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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift 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

Azure Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Server Virtualization Software (10th), Container Management (12th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Azure Red Hat OpenShift is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 12.0%, up from 11.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

ArtemiiKropachev - PeerSpot reviewer
A high-performing solution provides highly available, fully managed OpenShift clusters on demand and lot of automation that developers can utilize
Azure Red Hat OpenShift is very valuable because it is a complete application delivery platform with a lot of automation that developers can utilize. It's a complete solution without building your own on top of Kubernetes. 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.
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

"It has a feature to automatically scale up or scale down. If my application is running in peak hours, it will automatically increase."
"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."
"Technical support from Red Hat is very good."
"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."
"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."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"It has features that enhance security, ease of deployment, and service exposure compared to Kubernetes."
"The stability has been good."
"Self-provisioning support saves a lot of time and unnecessary work from the system administrator who can use this time to run and monitor the infrastructure. For the developer, this means less time waiting for the provisioning and excellent flexibility for development, testing, and production. Also, in such systems it is easy for developers to monitor applications even after deployment."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"Key features are WildFly, because it standardizes infrastructure and the git repository and docker. Git is essential for source code and Docker for infrastructure."
"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."
"The product's initial setup is very easy, especially compared to AWS."
 

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."
"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."
"One of the things to notice is that this product can be expensive."
"Azure Red Hat OpenShift's support should be improved."
"The product is expensive."
"They need to improve the core licensing model."
"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."
"I would like Azure Red Hat OpenShift to be more open to new frameworks and languages. Currently, if I create a pod with Rust, it doesn't work in OpenShift, and I must create a layer of interpretation."
"Its virtual upgrades are time-consuming."
"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."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge."
"While Red Hat OpenShift is stable, monitoring and reporting capabilities need improvement. Integration with tools like Grafana and Prometheus is necessary for capturing logs, and manually managing these aspects is time-consuming."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to a similar product."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"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."
"Compared to other cloud environments like Amazon or Google, Azure Red Hat OpenShift is an expensive solution."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"I don't deal with the cost part, but I know that the cost is very high when compared to other products. They charge for CPU and memory, but we don't worry about it."
"The price depends on the type and the nature of the organizations, along with the types of projects that are of considerable range."
"The licensing cost for OpenShift is expensive when compared to other products. RedHat also charges you additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
"OpenShift is really good when we need to start, but once we get to a certain scale, it becomes too expensive."
"This solution is fairly expensive but comes at an average cost compared to other solutions in the market."
"The pricing is standard; the solution isn't particularly expensive or affordable."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Government
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
 

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?
The pricing for OpenShift is similar to other solutions like Docker ( /products/docker-37146-reviews ) Studio. The plans with ARO and AWS are standard in the market. However, using OpenShift on-pre...
What needs improvement with Azure Red Hat OpenShift?
I would like Azure Red Hat OpenShift to be more open to new frameworks and languages. Currently, if I create a pod with Rust, it doesn't work in OpenShift, and I must create a layer of interpretati...
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

Information Not Available
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Red Hat OpenShift vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.