No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Outposts 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Outposts
Ranking in Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (3rd), Server Virtualization Software (6th), Container Management (7th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms category, the mindshare of AWS Outposts is 8.8%, down from 15.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 8.6%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat OpenShift8.6%
AWS Outposts8.8%
Other82.6%
Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Strategic Cloud Consultant at Shell
Seamless and simplified migration of applications with significant low latency
The most valuable aspect is that it comes in a rack form factor which makes it incredibly easy to use and deploy various AWS services. You can start with foundational services like EC2, and then expand to container management with ECS and Kubernetes with EKS. You can also take advantage of EBS for storage needs, manage databases using RDS, and ensure load balancing with ALBs. It essentially brings a comprehensive range of AWS services to your on-premises environment in a convenient rack format.
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
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

"AWS can manage services when deployed on customer sites due to Outposts' capability of being installed in on-premises environments."
"Outposts allows you to isolate your private environment from the public cloud provider while enabling almost all the features that are available on public cloud services."
"With AWS, we've had seamless integration and support for many of our applications."
"The most valuable aspect is its ability to provide interfaces for events."
"We expanded the projects over a year and a half, and we used the solution to save around 30% of our customer operations costs with both customers."
"AWS Outposts brings native AWS services, infrastructure, and API to our on-premises data center or co-location facilities."
"If you compare with the full bundle of these services, you can see the difference. This is enough for these locations in private data centers. Because the main reasons why the customers want to have it on their side are for the low latency and the security of their critical data."
"If you compare with the full bundle of these services, you can see the difference, and this is enough for these locations in private data centers because the main reasons why the customers want to have it on their side are for the low latency and the security of their critical data."
"OpenShift is based on Kubernetes and we try to use all the Kubernetes objects of OpenShift. We don't use features that are specific to OpenShift, except internal certificates for the services. The one feature that is missing from Kubernetes and that is really useful in OpenShift is the lifecycle of the cluster and the ease of installation. We use VMware and VMware integration internally with the OpenShift installer, which is very good. With OpenShift it's easy to spin up or scale out a cluster."
"It has features that enhance security, ease of deployment, and service exposure compared to Kubernetes."
"Our small team developed and rolled out everything to production in a short time, mostly thanks to OpenShift."
"Has a better UI and is good as a CICD solution."
"The scalability of OpenShift combined with Kubernetes is good. At least from the software standpoint, it becomes quite easy to handle the scalability through configuration. You need to constantly monitor the underlying infrastructure and ensure that it has adequate provisioning. If you have enough infrastructure, then managing the scalability is quite easy which is done through configuration."
"Red Hat OpenShift helped us with managing scaling up and scaling down."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"Red Hat OpenShift offers very comprehensive security standards, everything is designed based on a zero-trust security framework, and I appreciate that about it."
 

Cons

"The product is heavy to ship and can be difficult to handle logistically."
"It would be beneficial to have the option for capacity expansion."
"The pricing model needs improvement because right now it's very expensive. All of these solutions are very expensive and it prevents other customers or owners of data centers from buying it."
"Depending on the installation process, we have found some bugs and issues with the solution when the same platform is not used."
"The pricing model needs improvement because right now it's very expensive."
"The platform needs to spend more time investing in strengthening its governance and information tools and consider the real needs of its customers."
"It would be great if it could support Glue services."
"Also, it would be beneficial if AWS allowed for more granular and customizable pricing options."
"OpenShift's storage management could be better."
"Possibly, the most complicated part is the configuration for an application."
"The main drawback was the upgrade from Openshift Enterprise 3.11 to Openshift Enterprise 4 up to now."
"This solution is fairly expensive but comes at an average cost compared to other solutions in the market."
"The GUI could have more capabilities, particularly around virtualization. Some features are missing, such as storage migrations, when compared with VMware."
"I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive."
"OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets."
"The software-defined networking part of it caused us quite a bit of heartburn. We ran into a lot of problems with the difference between on-prem and cloud, where we had to make quite a number of modifications... They've since resolved it, so it's not really an issue anymore."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Customers should consider the high cost, which can range from $10,000 to hundreds of thousands depending on the components."
"While the longer-term pricing is suitable for enterprise contracts, it can be on the higher side, especially when organizations don't utilize all the services included in the bundles."
"AWS Outposts is a cheap solution."
"The pricing of Outposts needs to be evaluated from the standpoint of what's cost-effective at your company: How are you going to use it? How much money will it save for your products or applications? Is it worth it? I would say it's probably too expensive for small or medium-sized companies. However, big companies might find it to be highly cost-effective depending on their respective cloud strategies."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"My company makes payments towards the licensing costs attached to OpenShift."
"The price depends on the type and the nature of the organizations, along with the types of projects that are of considerable range."
"The product's support is expensive. I would rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The product has reasonable pricing."
"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 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."
"We are currently using the open version, OKD. We plan to get the enterprise version in the future."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise53
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS Outposts?
With AWS, we've had seamless integration and support for many of our applications.
What needs improvement with AWS Outposts?
Outposts is not a simple solution to implement as it needs to be shipped from the US and involves high delivery costs and running costs. The product is heavy to ship and can be difficult to handle ...
What advice do you have for others considering AWS Outposts?
I rate AWS Outposts a nine out of ten, indicating room for some improvement.
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 needs improvement with OpenShift?
Areas where Red Hat OpenShift can be improved include the licensing being a bit complex and maybe expensive, as that is something in the hands of the organization's higher management, especially wh...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Philips, Morningstar
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Outposts vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.