Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Google Cloud vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Google Cloud
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) (4th)
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Google Cloud is 7.2%, up from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 13.4%, up from 12.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Monirul Islam Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 22, 2023
Great for big data with off-the-charts scalability for storage and databases
Our company uses the solution for big data storage such as telecom, health services, SMP, and email serial data.  We have a relationship with a vendor in India and serve as their Google partner. We have more than one million people using the CSP and 10,000 concurrent users The solution works well…
Petr Bunka - PeerSpot reviewer
May 22, 2024
Used for runtime or application migration, transitioning from classic application servers
We use Red Hat OpenShift for runtime or application migration, transitioning from classic application servers and configuration restore machines The solution offers ease with which we can define how to run applications and configure them. It's much more convenient than creating a virtual machine…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It didn't take long to get everything set up and understand what was going on. Things are pretty clear."
"The solution has improved our web apps so that we can have a canary deployment. GCP also helps us upload new features and changes to our software without impacting a lot of users with the network. The AI features have improved the software as well."
"The availability has been increased."
"The availability of content on the solution is very valuable."
"The stability is good with Google Cloud."
"It is a stable solution."
"I like that it is free. It's easy to use, and it's reliable."
"The features I found most valuable are the cloud run and cloud function."
"Security is also an important part of this solution. By default, things are running with limited privileges and securely confined to their own resources. This way, different users and projects can all use the same infrastructure."
"We have found the cluster management function to be very good with this product."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"We are able to operate client’s platform without downtime during security patch management each month and provide a good SLA (as scalability for applications is processed during heavy client website load, automatically)."
"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 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."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the security context constraint (SCC). The solution’s security throughout the stack is good. And security context constraints provide port-level security. It's a granular level of control, where you can give privileges to certain users to work on certain applications."
 

Cons

"Uploading documents could be simplified."
"Google Cloud does not have many build pipelines like Azure does."
"The product could always be a little bit less expensive."
"If there were more documentation and training, it would be very helpful in explaining the underlying processes."
"Google Cloud could improve by having better integration with other platforms."
"The UI is beautiful but not easy to use, and also a little slow. Anything that you click is slow to load. It is also not easy to find something. I do not find the left-hand side menu good. We have a lot of options mixed there and we need the best way to deploy cloud resources. I prefer Azure ARM templates since their JSON files are easy to manipulate and integrate with other tools."
"The Spanish version is in beta. It needs to be farther along."
"Google Cloud should provide more introductory videos on how to get started. Currently, very few of these resources are available. Additionally, training on Google Cloud products is not very well streamlined. Users have to search for training, which can be quite complex."
"The solution only offers support for one server."
"An enhancement to consider for the future might involve incorporating a comprehensive solution for CI/CD tailored specifically for OpenShift."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."
"The operators need a lot of improvement, with better integrations."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the NGO version so the cloud reasonably priced at $2 to $3 per month."
"Google Cloud could be cheaper."
"This solution is worth the money we are paying. I would rate the pricing a three out of five."
"The solution is cheaper than Azure."
"We approached Google Cloud with certain cost assumptions but were surprised to find that our actual expenses were higher than expected. Initially, we had anticipated spending a set amount on the solution, but in reality, we ended up spending more than that. It would be helpful to have greater transparency and educational documentation on the cost-related aspects of Google Cloud."
"For commercial purposes, users need to pay for the products they use on a workload basis, not a license basis. There are two pricing models: fixed monthly and pay-as-you-go. In the pay-as-you-go model, users pay for the resources they use, while in the fixed monthly model, they have 24/7 access to resources for a set monthly fee."
"Google Cloud is on the expensive side for us. I don't have exact figures on the cost per year or month."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as an eight."
"It's important to start small because the solution is scalable. We can build our cluster and look at the bundle option, not the external subscriptions. Talking to the people at Red Hat can save us money."
"The product’s pricing is expensive."
"The product has reasonable pricing."
"The model of pricing and buying licences is quite rigid. We are in the process of negotiating on demand pricing which will help us take advantage of the cloud as a whole."
"OpenShift is really good when we need to start, but once we get to a certain scale, it becomes too expensive."
"My company makes payments towards the licensing costs attached to OpenShift."
"We had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license for all our servers' operating systems. By having multiple Red Hat products together, you can negotiate costs and leverage on having a sort of enterprise license agreement to reduce the overall outlay or TCO."
"The solution is cost-effective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
50%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google Cloud?
Google Cloud is perceived as a cost-effective and user-friendly option, especially compared to AWS. The current affordability and ease of use make it suitable for medium-sized companies. While the ...
What needs improvement with Google Cloud?
The performance after long-term use shows the storage is too full, and I cannot add more storage without paying for it. I want to migrate to another solution if I need to pay for additional storage...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud?
For personal storage, Google Workspace, Google portal, Google video, Google file, and Google Cloud Shell for programming language.
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.