Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs Google App Engine comparison

Microsoft and Google are both solutions in the PaaS Clouds category. Microsoft is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.3, while Google is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.3. Microsoft holds a 0.6% mindshare in PSP, compared to Google’s 2.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Google users who would recommend it.

Azure Red Hat OpenShift

Read 10 Azure Red Hat OpenShift reviews

515 Views
39 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Google App Engine

Read 35 Google App Engine reviews

1,572 Views
289 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Azure Red Hat OpenShift

Google App Engine

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Google App Engine and Azure Red Hat OpenShift are cloud solutions for application deployment, competing in price and feature offerings. While Google App Engine is praised for pricing and customer service, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is seen as advantageous due to its robust feature set and capabilities.

Features: Google App Engine offers automatic scaling, flexible environment support, and integration with Google services. Azure Red Hat OpenShift provides a Kubernetes-based architecture, container orchestration, and hybrid cloud support.

Room for Improvement: Google App Engine could enhance its flexibility for alternative services, improve features beyond simplicity, and advance trial offerings. Azure Red Hat OpenShift may work on reducing setup complexity, refining pricing structure, and enhancing initial configuration processes.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Google App Engine features straightforward deployment with minimal configurations, preferred for developers seeking simplicity, and is recognized for efficient customer service. Azure Red Hat OpenShift requires more setup time and expertise but offers advanced deployment options. Customer service is strong, focused on enterprise needs despite lesser immediacy.

Pricing and ROI: Google App Engine's pricing is favorable for smaller businesses with potentially higher ROI for simple applications. Azure Red Hat OpenShift involves higher setup costs due to enterprise-grade features. The ROI is significant for larger organizations utilizing its full capabilities, justifying its investment for advanced cloud solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google App Engine Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google App Engine

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,168 peers since 2012

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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift

Ranking in PaaS Clouds

12th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Google App Engine

Ranking in PaaS Clouds

7th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google App Engine is 2.2%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

PaaS Clouds

Featured Reviews

ArtemiiKropachev

Vice President, Engineering & Principal Architect at Li9 Technology Solutions

A high-performing solution provides highly available, fully managed OpenShift clusters on demand and lot of automation that developers can utilize

Azure Red Hat OpenShift is very valuable because it is a complete application delivery platform with a lot of automation that developers can utilize. It's a complete solution without building your own on top of Kubernetes. 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.

Read full review

OmkarPatil

Chief Executive Officer at Nyx CodeCraft

Simplifies app development process for businesses

The product simplifies app development processes since once the local development is completed, my company has a common configuration in place where we can specify the requirements to run an application, after which we need to do a one-click GCP deployment for the entire application. In general, the two offer managed deployment options, so we don't have to worry about deployment. In my company, we just configure the servers and check if anything needs to be containerized, after which GCP handles everything for us. A project where Google App Engine scalability was essential was when, recently, my company was involved with Golang to build a web application, after which deploying that application on Google App Engine was really easy. In my company, we also had a Django application in Python, and it was easy to deploy. As my company deals with small-scale projects, the automated scaling feature of Google App Engine is not something we thought about. I wouldn't recommend the product to others unless the potential end users use GCP and have a word with their vendors about their plans. One specific recommendation from me would be that the product's potential uses should stick with a particular vendor. If someone wants a product that is easy to deploy and scalable, then multiple options are available in the market. The product integrates very well with other Google solutions. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."

"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."

"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."

"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."

"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."

"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."

"Red Hat is a very stable product with good integration with products such as Kubernetes, and it also offers migration tools."

"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."

More Azure Red Hat OpenShift pros

"What I find most beneficial about Google App Engine is that we do not need to manage it since it's a fully managed serverless platform, allowing us to spend more time on development rather than managing and maintaining configurations."

"The WhatApp feature is the most valuable."

"What I find most valuable about Google App Engine is its support for open-source development."

"What I appreciate most about Google App Engine is that the deployment is significantly easier compared to a conventional Linux platform."

"The auto-scaling feature helped us significantly in our fast-paced environment where the number of users was increasing rapidly."

"The product's setup and deployment phases are easy."

"What I appreciate most about Google App Engine is that the deployment is significantly easier compared to a conventional Linux platform."

