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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs Heroku 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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Heroku
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Heroku is 2.8%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Heroku2.8%
Azure Red Hat OpenShift1.2%
Other96.0%
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

DeepakMishra - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO, Head of Sales and Business Development at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Integrated cloud platform has streamlined app delivery and supported certified marketplace products
A potential area for improvement for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is to see managed identity support and ensure that some of the security features are not conflicting with Azure or Azure product features. I am sure in the future it will be more templatized so that we need not depend on Azure security features. Azure Red Hat OpenShift should be independent of Azure security features with respect to container scan and all that. Why would it use an Azure security feature? That is what I find. It is still yet to be GA and commonly available, but that is a strong reason for improvement.
Cristian-Molina - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Developer at Go Coeupas
Has a quick development cycle and continuous integration
The initial setup is straightforward. Heroku integrates well. You only have to push the code, and it automatically deploys the new version. Whether you have permission depends on the application. Currently, I have one application that I deploy myself. I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

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 features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"The functions and features in Azure Red Hat OpenShift that I have found most valuable are that it is a platform that is baked into Azure, and since it is baked into Azure, it is managed operation by Azure, which takes out the complexity of the infrastructure management and day two operations when compared with on-premise 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."
"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."
"Red Hat is a very stable product with good integration with products such as Kubernetes, and it also offers migration tools."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"Valuable for us was the fast deployment. This means the time to market is improved without pain for developers."
"I have been a great fan of Heroku as it simplified my work for many years."
"Easy, fast, fun, and extendable."
"Lots of integrations"
"Thanks to Heroku, we don't need to do as much direct management in AWS."
"The product is stable."
"Deploying with git, npm install git hook ... basically, they got it right for nodejs servers hosting."
"It is easy to deploy applications, and we don't need to bother about software updates on the server. We don't need to bother about machines, servers, and hardware. We only need to care about the system and functionality that we need or want to develop. They take care of everything else. It provides high availability. It is a pretty good solution that provides everything that we need. It has everything that we need to run our applications. We have many different applications, and we generate three million bills for a company in Brazil. We see more than a billion requests per day in another application. Everything works just fine, and it is very good."
 

Cons

"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"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."
"I would rate the technical support from Microsoft as six."
"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."
"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."
"Plugins aren't cheap (Mailchimp is $1.5/1000 emails)."
"They could flesh out some of their analytics a little more."
"We have to do daily restarts of some processes, which is annoying, and the support for custom CI could be better."
"I have an issue with the session server in terms of how it can scale, and where I can put my sessions."
"I had an issue recently where my site was down intermittently for unknown reasons. I posted a ticket and 5 days have gone by without any resolution."
"There is an issue because Heroku supports Docker container images, but not if you're using the continuous integration infrastructure."
"We don't find the pipelines intuitive. The user experience could be better. Having to set up multiple apps, then a pipeline, seems like an overkill on the amount of work to do."
"The pricing could be improved because scaling the database becomes costly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
"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."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"The price of Heroku could be less expensive."
"There is a standard fee for a processing unit, they call them "dynos," and then you pay for add-ons."
"I rate the tool's pricing a three out of ten."
"Its price is very good."
"The tool is free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
A potential area for improvement for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is to see managed identity support and ensure that some of the security features are not conflicting with Azure or Azure product feature...
What is your primary use case for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
My use case for Azure Red Hat OpenShift is for an employee engagement application and HR, and I have also used it for an agentic bot.
What needs improvement with Heroku?
I don't like that the web server crashes every day, every 24 hours. The pricing could be improved because scaling the database becomes costly. The Docker features are not great. You cannot use any ...
What is your primary use case for Heroku?
We use the solution for web applications and web APIs.
What advice do you have for others considering Heroku?
The integration capabilities are great because of the quick integration and the management features. We don't need a lot of expertise and all external DevOps people. Heroku is the easiest platform ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Facebook, UrbanDictionary, Code for America, Mailchimp, Rapportive, GitHub, TED, and Lyft.
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Heroku and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.