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

Google App Engine vs Red Hat OpenShift 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
5.5
Google App Engine lowered deployment costs significantly, though ROI varies with expertise, highlighting potential savings with correct use.
Sentiment score
7.8
Red Hat OpenShift improves productivity, offers cost savings, enhances system stability, and provides 15% ROI, especially in privacy-focused sectors.
Once we deployed this same application as part of Google App Engine, the cost drastically reduced to just $120 for the small instance we use for our development.
Operationally, it was efficient for us because we could easily spin up new versions to demonstrate new functionality without modifying the original environment.
I have noticed a return on investment in terms of less maintenance, but it depends on the organization's standard deployment preferences.
With OpenShift combined with IBM Cloud App integration, I can spin an integration server in a second as compared to traditional methods, which could take days or weeks.
Moving to OpenShift resulted in increased system stability and reduced downtime, which contributed to operational efficiency.
It is always advisable to get the bare minimum that you need, and then add more when necessary.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.5
Google App Engine's customer service varies, with mixed experiences ranging from quick support to delayed responses, affecting satisfaction.
Sentiment score
6.8
Red Hat OpenShift support is mixed, praised for expertise but criticized for slow responses and varying experiences based on subscription.
They route us toward the appropriate team handling Google App Engine or other services, so when there is an issue, the respective team connects and provides support.
The technical support was very quick and responsive, with a direct team line available.
Technical support for Google App Engine is efficient and offers a brilliant solution.
Red Hat's technical support is responsive and effective.
I have been pretty happy in the past with getting support from Red Hat.
Red Hat's technical support is good, and I would rate it a nine out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Google App Engine is praised for scalability, integration, and resource expansion, although deployment challenges and bug handling need improvement.
Sentiment score
7.5
Red Hat OpenShift offers efficient scalability with automated features, easy deployment, and adaptability, despite cost and infrastructure considerations.
I would rate the scalability as nine out of ten, appreciating its design that does not require much attention to scaling configurations or costs.
Google App Engine scales well in the standard environment, which automatically handles traffic without manual scaling.
Google App Engine is highly scalable and can integrate easily with other applications.
The on-demand provisioning of pods and auto-scaling, whether horizontal or vertical, is the best part.
OpenShift's horizontal pod scaling is more effective and efficient than that used in Kubernetes, making it a superior choice for scalability.
Red Hat OpenShift scales excellently, with a rating of ten out of ten.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Google App Engine is highly stable, requires minimal maintenance, and ensures smooth application performance with quick bug resolutions.
Sentiment score
7.7
Red Hat OpenShift is praised for stability, reliability, and features like Blue-Green deployment, with minor issues quickly resolved.
I have not experienced any crashing or instability with Google App Engine.
However, large code bases can still cause it to slow down.
I would rate the stability of Google App Engine a perfect 10 out of 10, as it is completely managed by Google.
It provides better performance yet requires more resources compared to vanilla Kubernetes.
I've had my cluster running for over four years.
It performs well under load, providing the desired output.
 

Room For Improvement

Google App Engine needs cost reduction, enhanced usability, better language support, improved documentation, and more flexibility for broader adoption.
Red Hat OpenShift needs better documentation, improved usability, and enhancements in security, integration, technical support, and installation processes.
It would be beneficial if Flex services could scale down to zero instances during periods of no traffic.
The pricing is higher compared to alternatives like Kubernetes and Compute Engine.
In the Flex environment, SSH access is not available for private instances.
Learning OpenShift requires complex infrastructure, needing vCenter integration, more advanced answers, active directory, and more expensive hardware.
Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services.
We should aim to include VMware-like capabilities to be competitive, especially considering cost factors.
 

Setup Cost

Google App Engine is affordable for lightweight use but may become costly with increased usage and enterprise licenses.
Red Hat OpenShift pricing is high but potentially cost-effective for large enterprises, offering comprehensive support and enterprise capabilities.
For F1 usage with 256 MB, it is free.
My GCP billing is about 10 lakh INR per month, and Google App Engine contributes only 25,000 to 30,000 INR.
The pricing of Google App Engine largely depends on the features chosen; if we opt for the standard edition, it is less expensive, while the flexible option incurs more costs due to always having an instance running.
Initially, licensing was per CPU, with a memory cap, but the price has doubled, making it difficult to justify for clients with smaller compute needs.
Red Hat can improve on the pricing part by making it more flexible and possibly on the lower side.
The cost of OpenShift is very high, particularly with the OpenShift Plus package, which includes many products and services.
 

Valuable Features

Google App Engine provides scalable, secure, and cost-effective serverless architecture, supporting developers with seamless Google Cloud integration and productivity tools.
Red Hat OpenShift is valued for its security, scalability, automation, multi-cloud flexibility, and efficient management interface.
The solution offers scalability, autoscaling based on user demand, and security, as Google manages all updates and security patches.
Google App Engine offers a cloud-based solution for free, especially for Java, making it a cost-effective option compared to expensive VMs.
I also appreciate the Google App Engine standard environment because it handles traffic scaling without manual intervention.
Because it was centrally managed in our company, many metrics that we had to write code for were available out of the box, including utilization, CPU utilization, memory, and similar metrics.
The concept of containers and scaling on demand is a feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat OpenShift.
A valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift is its ability to handle increased loads by automatically adding nodes.
 

Categories and Ranking

Google App Engine
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Server Virtualization Software (9th), Container Management (12th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Google App Engine is 2.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 12.1%, up from 11.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

OmkarPatil - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
Adopting a flexible and efficient approach with noticeable improvements in operational costs and continued challenges in job management
Currently, one of the biggest challenges we face is with services and jobs. For spawning batches, although it has crons, it is not easy to integrate with enterprise systems such as Autosys. The entire company uses Autosys, but we are not able to integrate it effectively. We need intermediate servers to run OC utility commands and initiate the cron job. We have to do a lot of modifications to ensure our batches work properly. With physical or virtual servers, even in AWS, we are able to write and manage multiple jobs. Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge. Integrating third parties is a challenge with Red Hat OpenShift. For example, with Elasticsearch, onboarding itself was difficult, running file beats and dealing with routing issues. It is not straightforward, especially since we have some components in AWS as. AWS has many capabilities that come out of the box and are easier to work with compared to Red Hat OpenShift. Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services. The main reason we went with Red Hat OpenShift was because it is a private cloud, and we have regulatory requirements that prevent us from using public cloud.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
859,579 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
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Educational Organization
11%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google App Engine?
The product's setup and deployment phases are easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google App Engine?
Google App Engine's pricing seemed reasonable to my employer. However, I cannot make comparisons as I don't have experience with other managed services.
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...
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Khan Academy, Best Buy, Gigya, MetOffice, Getaround, Mimiboard, NewsLimited, WebFilings, and CloudLock.
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about Google App Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.