

Microsoft Azure and Red Hat OpenShift are key competitors in the cloud computing sector, each offering unique advantages. Microsoft Azure takes the lead in providing an extensive array of global cloud services, which allows broader integration and deployment options, making it attractive for enterprises in diverse sectors. Red Hat OpenShift, however, has the upper hand in container orchestration and Kubernetes integration, which are crucial for companies focused on container management and scalable application deployments.
Features: Microsoft Azure provides global data center availability, open REST protocols, and high scalability and availability. It integrates well with both Microsoft and non-Microsoft services, offering multi-language support. Red Hat OpenShift focuses on container orchestration and scalability, excelling in Kubernetes support and security features, alongside robust application lifecycle management.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure could enhance its pricing transparency, improve subscription models, and strengthen debugging and logging capabilities. Enhancements in security measures and user interface usability are suggested too. Red Hat OpenShift could simplify its configuration processes, improve documentation, and offer better integration with third-party services to ease multi-cloud management complexities and bolster support.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Azure eases public cloud deployment but can overwhelm users with its vast feature set initially; its customer support garners mixed feedback regarding response times. Red Hat OpenShift delivers robust deployment for Kubernetes with the need for expertise; though its support is highly lauded for those familiar with its systems.
Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Azure's flexible pay-as-you-go pricing benefits large enterprises but may be costly for smaller setups. Understanding costs can be complex. Red Hat OpenShift is costly, particularly for its enterprise features, but offers considerable cost savings in container management compared to internal solutions, delivering ROI through scalability and Kubernetes integration.
The value for money is good, and Microsoft Azure has positively impacted our operational costs.
When we use Microsoft Azure, it provides enhanced security from our perspective, though I am not certain about the financial return on investment or benefits for our users as I do not have that information.
With OpenShift combined with IBM Cloud App integration, I can spin an integration server in a second as compared to traditional methods, which could take days or weeks.
Moving to OpenShift resulted in increased system stability and reduced downtime, which contributed to operational efficiency.
It is always advisable to get the bare minimum that you need, and then add more when necessary.
Microsoft needs to engage L3 and L2 in support when specified in service tickets.
We eventually get the resolution we seek.
I would rate their technical support a ten because we have various support channels available.
Red Hat's technical support is responsive and effective.
Customer support is really good because so far in our case, we have always received a prompt response, and they have been really helpful to us.
I have been pretty happy in the past with getting support from Red Hat.
Microsoft Azure is not just one product; it is a platform with multiple products within Microsoft Azure, and I would say it is scalable and would rate it a nine.
The scalability of Microsoft Azure is excellent for growth and adaptation, depending on company requirements.
It has different kinds of designs that allow for management and deployment in multi-zones, offering both scalable and non-scalable options.
The on-demand provisioning of pods and auto-scaling, whether horizontal or vertical, is the best part.
OpenShift's horizontal pod scaling is more effective and efficient than that used in Kubernetes, making it a superior choice for scalability.
Red Hat OpenShift scales excellently, with a rating of ten out of ten.
We noticed a few critical servers went down due to a Microsoft Azure-end hardware issue.
We are now migrating clients without the zoning into mandatory multi-zone deployments, so if one zone goes down, their application and database remain live.
Microsoft Azure is quite stable, but recent outages and security issues have slightly decreased my confidence.
It provides better performance yet requires more resources compared to vanilla Kubernetes.
I've had my cluster running for over four years.
It performs well under load, providing the desired output.
Recent outages and security issues are also a concern, causing a decrease in confidence, especially when partnering with third-party companies.
The administrative side is suitable for technical people, but our finance and HR super users find it less user-friendly, as they prefer drag-and-drop features to build their own solutions without contacting IT.
There is still room for improvement in terms of pricing.
Learning OpenShift requires complex infrastructure, needing vCenter integration, more advanced answers, active directory, and more expensive hardware.
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.
We should aim to include VMware-like capabilities to be competitive, especially considering cost factors.
Microsoft solutions might be cheaper than some services like AWS, but some solutions may be more expensive depending on the services compared.
Copilot is expensive based on recent pricing for our POC.
They have discounts and also provide promotions for a three-year reservation which comes with significant discounts on the infrastructure part.
Initially, licensing was per CPU, with a memory cap, but the price has doubled, making it difficult to justify for clients with smaller compute needs.
The pricing for Red Hat OpenShift is considered quite high.
Red Hat can improve on the pricing part by making it more flexible and possibly on the lower side.
Power BI, another feature of Azure, is extremely elegant and has robust features that support forecasting using R and Python.
If Microsoft gives a report, such as a server performance report in a detailed way, which shows what is consuming more CPU, memory, and disk IO, and network utilization during a particular time, it would be helpful to visualize that information.
What is very interesting in terms of scalability is the automatic possibilities to provision some new machines to be able to absorb the number of users we have in the system.
Because it was centrally managed in our company, many metrics that we had to write code for were available out of the box, including utilization, CPU utilization, memory, and similar metrics.
The concept of containers and scaling on demand is a feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat OpenShift.
A valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift is its ability to handle increased loads by automatically adding nodes.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Azure | 15.7% |
| Red Hat OpenShift | 9.5% |
| Other | 74.8% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 140 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 53 |
| Large Enterprise | 150 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 17 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 43 |
Microsoft Azure integrates services and offers flexibility, ensuring compatibility with diverse environments. Its scalability, security, and cost-efficient features enhance deployment and management, making it ideal for infrastructure services and application hosting.
Azure provides a comprehensive suite of tools for application deployment, virtual machine management, and data analytics. It allows seamless integration with Power BI and offers a user-friendly interface supported by detailed documentation and technical support. Though users appreciate its capabilities, they sometimes face challenges with costs, setup, and interface complexity, alongside integration and performance issues. Frequent updates and a learning curve are also noted, though Azure's cloud-based security and scalability remain critical for disaster recovery and business continuity.
What are Azure's key features?Microsoft Azure is widely implemented in industries like financial services, healthcare, and logistics for hosting enterprise applications and vital services. Companies utilize its capabilities for IoT applications, DevOps, and Kubernetes clusters, benefiting from its cloud migrations, data analytics, and active directory support.
Red Hat OpenShift offers a robust, scalable platform with strong security and automation, suitable for container orchestration, application deployment, and microservices architecture.
Designed to modernize applications by transitioning from legacy systems to cloud-native environments, Red Hat OpenShift provides powerful CI/CD integration and Kubernetes compatibility. Its security features, multi-cloud support, and source-to-image functionality enhance deployment flexibility. While the GUI offers user-friendly navigation, users benefit from its cloud-agnostic nature and efficient lifecycle management. However, improvements are needed in documentation, configuration complexity, and integration with third-party platforms. Pricing and high resource demands can also be challenging for wider adoption.
What are the key features of Red Hat OpenShift?Red Hat OpenShift is strategically implemented for diverse industries focusing on container orchestration and application modernization. Organizations leverage it for migrating applications to cloud-native environments and managing CI/CD pipelines. Its functionality facilitates efficient resource management and microservices architecture adoption, supporting enterprise-level DevOps practices. Users employ it across cloud and on-premises platforms to drive performance improvements.
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.