We compared Red Hat Quay and Harbor based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Users identified the need for improved documentation and tutorials to aid in effectively utilizing the platform. Additionally, users expressed interest in enhancements to the performance of Harbor, with faster response times and increased stability being desired. The platform could benefit from expanded customization options and better integration with other tools.
Features: Red Hat Quay is highly praised for its container image management, security features, and integration capabilities. On the other hand, Harbor stands out for its efficient and secure storage capabilities, user-friendly interface, and emphasis on security and compliance. Additionally, Harbor's seamless integration with other tools and platforms boosts user productivity.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Red Hat Quay is perceived as straightforward and hassle-free, while the setup cost for Harbor is minimal. Red Hat Quay is considered flexible and accommodating in terms of licensing, whereas Harbor has simple and hassle-free licensing., Red Hat Quay received positive feedback on its ROI, with improvements in efficiency and reliability. Users appreciated its ease of use and seamless integration. On the other hand, Harbor has highly satisfactory ROI, with significant returns on investment indicating profitability.
Room for Improvement: Red Hat Quay: Red Hat Quay could benefit from enhancements in user-friendliness, intuitive navigation, documentation, performance, integration with other tools, and customization options, as suggested by users. Harbor: Harbor requires enhancements in certain areas, as indicated by user feedback.
Deployment and customer support: User feedback on the duration required to establish a new tech solution is not provided for Red Hat Quay. In contrast, user feedback for Harbor varies, with some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others only needed one week for both. Context is key in understanding the actual timeframe., Red Hat Quay's customer service was highly regarded for its reliability, promptness, and knowledge. Users praised the support team's effectiveness in addressing issues and their excellent communication. Harbor's customer service also received high praise for its assistance and help.
The summary above is based on user interviews we conducted recently with Red Hat Quay and Harbor users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Right now this is the leading product in this category."
"It's easy to use, and it does what it is meant for."
"The product should integrate better with other storage options."
"The GUI needs to improve."
"It could be more integrated with other platforms."
Harbor is ranked 2nd in Container Registry while Red Hat Quay is ranked 6th in Container Registry. Harbor is rated 7.0, while Red Hat Quay is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Harbor writes "Check document vulnerabilities with this cloud-native product that needs to improve in ease-of-use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Quay writes "A stable repository that is easy to use and easy to install". Harbor is most compared with JFrog Container Registry, Azure Container Registry, Amazon ECR, VMware Harbor Registry and DigitalOcean Container Registry, whereas Red Hat Quay is most compared with JFrog Container Registry, Amazon ECR, Azure Container Registry and VMware Harbor Registry.
See our list of best Container Registry vendors.
We monitor all Container Registry 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.
