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.
"The updates are the most valuable feature."
"Until now, RHEL has been the most stable OS I have ever seen. Nothing seems to break, with frequent updates. I have been running it 24/7 for the past 18 months and it runs flawlessly."
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux is easy to manage, update, and integrate. I also like Red Hat Enterprise Linux's built-in security features. You need to enable them by default or keep them enabled if you want your system to be secured. It protects most of the system components."
"The solution's stability is great, and patching it with Ansible is very easy."
"We're very happy with the amount of security customization we've been able to do with RHEL. The fact that Red Hat is really on top of security issues is also valuable. We get daily emails from Red Hat letting us know of possible issues and fixes, which is incredibly helpful for us."
"Customer support is valuable."
"It has improved our organization. It has standardized processes."
"I like most of the features. I like its stability. I like its views. It provides a very stable environment."
"The simplicity of the solution is the most valuable aspect."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to be used in a virtualized environment."
"Windows Server performance is very good for backups."
"We like the performance."
"Every time they perform a new release, the solution gets better and better."
"We have been using this solution for a long time and it has been stable."
"It is easy to use, and its performance is good."
"The solution has a sufficient amount of stability and performance that meets my needs."
"Scaling can be complicated and has room for improvement."
"Their pricing and documentation can be improved."
"The Authselect tool needs improvement. This tool is used to connect your system to an identity provider or directory service, e.g., openLDAP. There is documentation and descriptions. While there are a few use cases and examples described, it is sometimes hard to use these tools to set up the configuration that we need for our specific environment. I would like it if there was more general information about the tool, not just describing a use case. For example, here is how to do it and how to connect to some kind of openLDAP service as well as more information about when you need to configure certificate services and mutual authentication."
"The cockpit server doesn't work and is useless. I don't like the images shown in GCP. I prefer the ones in AWS. It seems like the solution is in tune with what we deploy on the private cloud."
"AIX will be out of support in the next few years, so that is a problem because a lot of the clinical apps use AIX."
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux should be available in a free version that developers could try on their own machines before deciding to implement the enterprise edition. It would be nice to have a community version available with all the features so developers can become more familiar with RHEL."
"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."
"Workstations: More applications for graphics."
"Resolving problems in the Windows environment should be improved."
"I would like Windows to come up lighter because the footprint itself can consume more than 300GB. It would probably take close to 100GB of space to install a Windows operating system because it has got so many features."
"Rebooting is sometimes required to resolve issues, although we don't know the root cause."
"Windows Server could be improved with cheaper licensing costs."
"I have found the stability to be good but it could improve."
"The solution needs to be more stable and secure."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly."
"The solution is rather expensive and could be more affordable."
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.