We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure and OpenShift based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: When choosing the best PaaS Cloud Solution, PeerSpot users rate Microsoft Azure as the best choice. Microsoft Azure provides robust PaaS options, such as robust platform and infrastructure services. The solution also functions extremely well as a SaaS and IaaS solution. Many users feel security and monitoring is lacking somewhat with OpenShift and that it should have better integrations with public clouds.
"We didn't have any problems setting it up."
"We find that it is easy to integrate with other Microsoft technologies such as Microsoft Office."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"SQL Server has been most beneficial for our client’s workload."
"Technical support has been extremely helpful."
"The best feature in Microsoft Azure is that I don't have to change computers. I don't have to upgrade or if something breaks or a hard drive crashes. The lack of a physical aspect is the major feature for me."
"The main benefit of Microsoft Azure is that it is cloud-based. We are using Microsoft Visual Studio for our code and it is tightly integrated with Microsoft Azure. Additionally, the solution is user-friendly."
"Managed storage capabilities, which create a very simple way to create, copy, and replicate local or geo-replicate, it's very simple to assign workloads."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"I am impressed with the product's security features."
"Scaling and uptime of the applications are positives."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the great customer service and the ability for our team to get assistance when we need it."
"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."
"We have found the cluster management function to be very good with this product."
"The installation process is complex."
"The quality of some components of Microsoft Azure is not that great. For example, Microsoft has not fixed issues in Microsoft Teams for many years. There are well-known issues that are submitted by customers two years ago and they still are not fixed."
"The tool should add an interface that is similar to AWS."
"More expensive than other solutions without justification."
"Performance could be improved."
"I would like to see this solution support integration."
"Microsoft Azure needs to improve its user interface. New developers and teams have difficulty understanding its lifecycle."
"Because it has a lot of features, a person just coming into Microsoft Azure might feel that it is a bit complex."
"Room for improvement is around the offerings that come as a bundle with the container platform. The packaging of the platform should be done such that customers do not have to purchase additional licenses."
"An enhancement to consider for the future might involve incorporating a comprehensive solution for CI/CD tailored specifically for OpenShift."
"The tool lacks some features to make it compliant with Kubernetes"
"The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management."
"The latest 4.0 version of OpenShift disabled a few of the features we previously made use of, although this wasn't a huge deal."
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"It could use auto-scaling based on criteria such as transaction volume, queue backlog, etc. Currently, it is limited to CPU and memory."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 299 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Pivotal Cloud Foundry and IBM Public Cloud, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), Google Cloud and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI). See our Microsoft Azure vs. OpenShift 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.