We performed a comparison between Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Windows Server based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Users of Windows Server 2016 feel that it is a very user-friendly solution. Furthermore, they note that its active directory feature is highly valuable. They also note that it is highly scalable. However, many users feel that its security capabilities could be greatly improved. They also feel that the graphical interface could be better.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Red Hat Enterprise Linux seems to be a slightly superior solution. All other things being more or less equal, our reviewers found Windows Server 2016 rather expensive to purchase and not as secure as it should be.
"While using it, we encountered far fewer complexities, and the entire process is much smoother and streamlined."
"I like most of the features. I like its stability. I like its views. It provides a very stable environment."
"Resiliency-wise, the solution is very good."
"The tool's most valuable feature is simplicity. There is value in having a fully CLI-based operating system instead of a GUI-based one. It is lightweight and can be leveraged without resource constraints."
"Red Hat Enterprise Linunx's most valuable feature is patching."
"The best system I've ever used is Red Hat, in terms of its ability and consistency of the operating system. Other than that, the vast majority of applications that I had, you can deploy Red Hat with the support of the vast majority of applications. We don't have many issues with the OS, the support is very good."
"The AppStream feature provides access to up-to-date languages and tools in a way that interoperates with third-party source code. It makes it a lot easier to maintain that, as well as keeps our developers happy by having newer versions of development languages available."
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux has made significant improvements in terms of storage. You can mount an 18 terabyte file system. It also supports NFS shares and the SIP share for the photos. There have been many features added since RHEL 6. It's more user-friendly and graphical."
"The installation of the solution is becoming easier every year after new releases. The first installation can take an hour but you can use templates to make the installation very quick."
"I would say Microsoft operating systems are more stable correctly than they were before, they have made some improvements over the years."
"I find mutual authentication and the environment useful."
"The performance is very good."
"I have found the solution to be flexible and easy to use."
"The solution is easy to use and it has good performance."
"The tool supports many applications."
"Most applications are compatible with this operating system."
"Red Hat can be tricky at times, but all operating systems are. The moves to systemd and NetworkManager haven't made the product more user-friendly. Let's put it that way. The network management they had before was easier and somewhat more reliable than NetworkManager, which Red Hat forces us to use now."
"The solution's modules feature could be better."
"The solution's licensing sometimes could be a little bit confusing for someone who's not a full-blown system admin and doesn't have a lot of experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux."
"I don't prefer Red Hat Enterprise Linux for desktop over other options."
"The solution should provide demos so that users can learn to use it and improve their environments."
"We need to have more flexibility on the developed versions. Not everybody is ready to subscribe to enterprise versions. They would like to test the tool without subscriptions."
"There's too much information on the support page sometimes."
"We had issues migrating from the old to the new RHEL version in the virtual environment. It forced us to spin up a new virtual environment to have the new RHEL version."
"There's a short availability that could be much better."
"Windows Server could be more secure."
"The upgrade process for this solution could be simplified and made more straightforward."
"The integration and monitoring could be improved."
"The security should be improved."
"The solution is rather expensive and could be more affordable."
"The technical support could improve."
"Resolving problems in the Windows environment should be improved."
More Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is ranked 1st in Operating Systems (OS) for Business with 167 reviews while Windows Server is ranked 4th in Operating Systems (OS) for Business with 180 reviews. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is rated 8.8, while Windows Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) writes "Highly stable, good knowledge base, and reasonable price". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Windows Server writes "Easy to setup, stable and caters to my wide range of use cases but lacks user-friendly interface". Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is most compared with Ubuntu Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise, Windows 10, CentOS and Oracle Linux, whereas Windows Server is most compared with Ubuntu Linux, Windows 10, Oracle Linux, Windows 11 and CentOS. See our Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) vs. Windows Server report.
See our list of best Operating Systems (OS) for Business vendors.
We monitor all Operating Systems (OS) for Business 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.