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 51 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform reviews

6,555 Views
6,489 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: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Container Management

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,497 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

6.8

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

Rifat Rahman

Infrastructure Architect & CEO at Tirzok Private Limited

Integration and automation have transformed deployment and maintenance

Regarding the learning curve, the customers actually do not need the technical nitty-gritty details; they need to know about the containerization journey because they are not familiar with it. They know it as a theory, but they don't understand anything about its practical implications. That's the main challenge. The solution itself doesn't require a high learning curve; it is actually quite good to manage. However, application developers and managers have to understand the beauty of it, and that is the challenge. If Red Hat can execute some programs regarding that, it will help. Regarding Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform, it is expensive according to market feedback. Notably, the platform plus is perceived as quite expensive and some features from an infrastructure perspective are lacking.

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."

"I definitely recommend Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform to other organizations due to its high availability, security, ease of use, and all the built-in features it offers."

"The auto scalability feature, which is based on smart agendas, determined from pre-prepared rules is the most valuable feature. You can also create different routes for deployment. Deployment types can be provided with an identifier, such as an ARB deployment. This really helped in rolling out releases without disrupting services for the end-users."

"Centralized control of container resources is most valuable."

"It’s user-friendly."

"Red Hat's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is good. It is a lightweight operating system. You don't have to worry about the security patches on the system. You can update the entire environment with security patches, which is a nice feature."

"Openshift is a very developer-friendly product."

"The software is user-friendly and straightforward to use, which is favorable to a developer."

"The stack in the software supply chain is one of the main reasons that we use OpenShift. When I came to this company, we bought hardware from IBM named Bluemix, and they used ICP, which stands for IBM Cloud Private."

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."

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

"It is difficult to deploy the OpenShift cluster in a bare-metal environment."

"The UI could be more user-friendly to drive tasks more effectively through the interface."

"Regarding return on investment, my customers have not yet seen value in money while or since implementing the Container Platform."

"It has an option to install OpenShift without connecting it to the Internet. We tried this, but it was very hard. We couldn't manage to use that option. We wanted to use it offline for installations, updates, upgrades, etc., but we didn't find the offline installation and updates easy. This could be better."

"The stability needs improvement."

"It can take 10 to 15 minutes to deploy a microservice. The CI/CD process takes a long time, and if it's because of OCP, that is something that can be changed."

"The support costs are too high."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The product pricing is competitive and structured around vCPU subscriptions, aligning with our application requirements."

"The pricing and licensing are handled on an upper management level, and I'm not involved in that, but I understand the solution to be somewhat pricey."

"The solution is expensive, and I rate it an eight out of ten. There is a subscription called OpenShift Plus, which offers additional features and products the vendor provides to complement the OpenShift Container Platform. These include ACM, Red Hat Quay, and Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation."

"The product is expensive."

"It depends on who you're talking to. For a large corporation, it is acceptable, other than the significant infrastructure requirements. For a small organization, it is in no way suitable, and we'd go for Amazon's container solution."

"I'm not familiar with pricing or financial aspects. In terms of effort versus benefit, it's worth it."

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

"The pricing is expensive for licensing."

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

867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	39

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?

Regarding whether Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is expensive or if the price is reasonable for my customers, to me, the services it provides should incur some costs, but based on market feed...

See all answers

Comparisons

No data available

Amazon EKS vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 55% of the time

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

Compared 12% of the time

HashiCorp Nomad vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 6% of the time

VMware Tanzu Platform vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 5% of the time

Amazon Elastic Container Service vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 4% of the time

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Container Management

September 2025

Download Cisco Container Platform [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

August 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: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,497 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.