We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."The tool is budget-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the diagnostic service."
"It employs high availability."
"The solution is a managed Kubernetes, so much of the maintenance in the control plane is handled automatically by the cloud service provider."
"The product has built-in functionality that checks whether the service is available or not. In case the service is down, the tool will create a new instance by default. Hence, the web API will be always up irrespective of the server or the situation."
"The most valuable features of AKS are rollback updates, high availability, easy management, speedy execution and deployment."
"It is easy to deploy."
"The solution's technical support is excellent."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"Key features are WildFly, because it standardizes infrastructure and the git repository and docker. Git is essential for source code and Docker for infrastructure."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"It's cloud agnostic and the containerization and security features are outstanding."
"The company had a product called device financing, where the company worked as a partner with Google. It allowed customers to take mobile phones on loan or via credit. When we migrated those services to OpenShift in February last year, we were able to sell over 100,000 devices in a single day, which was very good."
"Two stand-out features are the security model and value-add features that don't exist in Upstream Kubernetes."
"The virtualization of my APIs means I no longer have to pay VMware large amounts of money to only run in-house solutions."
"I like OCP, and the management UI is better than the open-source ones."
"Unfortunately, when a microservice fails, Azure can take up to 60 seconds to broadcast an alert to the monitoring agents."
"In terms of cost perspective, they could make the product more affordable."
"The solution's logs have room for improvement."
"The application firewall is lacking some features and there is room for enhancement."
"Sometimes, it fails to provide specific metrics."
"More control over Infra scanning can be introduced."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The initial setup of AKS is complicated. The setup depends on the cluster, nodes, and lots of other things. There are also lots of extremely critical small devices. Moreover, you will have to pay them even while setting up the solution. It is not like you setup first and then pay for it."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"The monitoring part could be better to monitor the performance."
"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."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"If we can have a GUI-based configuration with better flexibility then it will be great."
"We want to see better alerting, especially in critical situations requiring immediate intervention. Until we go to the dashboard, it can be challenging to quickly recognize that there's an issue for us to deal with. Therefore, a popup of the event or a tweaked GUI to catch our attention when it's alerting would be a welcome change. Everything else is good. We don't need any additional features. From the operations perspective, as an administrator, there is nothing concerning."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". 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". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher, Qualys VMDR, Tenable.io Container Security and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI).
We monitor all Container Security 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.
