We know that the strength of open standards is that customers will be able to choose from many commercial and open source solutions. We believe more gas stations on the corner means more business for everyone.
We “enjoy” competing with Ping, if that’s possible. Ping provides greatly needed support for open standards, and has literally hosted the ecosystem of companies in their hometown and abroad at many great events. Not surprisingly, we frequently get asked the question: How does Gluu compare to Ping? In the interest of efficiency, we decided to write this blog to help explain what are some of the reasons why some customers might prefer Gluu… or Ping.
If you fit into one of these categories, you may prefer to go with Gluu Green:
You want Open Source. Either you are paranoid, and you actually want to read all the code. Or you have realized that open source is simply the best development model for writing servers based on open Internet standards.
You want OpenID Connect or UMA today. Compare the current results of Ping and Gluu from the latest OpenID Connect Interop (#5). Its going to take Ping a long time to write all that code. And there are even more endpoints and tokens for UMA.
Gluu offers tools for Multi-Party federations. This type of federation is used extensively in higher education and government. It provides both the tools and rules to enable networks of autonomous IDPs and RPs to drive down the cost of SSO, improve security and protect privacy.
You want a managed service. Gluu’s use of Puppet to standardize delivery of the OX stack offers a compromise between a multi-tenant SaaS identity offering (PingOne), and an enterprise software deployment (PingFederate). It offers the operational advantage of a SaaS service, without the security and privacy dis-advantage of storing PII on shared servers.
You don’t want to pay per user or per application. The Gluu Server subscription offers a predictable annual operational cost. There are no per-user or per connection fees even for strong multi-factor