We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."They release new solutions almost every quarter and you don't get that kind of innovation from an enterprise company."
"Very good automation and very stable."
"There is no downtime. The solution is reliable."
"In general, the cost management in Amazon is complicated. It's not too straightforward."
"One of the most valuable things about it, besides the stability, is that you can forget about infrastructure because you're just doing it on AWS. I remember the times before AWS and other cloud solutions existed, and it was a huge pain to get real hardware, put it inside, configure everything, report everything, and do a scale. It was very, very difficult compared to how it is now. Not even just AWS, but what all these cloud providers are doing, I would say, is a huge advancement in technology."
"I think Amazon AWS is easy to use, and it's a good service. I also like Amazon EKS because it's good."
"Since AWS came a bit later to the market, they are always improving and upgrading their platform."
"Amazon AWS is easy to use and in the past two years, I've never had any issues with scalability or stability."
"In general, customers appreciate its ability to run different workloads, manage applications through CI/CD pipelines like Jenkins, and leverage tools like Helm charts and Kako."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is the UI console. We are able to receive the resources from the console directly."
"The deployment mechanism has become more dynamic with the use of the product."
"Our pipeline integrates various monitoring tools like Fortify for security checks. Once the pipeline processes the code, the finished product is deployed on Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud. We ensure application setup and recovery by utilizing two separate clusters on OpenShift."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution offers the most robust Kubernetes orchestration available."
"The portability, moving from one platform to another, is easy."
"They should really consolidate and make things simpler rather than offer you hundreds of random options. The way everything is arranged really forces users to figure out everything on their own and then, on top of that, to calculate the total costs. There's an infinite number of combinations even just with cost calculations. It's just too much."
"Monitoring still needs to be improved."
"The setup of the solution is not so easy, it requires various skills to complete it. The whole implementation can take a month."
"Somehow Amazon associated their marketplace as a place to find images of various installs (preconfigured software) and was late in the game enabling and promoting SaaS-based solutions. Thus, the AWS marketplace has near zero awareness in the mind of the prospect to find solutions to various problems plaguing them."
"A person with no AWS experience might find it overwhelming at first."
"You'll probably experience some sticker shock with AWS. You attempt to understand the cost, but you don't realize what you're paying until you get your first bill. I don't know if Amazon does that on purpose, but costs can get out of control quickly if you don't have someone who specializes in AWS cost management."
"More complete and specific training for many of the technologies, specifically with Python Django and the CMS (Mezzanine)."
"The web console of AWS is not so user-friendly."
"The effectiveness is satisfactory, and there haven't been any additional fees due to meeting demands. However, there's room for improvement in pricing, performance, and stability. Regarding the UI, it could be more user-friendly and integrated with various platforms. Currently, the UI lacks user-friendliness, especially for developers unfamiliar with container technology. Expecting them to create YAML files for security purposes is unrealistic without proper guidance or experience. This aspect needs improvement."
"The general purpose solution tries to cater to too many customers so it is heavy."
"There is room for improvement in cluster-based queue monitoring and autoscaling."
"The installation and configuration procedure should be simplified."
"The service mesh integrations could improve the solution."
"Making it even more cost-effective could be explored."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
More Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in PaaS Clouds with 250 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is ranked 16th in PaaS Clouds with 7 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Reliable with good security but is difficult to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud writes "Communication can be built on any cloud and that is a big advantage for customers". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, Microsoft Azure, Red Hat OpenShift, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is most compared with Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure. See our Amazon AWS vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
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.