratings)
    8.5
    (10 ratings)
    Availability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    5.5
    (1 ratings)
    Performance
    9.4
    (3 ratings)
    9.0
    (125 ratings)
    Support Rating
    8.0
    (6 ratings)
    7.0
    (9 ratings)
    In-Person Training
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    7.0
    (3 ratings)
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (3 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    9.2
    (3 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Professional Services
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.3
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor post-sale
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Vendor pre-sale
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    IBM TerraformRed Hat OpenShift
    Likelihood to Recommend
    IBM
    Anything that needs to be repeated en masse. Terraform is great at taking a template and have it be repeated across your estate. You can dynamically change the assets they're generating depending on certain variables. Which means though templated assets will all be similar, they're allowed to have unique properties about them. For example flattening JSON into tabular data and ensuring the flattening code is unique to the file's schema.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    Red Hat OpenShift, despite its complexity and overhead, remains the most complete and enterprise-ready Kubernetes platform available. It excels in research projects like ours, where we need robust CI/CD, GPU scheduling, and tight integration with tools like Jupyter, OpenDataHub, and Quiskit. Its security, scalability, and operator ecosystem make it ideal for experimental and production-grade AI workloads. However, for simpler general hosting tasks—such as serving static websites or lightweight backend services—we find traditional VMs, Docker, or LXD more practical and resource-efficient. Red Hat OpenShift shines in complex, container-native workflows, but can be overkill for basic infrastructure needs.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    IBM
    • Terraform is cloud agnostic. Just select the suitable provider for the cloud and it will do the job.
    • Templating is possible to make the Terraform templates reusable.
    • Variables can be created to make the templates generic so that it can be reused for different environments or resources.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • We had a few microservices that dealt with notifications and alerts. We used OpenShift to deploy these microservices, which handle and deliver notifications using publish-subscribe models.
    • We had to expose an API to consumers via MTLS, which was implemented using Server secret integration in OpenShift. We were then able to deploy the APIs on OpenShift with API security.
    • We integrated Splunk with OpenShift to view the logs of our applications and gain real-time insights into usage, as well as provide high availability.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    IBM
    • The language itself is a bit unusual and this makes it hard for new users to get onboarded into the codebase. While it's improving with later releases, basic concepts like "map an array of options into a set of configurations" or "apply this logic if a variable is specified" are possible but unnecessarily cumbersome.
    • The 'Terraform Plan' operation could be substantially more sophisticated. There are many situations where a Terraform file could never work but successfully passes the 'plan' phase only to fail during the 'apply' phase.
    • Environment migrations could be smoother. Renaming/refactoring files is a challenge because of the need to use 'Terraform mv' commands, etc.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • I wouldn't necessarily say there is look everyday technology transform. I can see a trend wherein Red Hat OpenShift is adopting all the new technology trends and helping their customers align with their priorities and the emerging technology trends. I wouldn't call out various scope for development every day. There is scope for development. It is all how the organizations adopt it and how they deliver it to their customers. I don't want to call out there is scope for development. It's happening. It is a never ending process.
    • At the moment, I don't have anything to call out. We are experiencing Red Hat OpenShift and we can see every day they're coming up with new features as and when they come up with new features, we want to experience it more and more. We are looking for opportunities wherein this can be leveraged to help our users and partners.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    IBM
    Still the best provisioning tool out there and good support from the community as well in terms of shared knowledge
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    This is the current strategy for the company, most of the products in the organisation are aligning to Openshift and various use cases it support. Also lot of applications are being developed for AI use case, openshift.AI provides opportunity to host and leverage the AI capabilities for these applications
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    IBM
    The syntax itself is pretty straightforward. The documentation is well-maintained & easy to follow. Most cloud providers, even smaller ones, maintain official provider libraries, making discovery & learning a breeze. Some, like GCP, even provide high-level libraries on top of their own more primitive provider, making building complex infra much more manageable. The language itself is cloud-agnostic, so you can literally manage resources from multiple providers in a single Terraform repo.
