We performed a comparison between Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Windows Server based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Users of Windows Server 2016 feel that it is a very user-friendly solution. Furthermore, they note that its active directory feature is highly valuable. They also note that it is highly scalable. However, many users feel that its security capabilities could be greatly improved. They also feel that the graphical interface could be better.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Red Hat Enterprise Linux seems to be a slightly superior solution. All other things being more or less equal, our reviewers found Windows Server 2016 rather expensive to purchase and not as secure as it should be.
"Copious documentation is probably the best feature of the solution."
"For us, its security, management, stability, and hardening are most valuable."
"It eases the burden by restricting the use of open-source Linux and preventing the development community from obtaining their own images. This is crucial for maintaining a secure supply chain and ensuring the lockdown of live Linux packages."
"The most valuable features are ease of support and the ability to run a read-only course on the operating system."
"The biggest benefit is from a security standpoint. As the product progresses and they come up with new versions, the new security features are addressing vulnerabilities. From that perspective, it has worked well."
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux is easy to manage, update, and integrate. I also like Red Hat Enterprise Linux's built-in security features. You need to enable them by default or keep them enabled if you want your system to be secured. It protects most of the system components."
"The solution's use of Kubernetes as an internal or core process on the system is brilliant."
"LVM is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is this solution integrates very well with all Microsoft and all other mainstream software solutions and the design is very good. Windows has an option now allowing you to just install the Windows Core with the PowerShell without any graphical services running."
"The product is reliable. It is powerful and we can make a lot of tools to work with it."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ESRP that is used with the Windows Platform."
"I like that it's a stable product. For me, it's working fine."
"I like the views in the user interface."
"The product integrates well with Sophos."
"We use this solution for hosting applications on the server."
"It is easy to use."
"AIX will be out of support in the next few years, so that is a problem because a lot of the clinical apps use AIX."
"Right now, we need to get memory and CPU via the console."
"There should be more upgrades to the security features."
"The labor required to maintain the on-premises storage systems has room for improvement."
"I use Linux on Satellite with Ansible infrastructure. It would be great if there were a universal interface to control RHEL's policy from Satellite. It could be a dashboard showing which policies were enabled on what system and allow you to apply them from the dashboard."
"The Cockpit interface needs improvement with more features. The information for implementing Red Hat Cluster could be also improved. And there could also be better performance monitoring."
"As such, there are no specific features that we are looking for. We have frequent meetings with them. We have had some issues on the application side and the OS side for which we opened cases and discussed those concerns and questions in the meetings offered by Red Hat."
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux's patching process needs improvement, particularly in achieving consistency. Currently, when you patch, you might not have control over the timing, leading to different software packages ending up at different patch levels. This lack of consistency can make it challenging to manage and control the various components effectively."
"Sometimes the PowerShell has an overly complicated syntax."
"The scalability could be improved a bit."
"An improvement would be to have more dashboards."
"They can simplify the utilization and control of the system when you have a lot of setups. They provided something called Windows Center or Control Center in version 2019. It's a free tool that comes with the Windows Server. You can install it on your desktop and use it. This tool simplifies the control and monitoring of all servers. If I have 200 servers, I don't need to log in to each one to configure it. I can manage them from this tool. However, this tool needs quite a lot of improvements. It's difficult to use, and they need to improve it."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The integration and monitoring could be improved."
"Resolving problems in the Windows environment should be improved."
"The command-line interface should be improved."
More Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is ranked 1st in Operating Systems (OS) for Business with 167 reviews while Windows Server is ranked 5th in Operating Systems (OS) for Business with 179 reviews. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is rated 8.8, while Windows Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) writes "Highly stable, good knowledge base, and reasonable price". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Windows Server writes "Easy to setup, stable and caters to my wide range of use cases but lacks user-friendly interface". Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is most compared with Ubuntu Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise, CentOS, Windows 10 and Rocky Linux, whereas Windows Server is most compared with Ubuntu Linux, Windows 10, Oracle Linux, CentOS and Windows 11. See our Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) vs. Windows Server report.
See our list of best Operating Systems (OS) for Business vendors.
We monitor all Operating Systems (OS) for Business 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.