We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure and OpenShift based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: When choosing the best PaaS Cloud Solution, PeerSpot users rate Microsoft Azure as the best choice. Microsoft Azure provides robust PaaS options, such as robust platform and infrastructure services. The solution also functions extremely well as a SaaS and IaaS solution. Many users feel security and monitoring is lacking somewhat with OpenShift and that it should have better integrations with public clouds.
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure is the Area feature. Additionally, the SQL Server DB as a serverless pool is useful, storage-wide external tables are helpful, and PolyBase is very good at reading external data. The capacity of Synapse to analyze in analytics is very good and it supports a range of data."
"The performance is good."
"Microsoft Azure has been easy to use in my experience."
"Microsoft Azure has thousands of services and products."
"The scalability is the most unique feature. Whenever our user count is high, and utilization of our application results in high use of resources, Microsoft Azure automatically scales our application so that users can access it without any issues or errors. Microsoft Azure gives you the flexibility to scale your applications up and down at any moment. It is quite easy and impressive."
"Reliable with ease of provisional services."
"We have found the user interface to be intuitive. Microsoft is a master at UI."
"Technical support, from what I understand, is quite helpful and we speak with them regularly."
"The security is good."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the great customer service and the ability for our team to get assistance when we need it."
"The most valuable feature is the auto scalers for all microservices. The feature allows us to place request limits and it is much cheaper than AWS."
"In terms of implementation, OpenShift is very user-friendly, which is an advantage. We are using it along with GitLab for implementing CI/CD pipelines. That's a feature that other products also have, but in OpenShift, we find it good."
"The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
"The initial setup is simple, and OpenShift is open-source, so it's easy to install on any cloud platform."
"The solution provides a lot of flexibility to the application team for running their applications in the container platform, without needing to monitor the entire infrastructure all the time. It automatically scales and automatically self-heals. There is also a mechanism to alert the team in case it is over-committing or overutilizing the application."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"Microsoft Azure can improve by adding more features for virtual machines, such as tier virtual machines."
"At this point, the latency is too high to use Azure in our production environment."
"It could be cheaper."
"The solution is less mature than AWS."
"The market place can be raised, and the CMT can be more sophisticated to create more opportunities for the end users."
"The solution could improve the stability. However, this could be a configuration issue that we are not been trained."
"We like that they have the new capabilities, but sometimes they're deprecating capabilities faster than we can handle. If we had to improve it, we would want to stay on some of these older capabilities a bit longer."
"Microsoft Azure could improve by having the availability be 100%. Which is difficult, but not impossible."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"The solution needs to support the new features in Kubernetes more quickly."
"My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs. Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime. Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud. I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster."
"There is no orchestration platform in OpenShift."
"The metrics in OpenShift can use improvement."
"Autoscaling is a very unique feature, but it could be useful to have more options based on traffic statistics, for example, via Prometheus. So, there should be more ready solutions to autoscale based on specific applications."
"Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 144 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 3rd in PaaS Clouds with 23 reviews. Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4, while OpenShift is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Optimized cloud solution with reliable recovery and fail services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Microsoft Azure is most compared with Oracle Cloud Platform, Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, SAP Cloud Platform and SAP HANA Enterprise Cloud, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Oracle Cloud Platform, Google Cloud and VMware Tanzu Application Service. See our Microsoft Azure vs. OpenShift report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.