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."The most valuable feature is the instant availability of resources."
"It was very user-friendly when setting up the virtual machines and console. It was an easy task for my team to create virtual servers and start replications."
"The ability to quickly create and manage resources is critical to getting things done, Azure just makes getting things done a lot simpler."
"Offers many data security features including securing network access."
"Azure's Data Lake services are decent. I like AKS, and API Management is relatively straightforward to use. The security and SIEM options Azure offers are good. All the infrastructure services are easy to use and set up."
"The focus on security is excellent. We really appreciate that about the solution."
"Azure allows us to bring applications to life quickly."
"We've got multiple tools on Azure, which is a very good feature of Azure. Our Palo Alto firewall and other things are hosted in Azure. We're using Sentinel as well, which is a security tool that is being used by our SOC teams. I've also used AWS, and I find Azure to be more Windows-driven. Although Azure is newer as compared to AWS, it is growing fast. Microsoft is working towards the betterment of Azure."
"The solution offers the most robust Kubernetes orchestration available."
"The portability, moving from one platform to another, is easy."
"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 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."
"The subscription licensing is very complex and we would like to have it simplified."
"Something that could be added to the solution is the use of deep learning, which is going to grow in the near future."
"I would like to see all of the cloud providers be more compatible with each other."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly."
"It should have a better hybrid-cloud central analysis. Their support service also needs to be improved. Our main concern is support calls. Our issue is basically related to the technical functionality of the services that we use. It doesn't behave as expected, and support often fails to solve the problem."
"We use Microsoft Server 2019 and 2016. And I didn't like the 2019 client, so we had to downgrade back to 2016. The main issue there was its monitoring system. Our client needed an alternative, and if they were using more Windows products, they also needed to make that downgrade."
"The solution could always work to reduce its costs."
"The alerts management should be improved. Alerts management is very complicated to configure. You have to go through a lot of tests and config action groups to set up those things. It is very complicated, and it can be simplified."
"Making it even more cost-effective could be explored."
"The general purpose solution tries to cater to too many customers so it is heavy."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in cluster-based queue monitoring and autoscaling."
"The service mesh integrations could improve the solution."
"The installation and configuration procedure should be simplified."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
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), Pivotal Cloud Foundry and SAP Cloud Platform, 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.