No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Outposts vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 Outposts
Ranking in Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (3rd), Server Virtualization Software (3rd), Container Management (4th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms category, the mindshare of AWS Outposts is 8.0%, down from 15.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 8.3%, up from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat OpenShift8.3%
AWS Outposts8.0%
Other83.7%
Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Strategic Cloud Consultant at Shell
Seamless and simplified migration of applications with significant low latency
The most valuable aspect is that it comes in a rack form factor which makes it incredibly easy to use and deploy various AWS services. You can start with foundational services like EC2, and then expand to container management with ECS and Kubernetes with EKS. You can also take advantage of EBS for storage needs, manage databases using RDS, and ensure load balancing with ALBs. It essentially brings a comprehensive range of AWS services to your on-premises environment in a convenient rack format.
AA
Operation Director at Zaintech
Platform has transformed our cloud into a secure, unified home for diverse modern applications
One of the best features of Red Hat OpenShift is that it has the catalog, the application catalog, and the operator hub, which allows us to deploy things easily and straightforward without going into a lot of hassles. This is one of the main things, in addition to having integration with ACM and ACS, where we can have the ability to manage multiple clusters and to secure them, deploy them, manage them, run GitOps and day-two operations, as well as upgrades and other functionality which is made easy using these tools. Red Hat OpenShift also provides virtualization capabilities, and I am currently working with Zain to make a project where we will convert F5 appliances to virtual machines and to manage them through Red Hat virtualization, OVE. Red Hat OpenShift is a unique platform because it provides the features for both worlds, containerization, and VMs at the same time, requiring you to learn one skillset in order to manage all of this at the same time. In the beginning, our cloud depended only on virtual machines, so I introduced this to our management to start to work with microservices and with containerization. This was adapted in our cloud, providing us the capability to sell more of these features and to reduce the hardware requirement by about thirty percent, following the trends of using containerization for all modern applications. In addition, it reduced the time to develop and to deploy a new application; all we need is using Jenkins for CI/CD. Once we commit any code, it gets triggered, and it will implement the new container in a very flexible and easy way, within seconds. This decreased the time to market and increased agility, allowing us to capture new opportunities very fast.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable aspect is that it comes in a rack form factor which makes it incredibly easy to use and deploy various AWS services."
"AWS Outposts brings native AWS services, infrastructure, and API to our on-premises data center or co-location facilities."
"I think the keys to success for the solution is the easy-to-use user interface and the fact that the development team really likes the platform."
"If you compare with the full bundle of these services, you can see the difference, and this is enough for these locations in private data centers because the main reasons why the customers want to have it on their side are for the low latency and the security of their critical data."
"We expanded the projects over a year and a half, and we used the solution to save around 30% of our customer operations costs with both customers."
"With AWS, we've had seamless integration and support for many of our applications."
"The most valuable aspect is its ability to provide interfaces for events."
"Outposts allows you to isolate your private environment from the public cloud provider while enabling almost all the features that are available on public cloud services. That is the beauty of this service. It's an infrastructure that you can put in your data center and seamlessly connect to the public cloud."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"Has a better UI and is good as a CICD solution."
"There is a quick deployment of the application, and we can scale out efficiently with the help of OpenShift."
"We have found RedHat OpenShift to provide the best solution and ease of use."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the great customer service and the ability for our team to get assistance when we need it."
"The main reason that we chose OpenShift rather than Azure or AWS was the scalability."
"It has features that enhance security, ease of deployment, and service exposure compared to Kubernetes."
"The solution offers ease with which we can define how to run applications and configure them. It's much more convenient than creating a virtual machine and configuring application servers, making the process faster and simpler."
 

Cons

"It would be beneficial to have the option for capacity expansion."
"Also, it would be beneficial if AWS allowed for more granular and customizable pricing options."
"The pricing model needs improvement because right now it's very expensive. All of these solutions are very expensive and it prevents other customers or owners of data centers from buying it."
"Depending on the installation process, we have found some bugs and issues with the solution when the same platform is not used."
"It would be great if it could support Glue services."
"Outposts supports elastic coordinator services, but not elastic container services, which is the native service for containers in AWS. That is something missing in this product."
"The product is heavy to ship and can be difficult to handle logistically."
"The platform needs to spend more time investing in strengthening its governance and information tools and consider the real needs of its customers."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"It could use auto-scaling based on criteria such as transaction volume, queue backlog, etc. Currently, it is limited to CPU and memory."
"The first installations were tricky."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"The customer support for Red Hat OpenShift is bad because the support does not respond."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"Autoscaling issues. It does not increase in a seamless manner. Sometimes, CPU utilization/Memory utilization exceeds and the application just hangs or gets into HeapSpace or OutOfMemory error."
"Most of the configurations are command based. If we can have a GUI-based configuration with better flexibility then it will be great."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS Outposts is a cheap solution."
"The pricing of Outposts needs to be evaluated from the standpoint of what's cost-effective at your company: How are you going to use it? How much money will it save for your products or applications? Is it worth it? I would say it's probably too expensive for small or medium-sized companies. However, big companies might find it to be highly cost-effective depending on their respective cloud strategies."
"While the longer-term pricing is suitable for enterprise contracts, it can be on the higher side, especially when organizations don't utilize all the services included in the bundles."
"Customers should consider the high cost, which can range from $10,000 to hundreds of thousands depending on the components."
"The product's support is expensive. I would rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The model of pricing and buying licences is quite rigid. We are in the process of negotiating on demand pricing which will help us take advantage of the cloud as a whole."
"My company makes payments towards the licensing costs attached to OpenShift."
"I don't deal with the cost part, but I know that the cost is very high when compared to other products. They charge for CPU and memory, but we don't worry about it."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"We use the license-free version of Red Hat Openshift but we pay for the support."
"OpenShift is really good when we need to start, but once we get to a certain scale, it becomes too expensive."
"We are currently using the open version, OKD. We plan to get the enterprise version in the future."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
912,517 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise58
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AWS Outposts?
Outposts is not a simple solution to implement as it needs to be shipped from the US and involves high delivery costs and running costs. The product is heavy to ship and can be difficult to handle ...
What advice do you have for others considering AWS Outposts?
I rate AWS Outposts a nine out of ten, indicating room for some improvement.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Outposts?
Customers should consider the high cost, which can range from $10,000 to hundreds of thousands depending on the components.
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What needs improvement with OpenShift?
One area for improvement in Red Hat OpenShift is during upgrades, as there is currently no option to revert to a previous version if vulnerabilities or issues arise. I believe that providing such a...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Philips, Morningstar
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Outposts vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
912,517 professionals have used our research since 2012.