Cisco Container Platform [EOL] vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform comparison

Cisco and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Management category. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]

Read 1 Cisco Container Platform [EOL] review

100% willing to recommend

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Read 50 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform reviews

7,099 Views
4,988 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco Container Platform [EOL] and Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), VMware and others in Container Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Container Management Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Container Management

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 857,028 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

Cisco Container Platform [EOL]

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Management (1st)

Featured Reviews

Cole McKnight

Cloud Architect, Feltus Lab at Clemson University

Enables the deployment/management of Kubernetes clusters from multiple resource providers at one location

One thing I have not really had the chance to explore too much is the Cisco Container Platform command-line interface. I've been told that exists and it's functional, but I'm not sure if it's really made for end-users. It might just be for admins or developers. One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice. What's really nice about most platforms is that they have command-line interfaces where you can just copy a single command which has all the flags with all the configurations you want and put that in a text file. Then, when you want to create another cluster you can just paste that in and edit one or two flags if you want to. You don't have to go through a web form every time and that is a feature that I would like to see in the future with CCP. It would be nice, at the end, once you create a cluster using the web form, if it would give you a single command that you could copy and put somewhere and then paste it, in the future, to create an identical cluster or an almost identical cluster. I would like the ability to save cluster configurations to CCP. I've provided that feedback to the development team. There might even be a version that is out which already has that functionality integrated into it. I think it's safe to say that at some point in the future that feature will be provided.

Read full review

Prasad Gupta

Software Engineer at IBM Software Labs

Efficient deployment with resource optimization and multi-region stability

There are several areas where OpenShift could improve. The interface has numerous UI bugs that need addressing. Furthermore, the latest version has deprecated the deployment config, which has its own advantages compared to the deployment container. Lastly, there is no built-in auto-scaling plugin at the OpenShift level; this needs to be addressed as it's available at the cloud provider level, like IBM Cloud.

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

"The most valuable feature is definitely the fact that you can use a single platform to deploy to different resource providers. Right now, the version I'm using has vSphere and AWS, but I know in the future they're planning on adding more. The ability to deploy clusters on-prem or to any number of public cloud providers is really valuable because you don't need to relearn or switch platforms to switch resource providers."

"Everything is packaged into OpenShift Container Platform."

"The most valuable features are the monitoring and logging functionalities."

"The banking transactions, inquiries, and account opening have been the most valuable."

"Dashboards... give us all the details we need to see about the microservices."

"The most valuable feature is that the solution can be deployed in the cloud which removes the expense of a server."

"Technical support is good; they are fast and reliable."

"The operating system has a live update and is more secure than any other. It's made for Atomic OS, a lightweight OS new to the market. I also like the source-to-image capabilities. The customer can directly deploy their applications from the repository. It's a highly flexible and easy way to deploy into production."

"The best feature is the management for the port life cycle, which automatically recycles, pulls, and scales up and down based on needs and requests."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform pros

Cons

"One thing that is a little bit annoying about Cisco Container Platform is that for each cluster you create you have to go through the same web form each time. If you're creating two identical clusters, you still have to go through that web form twice."

"There should be a simplification of the overall cluster environment. It should require fewer resources. Just to run a simple Hello World app, it requires about seven servers, and that's just crazy. I understand that it is fully redundant, but it's prohibitively expensive to get something simple going."

"I want to see more incorporation of native automation features; then, we could write a code, deploy it directly to OpenShift, and allow it to take care of the automated process. Using this method, we could write one application and have elements copy/pasted to other applications in the development process."

"The product monitoring tool does not work for us."

"With the recent trend of cloud-native, fully managed serverless services, I don't see much documentation about how a customer should move from on-prem to the cloud, or what is the best way to do a lift-and-shift. Even if you are on AWS OCP, which is self-managed infra services, and you want to use the ROSA managed services, what is the best way to achieve that migration? I don't see documentation for these kinds of use cases from Red Hat."

"One area for product improvement is the support limitations within the subscription models, particularly the restricted support hours for lower-tier subscriptions."

"The monitoring and logging could be improved."

"We've encountered challenges when transitioning applications between these environments."

"We are not big customers of Red Hat, but sometimes, we have severe bugs. We are very innovative, and sometimes, we have to wait for a long time to get proper attention. Red Hat should improve on that."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"We paid for Cloud Pak for integration. It all depends on how many VMs or how many CPUs you are using. They do the licensing based on that."

"I'm an architect, so I have no involvement in the pricing and licensing of the platform."

"OpenShift with Red Hat support is pretty costly. We have done a comparison between AWS EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Services) which provides fully managed services from AWS. It's built on open-source-based Kubernetes clusters and it is much cheaper compared to Red Hat, but it is a little expensive compared to ECS provided by AWS."

"Its price is a bit high because it's a premium product, but as long as the business is ready to pay for that, it's okay."

"The pricing is expensive for licensing."

"If you buy the product for a year or three, you get a lot of discounts...I feel that the product is worth its cost, especially since setting it up can be done with just a few clicks."

"We have to pay for the license."

"The product is expensive."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Which is better - OpenShift Container Platform or VMware Tanzu Mission Control?

Red Hat Openshift is ideal for organizations using microservices and cloud environments. I like that the platform is auto-scalable, which saves overhead time for developers. I think Openshift can b...

See all answers

What do you like most about OpenShift Container Platform?

The tool's most valuable features include high availability, scalability, and security. Other features like advanced cluster management, advanced cluster security, and Red Hat Quay make it powerful...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenShift Container Platform?

The current licensing cost for this solution is around $23,000 per year, per month. Regarding the current licensing cost, I would rate my satisfaction around seven or seven and a half; there's alwa...

See all answers

Comparisons

No data available

Amazon EKS vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 45% of the time

Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 16% of the time

Nutanix Kubernetes Platform (NKP) vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 7% of the time

VMware Tanzu Platform vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 7% of the time

HashiCorp Nomad vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 5% of the time

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Container Management

May 2025

Download Cisco Container Platform [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

May 2025

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform report

Download Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform product report

Also Known As

Cisco CCP

No data available

Overview

Cisco Container Platform is a fully curated, lightweight container management platform for production grade environments, powered by Kubernetes, and delivered with Cisco enterprise-class support. It reduces the complexity of configuring, deploying, securing, scaling and managing containers via automation coupled with Cisco’s best practices for security and networking. Cisco Container Platform is built with an open architecture using open source components, so you're not locked in to any single vendor. It works across both on-premises and public cloud environments. And because it’s optimized with Cisco HyperFlex, this preconfigured, integrated solution sets up in minutes.

Cisco

Red Hat® OpenShift® offers a consistent hybrid cloud foundation for building and scaling containerized applications. Benefit from streamlined platform installation and upgrades from one of the enterprise Kubernetes leaders.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

Clemson University

Edenor, BMW, Ford, Argentine Ministry of Health

Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Amazon Web Services (AWS), VMware and others in Container Management. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Container Management vendors.

We monitor all Container Management 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.