We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and OpenShift Container Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of the solution are the insights, meaning the remediation suggestions, as well as the incident alerts."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
"It's got a lot of great features."
"Microsoft Defender has a lot of features including regulatory compliance and attaching workbooks but the most valuable is the recommendations it provides for each and every resource when we open Microsoft Defender."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language."
"It helps you to identify the gaps in your solution and remediate them. It produces a compliance checklist against known standards such as ISO 27001, HIPAA, iTrust, etc."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"The auto scalability feature, which is based on smart agendas, determined from pre-prepared rules is the most valuable feature. You can also create different routes for deployment. Deployment types can be provided with an identifier, such as an ARB deployment. This really helped in rolling out releases without disrupting services for the end-users."
"The initial setup process is easy."
"The usability and the developer experience. The platform has a centralized consultant that is easy to use for our development, operations and security teams."
"On OpenShift, it's easy to scale applications. We can easily scale up or scale down."
"Technical support is good; they are fast and reliable."
"The platform is easy to scale as it supports Windows worker node."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring and logging functionalities."
"The most valuable feature for me in the OpenShift Container Platform is the option to manage different containers and environments and also being able to switch among them."
"You cannot create custom use cases."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"When you work with it, the only problem that we're struggling with is that we have 21 different subscriptions we're trying to apply security to. It's impossible to keep everything organized."
"Another thing is that Defender for Cloud uses more resources than CrowdStrike, which my current company uses. Defender for Cloud has two or three processes running simultaneously that consume memory and processor time. I had the chance to compare that with CrowdStrike a few days ago, which was significantly less. It would be nice if Defender were a little lighter. It's a relatively large installation that consumes more resources than competitors do."
"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."
"No possibility to write or edit any capability."
"The initial setup is not actually so complex but it feels complex because there are many add-ons. There are many options and my team needs to be aware of all of these changes happening on the backend which is a distraction."
"The solution needs to introduce open ID connect integration for role-based access control."
"The initial setup can be hard."
"The support costs are too high."
"OpenShift needs to improve their container storage."
"OpenShift Container Platform is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"The setup process is not great."
"OpenShift has certain restrictions in terms of managing the cluster when it's running on a public cloud. For example, identity and access management integration with the IM of AWS is quite difficult. It requires some open-source tools to integrate. This is one area where I always see room for improvement."
"OpenShift Container Platform could improve by having better integration."
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 10th in Container Management with 46 reviews while OpenShift Container Platform is ranked 1st in Container Management with 36 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while OpenShift Container Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift Container Platform writes "Provides automation that speeds up our process by 30% and helps us achieve zero downtime". Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas OpenShift Container Platform is most compared with Amazon EKS, VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Amazon Elastic Container Service and NGINX Ingress Controller. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. OpenShift Container Platform report.
See our list of best Container Management vendors.
We monitor all Container Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
