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

Microsoft Azure VMware 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

Microsoft Azure VMware
Ranking in Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
4
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 Microsoft Azure VMware is 3.7%, up from 2.4% 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%
Microsoft Azure VMware3.7%
Other87.7%
Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

DW
Solutions Area Lead at Tech One Global
Cloud migration has reduced hardware dependence and optimizes security and AI-ready operations
Microsoft Azure VMware is an area that requires attention. I believe the VMware part should eventually merge with Azure as a single Azure platform, moving away from hypervisor-on-hypervisor architecture and instead bringing VMware features into Azure as native capabilities or as VMware-labeled features running in a true cloud environment. Some features should be brought in to achieve this integration. Additional improvements for Microsoft Azure VMware would include integration with Azure Site Recovery and disaster recovery capabilities. The ideal scenario would be VMware as primary with disaster recovery in Azure, connecting in a native manner. These improvements should be delivered as an integrated solution available out of the box rather than as separate components. Integration with other solutions such as Microsoft Site Recovery should encompass Azure native business continuity and disaster recovery with VMware. Microsoft Azure VMware would serve as primary hosting and connect natively to business continuity and disaster recovery capabilities with Azure. This should be available as a native feature.
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

"For new users, if you have a scalable environment where a VMware data center makes sense for your business, I definitely recommend AVS."
"The capabilities are like a lift-and-shift operation for moving existing VMware environments to the cloud. The time for migration onto the cloud has substantially reduced."
"Since organizations are already on VMware, they can lift and shift everything to Microsoft Azure VMware, allowing the data center to be moved as a whole rather than as separate servers."
"The integration is very good."
"Regarding stability, it is like a five-star solution."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"We have found the solution to be very scalable during our time using it, and we now have a large number of transactions passing through the product."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"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 virtualization of my APIs means I no longer have to pay VMware large amounts of money to only run in-house solutions."
"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."
"This solution is providing a platform with OOTB features that are difficult to build from scratch."
"Overall, Red Hat is a handy tool to have, like an electric screwdriver instead of a manual one, because we can use what they've already written to make us more productive."
 

Cons

"The only issue is that a small challenge was found regarding the network...to have extended, smooth VLANs and everything else was a little bit complicated."
"Azure VMware needs to cater to smaller enterprises, as it is currently meant for larger entities. One improvement could be more support for mid-sized or scalable environments."
"Well, sometimes they release product after product, so it's it's kind of hard to keep an overview of all the different aspects of of the solutions."
"Azure VMware needs to cater to smaller enterprises, as it is currently meant for larger entities."
"Microsoft Azure VMware is an area that requires attention."
"There are still some issues with it. I have several cases at Red Hat that need to be resolved."
"One of the features that I've observed in Tanzu Mission Control is that I can manage multiple Kubernetes environments. For instance, one of my lines of business is using OpenShift OKD; another one wants to use Google Anthos, and somebody else wants to use VMware Tanzu. If I have to manage all these, Tanzu Mission Control is giving me the opportunity to completely manage all of my Kubernetes clusters, whereas, with OpenShift, I can only manage a particular area. I can't manage other Kubernetes clusters. I would like to have the option to manage all Kubernetes clusters with OpenShift."
"There is no orchestration platform in OpenShift, but we do in Kubernetes."
"I think OpenShift PREMIERE costs a lot more, compared to the support given in Europe."
"The product’s integration with Windows containers and other third-party products needs improvement."
"We had stability issues, especially with earlier versions where the underlying Kubernetes wasn't stable at all."
"I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive."
"The GUI could have more capabilities, particularly around virtualization. Some features are missing, such as storage migrations, when compared with VMware."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is very competitive."
"The mandatory requirements, such as a minimum of three nodes, make it expensive. The customers need to sign up for approximately $20,000 per month."
"To be honest, the tool comes at a high price."
"The product’s pricing is expensive."
"The pricing for OpenShift includes support and licensing, which costs approximately $400."
"We had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license for all our servers' operating systems. By having multiple Red Hat products together, you can negotiate costs and leverage on having a sort of enterprise license agreement to reduce the overall outlay or TCO."
"The cost is quite high."
"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 product's support is expensive. I would rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"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 solution is cost-effective."
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
University
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise53
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure VMware?
The pricing is high, rated around nine to 9.5 out of ten. The mandatory requirements, such as a minimum of three nodes, make it expensive. The customers need to sign up for approximately $20,000 pe...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure VMware?
Microsoft Azure VMware is an area that requires attention. I believe the VMware part should eventually merge with Azure as a single Azure platform, moving away from hypervisor-on-hypervisor archite...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Azure VMware?
People are moving to Microsoft Azure VMware primarily due to reducing on-premises hardware dependencies. One key factor is VMware licensing, and another is hardware costs. Hardware prices are incre...
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

Information Not Available
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure VMware vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.