Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS Elastic Beanstalk vs Azure Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
9th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of AWS Elastic Beanstalk is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin-Davis - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient deployment and management of web apps with integration into cloud services
One area where AWS Elastic Beanstalk struggles is with the complexity of deployments. As deployments become more complex, technical constraints can become a burden. This can lead to a situation where I might be better off building my own deployment mechanism. Additionally, CloudFormation controlling AWS Elastic Beanstalk in more complex environments is poorly supported, which can make management challenging.
John Sanborn - PeerSpot reviewer
Runs on every platform; makes it easy to adapt to Kubernetes
One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive. Another thing is that OpenShift has its own CLI, it has features in it that you don't have under normal Kubernetes. So if you're just a plain Kubernetes developer, you either don't know about these other features and you don't take advantage of them so you're basically treating it like a normal Kubernetes or there's a slight learning curve as you start to learn how the new CLIs work, the other options that are not available in Kubernetes. There is a learning curve; it's not high, but it's still there. That's another negative against OpenShift. If you're purchasing OpenShift on their OpenShift container platform, you will have to manage the master nodes. If you are using Kubernetes in AWS, Google, and Azure, you don't manage master nodes. It's not really a big deal. It's all part of the patching in OpenShift. People will start to say, "Well, I don't want to manage the masters." But I think if they actually see the process of patching an OpenShift, they would say, "Okay, it's not even worth arguing because it's so simple." Alternatively, the main three cloud vendors can provide OpenShift as a service.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The simplicity in the speed of provisioning users is what I like best about Elastic Beanstalk."
"Elastic Beanstalk simplifies deploying and managing applications."
"Elastic Beanstalk is helpful and easy to manage services, even when dealing with multiple clients."
"Elastic Beanstalk is very easy to use, providing infrastructure to deploy our third-party application to the cloud within 15 to 20 minutes."
"I would rate the overall solution a ten out of ten."
"I highly recommend it to others and frequently discuss it with customers."
"One of the most valuable aspects is that developers can access logs directly. They can download them from the AWS console within Elastic Beanstalk."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Beanstalk is its ease of use and management."
"As a consulting company, we implement Azure Red Hat OpenShift for our clients, who appreciate its integration capabilities for enhancing cloud operations. While we handle implementation, build processes, and automation, the operational responsibility lies with the customer. The service provides basic processes and support from Red Hat and Microsoft, which benefits clients by allowing them to focus on their business rather than regular operations like cluster upgrades."
"Flexibility, a very well-developed interface, and ease of learning are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"It has a feature to automatically scale up or scale down. If my application is running in peak hours, it will automatically increase."
"The solution's support and its automation tool that ensures we are secure and appropriately configured are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"In Kubernetes, when traffic goes out of a pod, it has to have its own IP address. Every service that's going out requires another IP. But with OpenShift, you don't have to deal with any of those IPs because they use NAT."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
 

Cons

"Maybe the company could create more option packages, such as more bundles of configuration."
"From what I've observed, it seems AWS has ceased further development on Elastic Beanstalk."
"The automatic scaling functionality could use improvement."
"Sometimes it is difficult to use for the first time. The automatic scaling functionality could use improvement."
"The documentation needs to be clearer, particularly relating to editing JSON files before uploading applications."
"Elastic Beanstalk can enhance its customizability further, especially in terms of deployment options."
"Elastic Beanstalk is powerful, however, it could be enhanced in areas where it abstracts infrastructure management, sometimes limiting advanced users who want granular control over resources like EC2 instances, networking, or load balancers."
"Sometimes there are issues when auto-scaling with CloudFront."
"Automation could be improved."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"Technically, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is fine. However, its marketing could be improved, especially when compared to the robust marketing efforts of Azure, HPE, and Nutanix."
"There is room for improvement in terms of orchestration. While Azure orchestration offers valuable features, it's worth noting that it may not match the level of orchestration provided by Kubernetes itself."
"The product is expensive."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"I would like Azure Red Hat OpenShift to be more open to new frameworks and languages. Currently, if I create a pod with Rust, it doesn't work in OpenShift, and I must create a layer of interpretation."
"Regarding room for improvement, there's always room, but it's mainly about Azure itself rather than Azure Red Hat OpenShift. Azure is not as advanced as AWS in terms of supported services. AWS is the leader in this area. However, there's no need for service improvement in Azure Red Hat OpenShift as the service is excellent. I don't need additional features because I can customize it according to the customer's needs."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift is not a low-price solution; it's expensive. Pricing depends on the strategy and whether you buy it directly from Red Hat or the Azure portal. Additionally, some customers may need a complete disaster recovery solution, which requires additional licensing and software products for implementation, such as backups."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Elastic Beanstalk?
AWS Elastic Beanstalk itself is free to use, but there are charges for other integrated services like RDS ( /products/amazon-rds-reviews ), ELBs, and EC2s. If only AWS Elastic Beanstalk is used, th...
What needs improvement with AWS Elastic Beanstalk?
Elastic Beanstalk can enhance its customizability further, especially in terms of deployment options.
What is your primary use case for AWS Elastic Beanstalk?
I have used AWS Elastic Beanstalk ( /products/aws-elastic-beanstalk-reviews ) primarily to manage infrastructure. The main purpose is to offload the complexity of managing servers, operating system...
What do you like most about Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
Red Hat OpenShift is cheaper than Broadcom VMware. Pricing discussions typically follow considerations of functionality, efficiency, and strategy.
What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
Technically, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is fine. However, its marketing could be improved, especially when compared to the robust marketing efforts of Azure, HPE, and Nutanix.
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Beanstalk vs. Azure Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.