We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure 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."I have found the solution to be flexible, easy to use, and the documents are straightforward to understand."
"The advantage of Microsoft Azure is its simplicity. It's easy to launch a project. However, the problem with this kind of solution is the reliability for the customers. You have to be sure to stay with Microsoft."
"Installation is easy as it's cloud-based. Performance is good. It's stable and scalable."
"Microsoft Azure is an optimized solution when we compare it to any other particular cloud solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of use."
"The data factory feature."
"Compute (App service, and virtual machine scale sets): The ability to manage Windows and Linus virtual machines."
"It is so huge and so powerful. The best thing is the possibilities of things that you can actually do with it. If you do it right, you can work or host your stuff a lot cheaper than traditionally. Its security is good, and it also reduces the strain on internal IT."
"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 deployment mechanism has become more dynamic with the use of the product."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution offers the most robust Kubernetes orchestration available."
"The portability, moving from one platform to another, is easy."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see this solution support integration."
"Monitoring options should be more sophisticated, as there are dashboards on which a end user is able to pin a lot of charts and a number of web parts, but for example, I would love to have some option like in Operational Management Suite."
"Microsoft Azure is so complicated inside. If you should do something internally, if you have to configure something, the opinion about Azure is that it is a little complicated inside. That's why the end users and clients are looking for help and why we help them configure and do anything inside of Azure. That is why we offer other tools to optimize the Azure environment."
"Establishing the account in the beginning was very difficult."
"I don't understand why we spend so much time and money on Azure when Microsoft relies on third-party companies for support in the CSP model. I don't know how the support model works within Microsoft, but giving it to poor-performing third-party companies is not ideal."
"Its subscription price could be cheaper."
"I would recommend some enhancement regarding integration features."
"Maybe Microsoft could improve its monitoring around the networking."
"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."
"Making it even more cost-effective could be explored."
"The installation and configuration procedure should be simplified."
"The service mesh integrations could improve the solution."
"The general purpose solution tries to cater to too many customers so it is heavy."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
"There is room for improvement in cluster-based queue monitoring and autoscaling."
More Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 299 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is ranked 16th in PaaS Clouds with 7 reviews. Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4, while Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is rated 8.2. 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 Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud writes "Communication can be built on any cloud and that is a big advantage for customers". Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Alibaba Cloud and Pivotal Cloud Foundry, whereas Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is most compared with Google Cloud and Amazon AWS. See our Microsoft Azure 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.