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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs Microsoft Azure 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
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
313
Ranking in other categories
Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure is 19.8%, up from 19.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Nicolas Chabrier - PeerSpot reviewer
Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration
The only thing is regarding the management of multi-cloud environments. That's not really possible. So basically, it's wonderful if you manage Microsoft clearly and if you manage Microsoft Azure, but if you need to consume external services and have a global overview of all your consumption, it's not the case. Google, for instance, has tools that help you manage multiple environments, which makes sense because Google is really the cloud provider. So that's why they need to be compliant with the others. But for sure, Microsoft's approach is different, and it's wonderful when you're one hundred percent on Azure. But if you'd like to have something more of a multi-cloud strategy, that's a bit of a gap where they could improve.

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."
"Flexibility, a very well-developed interface, and ease of learning are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"Red Hat is a very stable product with good integration with products such as Kubernetes, and it also offers migration tools."
"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."
"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."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"It's very easy to build a new service and get it into production."
"Azure virtual machines are stand-out."
"I get all the features under one roof."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure is its ease of use."
"This is a very stable product."
"The most valuable feature is the possibility of using Microsoft and non-Microsoft services on one environment."
"We use Microsoft Azure for operations, email, and office applications."
"The robust encryption services increase the confidence of tech users."
 

Cons

"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"The product is expensive."
"The security feature in the solution is an area that needs to be improved."
"We have reported some bugs we encountered, and it would be good if those bugs were resolved more quickly."
"Could be more user friendly; initial setup is difficult to understand."
"I would say an improvement could be allowing for more external, third-party tools. However, I think that's their vision, how they develop the product."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure, user interface design (UI/UX), clear navigation, and documentation support of Microsoft Azure."
"There is a need to be better on-premise solutions that are more helpful. However, I don't think that is the goal of Microsoft Azure. They want the solution to be secure cloud solutions with cloud applications. This is their main goal at the moment."
"The pricing in our region can be a bit high."
"With a Synapse environment, we might need to switch to Databricks for better scalability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
"The solution's licensing costs are yearly."
"Azure is cheaper than solutions from other cloud vendors like AWS or Google."
"It is competitive with other public cloud providers, and its price is very close to different cloud providers. There is not a noticeable difference between different cloud providers. Otherwise, it would be a risk for them to have services that were much more expensive than their competition. They're pretty much neck to neck on pricing."
"The licensing fee is quite cheap for what they're offering."
"The price needs to be lower because they're competing with AWS."
"The pricing is better than AWS."
"The long-term cost is higher than if you set up the servers on-premises, which is something that could be improved through more competitive pricing."
"It's not on a per-user basis; it's on a per subscription basis. It is dependent on how much you use."
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.
 

Comparison Review

it_user8586 - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Educational Organization
44%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

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.
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.
Which is preferable - IBM Public Cloud or Microsoft Azure?
IBM Public Cloud is IBM’s Platform-as-a-Service. It aims to provide organizations with a secure cloud environment to manage data and applications. One of the features we like is the cloud activity ...
Which is better - SAP Cloud Platform or Microsoft Azure?
One of the best features of SAP Cloud Platform is that it is web-based and you can log in from anywhere in the world. SAP Cloud Platform is suitable for companies of any size; it works well with bo...
How does Microsoft Azure compare to Google Firebase?
I would recommend Google Firebase instead of Microsoft Azure, simply for the array of features that it has to offer. In particular, the Firebase library grants you access to a shared data structure...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Windows Azure, Azure, MS Azure
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
BMW, Toyota, easyJet, NBC Sports, HarperCollins, Aviva, TalkTalk Business, Avanade, and Telenor.
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Microsoft Azure and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.