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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs Pivotal Cloud Foundry 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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Pivotal Cloud Foundry
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
8th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is 10.3%, up from 7.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

John Sanborn - PeerSpot reviewer
Runs on every platform; makes it easy to adapt to Kubernetes
One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive. Another thing is that OpenShift has its own CLI, it has features in it that you don't have under normal Kubernetes. So if you're just a plain Kubernetes developer, you either don't know about these other features and you don't take advantage of them so you're basically treating it like a normal Kubernetes or there's a slight learning curve as you start to learn how the new CLIs work, the other options that are not available in Kubernetes. There is a learning curve; it's not high, but it's still there. That's another negative against OpenShift. If you're purchasing OpenShift on their OpenShift container platform, you will have to manage the master nodes. If you are using Kubernetes in AWS, Google, and Azure, you don't manage master nodes. It's not really a big deal. It's all part of the patching in OpenShift. People will start to say, "Well, I don't want to manage the masters." But I think if they actually see the process of patching an OpenShift, they would say, "Okay, it's not even worth arguing because it's so simple." Alternatively, the main three cloud vendors can provide OpenShift as a service.
Vasundhara  Joshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamlessly scalable since applications written in Java and .NET do not create issues for its users
Regarding the setup phase, every step is a hurdle. With Pivotal Cloud Foundry, I won't get any proper resources for that. Even if I Google it, there is no proper solution for Pivotal Cloud Foundry. However, if we go for Azure or some other cloud, we can get a lot of information. I believe there is not much information for Pivotal Cloud Foundry since it may be some license issue. If you go for Azure, the migration process is straightforward. Since we have been given 10 GB of space in the public cloud, we are utilizing it in our company. So, we are trying to deploy our application on the cloud, and for us, it is like a trial process for now. From our total application rate, I can say that only two to three percent is on Pivotal Cloud Foundry. Currently, half of the code is in the shell script, which is causing issues. Also, most people in my organization have worked on Java-related code. For most of the applications, they are using the same, that is, shell script and AUTOsist, and so we haven't migrated yet. So that is the reason that we are planning to opt for a hybrid model so that we don't have to migrate completely to Pivotal Cloud Foundry.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"As a consulting company, we implement Azure Red Hat OpenShift for our clients, who appreciate its integration capabilities for enhancing cloud operations. While we handle implementation, build processes, and automation, the operational responsibility lies with the customer. The service provides basic processes and support from Red Hat and Microsoft, which benefits clients by allowing them to focus on their business rather than regular operations like cluster upgrades."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"The solution's support and its automation tool that ensures we are secure and appropriately configured are the most valuable features of Azure Red Hat OpenShift."
"Red Hat is a very stable product with good integration with products such as Kubernetes, and it also offers migration tools."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability."
"In Kubernetes, when traffic goes out of a pod, it has to have its own IP address. Every service that's going out requires another IP. But with OpenShift, you don't have to deal with any of those IPs because they use NAT."
"It supports AKS and other projects like Kubernetes or EKS."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is auto-healing and the plenty of other features that are provided."
"It supports CI/CD, and is integrated with the CI/CD very well."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very easy to use compared to other cloud technologies. It has a very good performance."
"The solution is stable and resilient. In our company, we do not even see any challenges with the solution."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring and the deployment is easier."
"It provides a set of developer-friendly tools that simplify application deployment."
"We find its stability and scalability valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is the UI, it is easy to use."
 

Cons

"Technically, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is fine. However, its marketing could be improved, especially when compared to the robust marketing efforts of Azure, HPE, and Nutanix."
"The product is expensive."
"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"There is room for improvement in terms of orchestration. While Azure orchestration offers valuable features, it's worth noting that it may not match the level of orchestration provided by Kubernetes itself."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"Automation could be improved."
"Regarding room for improvement, there's always room, but it's mainly about Azure itself rather than Azure Red Hat OpenShift. Azure is not as advanced as AWS in terms of supported services. AWS is the leader in this area. However, there's no need for service improvement in Azure Red Hat OpenShift as the service is excellent. I don't need additional features because I can customize it according to the customer's needs."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve the documentation. They are good, but they could improve more. Additionally, it would be beneficial if there were more use case examples."
"The user interface should be simpler to navigate because it t can take time for users to learn it."
"There are no synthetic application monitoring and real-time monitoring features."
"Something that can be done better is canary deployment. So, right now, we're using blue-green deployment. The support for canary deployment would be nice."
"I'd like to see a larger service offering."
"In the next release, I would like to see easy integration with external tools."
"There is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the future of Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
"It should offer more security features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift is not a low-price solution; it's expensive. Pricing depends on the strategy and whether you buy it directly from Red Hat or the Azure portal. Additionally, some customers may need a complete disaster recovery solution, which requires additional licensing and software products for implementation, such as backups."
"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"Licensing is on a monthly basis and right now we pay $24/month. There are no other costs over and above that."
"The pricing is on the higher side and there are cheaper options available."
"We do pay for the licensing cost because we have opted for a private cloud setup. So, it is a cloud setup, and we have to make payments based on the cloud size. I do not consider it very costly when comparing it to the market."
"The price of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is based on the customer's requirements. However, the price is comparable to other similar solutions."
"You're paying for the number of virtual machines you want to install in the installation."
"The price of Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve. However, in this category of solutions, they are all expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Government
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
39%
Manufacturing Company
19%
Insurance Company
6%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
The most valuable features of the solution are accessibility and scalability.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
Red Hat OpenShift is cheaper than Broadcom VMware. Pricing discussions typically follow considerations of functionality, efficiency, and strategy.
What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
Technically, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is fine. However, its marketing could be improved, especially when compared to the robust marketing efforts of Azure, HPE, and Nutanix.
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 Pivotal Cloud Foundry?
I find the ease of deployment and management of microservices to be the most valuable features. The platform also has good auto-scaling capabilities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pivotal Cloud Foundry?
I would say it is around a nine out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. Just short of Oracle. It's sort of Oracle cloud.
 

Also Known As

No data available
PCF, Pivotal Application Service (PAS), Pivotal Container Service (PKS), Pivotal Function Service (PFS)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Humana, Citibank, Mercedes Benz, Liberty Mutual, The Home Depot, GE, West Corp, Merrill Corporation, CoreLogic, Orange, Dish Network, Comcast, Bloomberg, Internal Revenue Service, Ford Motor Company, Garmin, Volkswagen, Solera, Allstate, US Air Force, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, ScotiaBank
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Pivotal Cloud Foundry and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.