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.
"Storage has made remote access to files much more painless and easy."
"The performance is good."
"Virtual machine services, in SaaS services, M365, and Data Lake are all popular with our clients."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of use."
"We find that it is easy to integrate with other Microsoft technologies such as Microsoft Office."
"Azure Active Directory: Has powerful security and auditing capabilities that we use to secure all our apps."
"Azure offers broad compatibility with both structured and unstructured data. For example, we use PostgreSQL for storing Azure's official data and manage various types of data, including tabular and image data, accommodating the storage of all data types we handle. So, in many ways, Azure simplified the data storage and management needs."
"Compute (App service, and virtual machine scale sets): The ability to manage Windows and Linus virtual machines."
"The most valuable feature is the high availability for the applications."
"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."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"We want to build a solution that can be deployable to any cloud because of client requirements and OpenShift allows us to do this."
"The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
"The most valuable feature is the auto scalers for all microservices. The feature allows us to place request limits and it is much cheaper than AWS."
"What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud. I also find the design of OpenShift good."
"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."
"Azure installation is complicated. When we first deployed Azure, it was challenging."
"The price could be improved as well as the interface speed, and technical support."
"I think it would be good to keep making progress on giving users the ability to do action calls on Data Factory. Right now, it's mostly local. Perhaps Microsoft could add the ability to put some calls in the workflow."
"I would like to see more advanced functionality in terms of information security."
"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."
"The solution could always work to reduce its costs."
"One area for enhancement could be in the realm of big data and unstructured data storage."
"They can add more documentation about the solution."
"An enhancement to consider for the future might involve incorporating a comprehensive solution for CI/CD tailored specifically for OpenShift."
"We need some kind of a multi-cluster management solution from the Red Hat site."
"We experienced issues around desktop security, that stopped us implementing a new feature that had been developed."
"There is no orchestration platform in OpenShift."
"Its virtual upgrades are time-consuming."
"One area for improvement is the documentation. They need to make it a little bit more user-friendly. Also, if you compare certain features and the installation process with Rancher, Rancher is simpler."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"The area for improvement is mostly in support for legacy applications."
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, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry and IBM Public Cloud, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Google Cloud, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) 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.