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    As I said before, the obserability is one of the weakest point of OpenShift and that has a lot to do with usability. The Kibana console is not fully integrated with OpenShift console and you have to switch from tab to tab to use it. Same with Prometheus, Jaeger and Grafan, it's a "simple" integration but if you want to do complex queries or dashboards you have to go to the specific console
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Reliability and Availability
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Red Hat
    Redhat openshift is generally reliable and available platform, it ensures high availability for most the situations. in fact the product where we put openshift in a box, we ensure that the availability is also happening at node and network level and also at storage level, so some of the factors that are outside of Openshift realm are also working in HA manner.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Performance
    IBM
    Terraform's performance is quite amazing when it comes to deployment of resources in AWS. Of course, the deployment times depend on various parameters like the number of resources to deploy and different regions to deploy. Terraform cannot control that. The only minor drawback probably shows up when a terraform job is terminated mid way. Then in many cases, time-consuming manual cleanup is required.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    Overall, this platform is beneficial. The only downsides we have encountered have been with pods that occasionally hang. This results in resources being dedicated to dead or zombie pods. Over time, these wasted resources occasionally cause us issues, and we have had difficulty monitoring these pods. However, this issue does not overshadow the benefits we get from Openshift.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    IBM
    I have yet to have an opportunity to reach out directly to HashiCorp for support on Terraform. However, I have spent a great deal of time considering their documentation as I use the tool. This opinion is based solely on that. I find the Terraform documentation to have great breadth but lacking in depth in many areas. I appreciate that all of the tool's resources have an entry in the docs but often the examples are lacking. Often, the examples provided are very basic and prompt additional exploration. Also, the links in the documentation often link back to the same page where one might expect to be linked to a different source with additional information.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    Their customer support team is good and quick to respond. On a couple of occassions, they have helped us in solving some issues which we were finding a tad difficult to comprehend. On a rare occasion, the response was a bit slow but maybe it was because of the festival season. Overall a good experience on this front.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    In-Person Training
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Red Hat
    I was not involved in the in person training, so i
    can not answer this question, but the team in my org worked directly
    with Openshift and able to get the in person training done easily, i did not
    hear problem or complain in this space, so i hope things happen
    seamlessly without any issue.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Online Training
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Red Hat
    We went thru the training material on RH webesite, i think its very descriptive and the handson lab sesssions are very useful. It would be good to create more short duration videos covering one single aspect of openshift, this wll keep the interest and also it breaks down the complexity to reasonable chunks.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    IBM
    Implementation is straight forward. Never had issues as the team is already very familiar with Terraform installation from previous projects and roles
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    IBM
    Terraform is the solid leader in the space. It allows you to do more then just provisioning within a pre-existing servers. It is more extensible and has more providers available than it competitors. It is also open source and more adopted by the community then some of the other solutions that are available in the market place.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    The Tanzu Platform seemed overly complicated, and the frequent changes to the portfolio as well as the messaging made us uneasy. We also decided it would not be wise to tie our application platform to a specific infrastructure provider, as Tanzu cannot be deployed on anything other than vSphere. SUSE Rancher seemed good overall, but ultimately felt closer to a DIY approach versus the comprehensive package that Red Hat OpenShift provides.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Red Hat
    It's easy to understand what are being billed and what's included in each type of subscription. Same with the support (Std or Premium) you know exactly what to expect when you need to use it. The "core" unit approach on the subscription made really simple to scale and carry the workloads from one site to another.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Scalability
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Red Hat
    This is a great platform to deployment container applications designed for multiple use cases. Its reasonably scalable platform, that can host multiple instances of applications, which can seamlessly handle the node and pod failure, if they are configured properly. There should be some scalability best practices guide would be very useful
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    IBM
    • we are able to deploy our infrastructure in a couple of ours in an automated and repeatable way, before this could take weeks if the work was done manually and was a lot of error prone.
    • having the state file, you can see a diff of what things have changed manually out side of Terraform which is a huge plus
    • if state file gets corrupted, it is very hard to debug or restore it without an impact or spending hours ..
    • writing big scale code can be very challenging and hard to be efficient so it's usable by the whole team
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • That is a complicated question and one that's not easy for me to answer. There's a lot of factors that go into all of the stuff that we just don't have an easy way of measuring. And we realize that while we're implementing Red Hat OpenShift, we've tried to start measuring some of that stuff, but we don't have a baseline to go on. So it's hard to say. What I can tell you is general experience with the platform has been extremely positive from the development aspect. Teams have been very, very happy with the speed at which they're able to do stuff. They've been happy with that. The way it works in one environment is exactly the way it works in the next environment because we don't have configuration drift, that type of thing, and has had very positive impacts. But we didn't have a baseline to start with. So I can't talk about getting there faster or anything like that.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    IBM Terraform Screenshots

    Screenshot of Terraform StateScreenshot of Terraform RunsScreenshot of Terraform VariablesScreenshot of Terraform WorkspacesScreenshot of Terraform Cost Estimation