Azure DevOps Services vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

ADO is well suited for the visibility of day-to-day tasks and responsibilities as well as things such as Features, user stories, etc. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any scenario where it might not be well suited, as you can customize ADO to your liking to a degree.

RedHat OpenShift is not only suited for IBM Cloud but can run in ANY cloud. We installed in Azure Cloud, for example. It can also run on Linux servers or a Power 9 machine. It is built for multi-cloud or on-prem environments. IBM support provides such excellent guidance in the installation and configuration that no other product on the market can beat it.

Incentivized

• Flexible Requirements Hierarchy Management: AZDO makes it easy to track items such as features or epics as a flat list, or as a hierarchy in which you can track the parent-child relationship.
• Fast Data Entry: AZDO was designed to facilitate quick data entry to capture work items quickly, while still enabling detailed capture of acceptance criteria and item properties.
• Excel Integration: AZDO stands out for its integration with MS Excel, which enables quick updates for bulk items.

Incentivized

• Multiclick provisioning of resources makes it super easy to manage pods and deployments. We don't have to maintain code for the same
• In built security features and customizability ensures that organization wide standards are integrated well into the containers
• Automated backups, scale ups and fail recovery makes sure of minimal down time

Incentivized

• Need to make the changes so that it doesn't occupy most of the CPU utilization and memory
• Execution of Bulky SQl Queries leads to either the SQl being out of exception or the VS being unresponsive
• Integration with Microsoft products is easy, but with non-Microsoft products it is more difficult, and you have to make a lot of configuration changes to integrate
• With every upgrade of the Visual Studio, like from VS 2010 to VS 2013 , we need to upgrade our hardware/machine, as the VS hardware requirement also increases
• If code is getting compiled in one visual studio, like in VS 2010, that the same code could possibly give an error when compiled in VS 2013, due to certain changes in keyword, data format, etc., with the VS upgrade

Incentivized

• I wish it had better compatibility with docker file syntax. We had issues when it couldn't build standard docker files
• Wish it had better documentation
• Wish they offered fully supported client libraries for the Openshift API rather than dumping it on a 3rd party

Incentivized

I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.

Incentivized

Azure DevOps is a powerful, complex cloud application. As such there are a number of things it does great and something where there is room for improvement. One of those areas would be in usability. In my opinion it relies too much on search. There is no easy way to view all projects or to group them in a logical way. You need to search for everything.

Incentivized

When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.

Incentivized

I think response time for IBM Cloud support should be improved.

Incentivized

Was not part of the process.

Incentivized

Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing interfaces, I feel it would be a complete project management system.

Incentivized

We evaluated a number of potential solutions and ultimately chose Red Hat OpenShift because it was compatible with our existing technology. Time and costs savings have been realized throughout the company since we implemented Red Hat OpenShift, and the IT department has been freed up to focus on activities that are more valuable.

Incentivized

• Increased dev team efficiency through more streamlined development processes and task automation.
• Improved quality of software deployments due to better source control, automated testing, and release management options available in DevOps.
• Better collaboration between the dev team, business analysts, and agile project managers.

Incentivized

• Our customer satisfaction and NPS score has had positive outcomes based on new architecture
• We are focused on business outcomes vs running the service and maintenance
• OpenShift on IBM Cloud has had a direct, positive impact on TCO, ROI, and payback period
• Our staff is more focused on higher-level business activities, i.e. acquiring & customer retention

Incentivized