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

HPE Ezmeral Container Platform vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

HPE Ezmeral Container Platform
Ranking in Container Management
16th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in Container Management
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (3rd), Server Virtualization Software (10th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Container Management category, the mindshare of HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is 1.2%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 2.9%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat OpenShift2.9%
HPE Ezmeral Container Platform1.2%
Other95.9%
Container Management
 

Featured Reviews

CC
Effective cost management achieved with robust storage features but user experience and data management require improvements
HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is not user-friendly and has many parts that are more difficult than Cloudera. It is also a complex solution and has low features for data management. For example, it cannot make a data catalog or process data lineage without third-party support, which increases the cost for development.
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.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The stability of the HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is good, and I rate it an eight out of ten."
"If customers focus on primary apps or if they are using them for data science, this is a good solution."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the security context constraint (SCC). The solution’s security throughout the stack is good. And security context constraints provide port-level security. It's a granular level of control, where you can give privileges to certain users to work on certain applications."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"I have seen a return on investment, and it depends upon the types and the nature of some of the most critical applications that have been hosted on the OpenShift infrastructure."
"I like OCP, and the management UI is better than the open-source ones."
"I love to automate everything and OpenShift was been born for that. It takes care of the network layer itself and I don't need to dive into it; I can work on a top level. Our project has numerous services designed to run in Docker containers, and we have run almost all pieces in OpenShift."
"OpenShift offers an easy-to-use graphical user interface for cluster management, making it more accessible for administrators."
"OpenShift offers robust tools for monitoring application traffic, allowing us to analyze client requests and other business-related metrics."
"The virtualization of my APIs means I no longer have to pay VMware large amounts of money to only run in-house solutions."
 

Cons

"HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is not user-friendly and has many parts that are more difficult than Cloudera. It is also a complex solution and has low features for data management."
"The modernization in Ezmeral could be improved."
"There are challenges related to additional security layers, connectivity compliance for endpoints, and integration."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"It could use auto-scaling based on criteria such as transaction volume, queue backlog, etc. Currently, it is limited to CPU and memory."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"Needs work on volume handling (although this is already better with GlusterFS). Security (SSSD) would also be an improvement."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It's important to start small because the solution is scalable. We can build our cluster and look at the bundle option, not the external subscriptions. Talking to the people at Red Hat can save us money."
"The model of pricing and buying licences is quite rigid. We are in the process of negotiating on demand pricing which will help us take advantage of the cloud as a whole."
"My company makes payments towards the licensing costs attached to OpenShift."
"Depending on the extent of the product use, licenses are available for a range of time periods, and are renewable at the end of the period."
"The product’s pricing is expensive."
"It's expensive. It may be cheaper to invest in building Vanilla Kubernetes, especially if security is not the number one motivation or requirement. Of course, that's difficult, and in some business areas, such as banking, that's not something you can put as a second priority. In other situations, a Vanilla Kubernetes with a sufficiently strong team can be cheaper and almost as effective."
"The licensing cost for OpenShift is expensive when compared to other products. RedHat also charges you additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
"This solution is fairly expensive but comes at an average cost compared to other solutions in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise40
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with HPE Ezmeral Container Platform?
HPE Ezmeral Container Platform is not user-friendly and has many parts that are more difficult than Cloudera. It is also a complex solution and has low features for data management. For example, it...
What is your primary use case for HPE Ezmeral Container Platform?
We want to replace the existing Cloudera data lake with HPE Ezmeral Container Platform ( /products/hpe-ezmeral-container-platform-reviews ).
What advice do you have for others considering HPE Ezmeral Container Platform?
I rate the HPE Ezmeral Container Platform seven out of ten because it has strong features for storage but lacks certain data management functionalities, requiring additional investments for third-p...
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

data iku, StreamSets, unravel
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE Ezmeral Container Platform vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.