"The most valuable features of Google App Engine include the ease of rolling back deployments when failures occur, the ability to track deployment times, and the feature to split traffic between different instances."

More Google App Engine pros

Cons

"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."

"They need to improve the core licensing model."

"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."

"Automation could be improved."

More Azure Red Hat OpenShift cons

"I am limited to sending a photo to five people. I want to be able to send a photo to many people, not just five."

"The documentation and community are lacking for this product."

"Data consumption of the device could be improved."

"Currently, we have to use Google CLI and utilize Google App CLI SDKs for deployment. If options were available to enable these SDKs for Terraform and CloudFormation, it would be more helpful for executing one-click deployments."

"The support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe."

"The main drawback with Google App Engine's standard environment was its restrictions. We could not work with file systems, run shell scripts from the environment, or use WebSockets."

"The interface and IDE, where I write code, could be improved. Unlike other IDEs like Visual Studio, it lacks easy access to available functions."

"I think there's still a lot that can be done with Google Meet and the video conferencing part of it. It could be more dynamic in terms of what can be done with it."

More Google App Engine cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"We pay the license yearly. It's about $6 a month, which is $72 a year per person, so it's about $500."

"If we don't know how to work with the tool, we might have some spikes in price."

"I would like to have more free application with it. Some of the applications, I am paying more for them. I think that they must be free."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

it_user8586

Engineer at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees

Aug 14, 2013

Amazon vs Rackspace vs Microsoft vs Google: Cloud Hosting Services Comparison

Amazon Web Services, Rackspace OpenStack, Microsoft Windows Azure and Google are the major cloud hosting and storage service providers. Athough Amazon is top of them and is oldest in cloud market, Rackspace, Microsoft and Google are giving tough competition to each other and to Amazon also for…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Government

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Educational Organization

11%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Red Hat OpenShift?

The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?

The pricing for OpenShift is similar to other solutions like Docker ( /products/docker-37146-reviews ) Studio. The plans with ARO and AWS are standard in the market. However, using OpenShift on-pre...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?

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 interpretati...

See all answers

What do you like most about Google App Engine?

The product's setup and deployment phases are easy.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google App Engine?

I haven't been involved on the pricing side, so I'm not exactly aware of the costs, although we did analyze log retention costs, but overall, I'm not sure how Google App Engine compares to other pr...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Google App Engine?

The areas of Google App Engine I would to see improved or enhanced in the future include expanding inbuilt support for more programming languages than the current limited options such as Python, Go...

See all answers

Comparisons

Red Hat OpenShift vs Azure Red Hat OpenShift

Compared 56% of the time

Amazon AWS vs Azure Red Hat OpenShift

Compared 27% of the time

Pivotal Cloud Foundry vs Azure Red Hat OpenShift

Compared 16% of the time

More Azure Red Hat OpenShift Competitors

Microsoft Azure vs Google App Engine

Compared 42% of the time

Amazon AWS vs Google App Engine

Compared 23% of the time

Heroku vs Google App Engine

Compared 14% of the time

Amazon Lightsail vs Google App Engine

Compared 5% of the time

Red Hat OpenShift vs Google App Engine

Compared 4% of the time

More Google App Engine Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Red Hat OpenShift

June 2025

Download Azure Red Hat OpenShift product report

Buyer's Guide

Google App Engine

June 2025

Download Google App Engine product report

Overview

Azure Red Hat OpenShift provides highly available, fully managed OpenShift clusters on demand, monitored and operated jointly by Microsoft and Red Hat. Kubernetes is at the core of Red Hat OpenShift. OpenShift brings added-value features to complement Kubernetes, making it a turnkey container platform as a service (PaaS) with a significantly improved developer and operator experience.

Microsoft

Google App Engine is a Platform-as-a-Service (Paas) provider that equips web application developers with all the resources and tools that they need to develop, test, and run their applications on Google's infrastructure. Everything is built into the kit, so with one download of the SDK, you'll be well on your way to first-rate apps.

Google

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Khan Academy, Best Buy, Gigya, MetOffice, Getaround, Mimiboard, NewsLimited, WebFilings, and CloudLock.

Buyer's Guide

Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google App Engine

June 2025

Free Report: Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google App Engine

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google App Engine and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Google App Engine report.

See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.

We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.