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.
"Microsoft Azure is an optimized solution when we compare it to any other particular cloud solution."
"The solution is secure and easy to use."
"The support is responsive and dedicated to SMEs."
"Offers many data security features including securing network access."
"Microsoft offers free courses and an exam on their products. Many of my colleagues who use Microsoft Azure take advantage of those free courses to help them learn about the solution in depth."
"It has multiple features that can be used from the start."
"In Azure, everything is pretty straightforward. Once you know it, the platform is very easy to use."
"The cycle development time is pretty fast, and there's very good coupling within the whole set of Microsoft tools, from database to the ETL engine, ingestion through Azure Data Factory, then modeling Synapse Analytics, and reporting through Power BI."
"Overall, the solution's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is excellent."
"OpenShift offers robust tools for monitoring application traffic, allowing us to analyze client requests and other business-related metrics."
"The security is good."
"The virtualization of my APIs means I no longer have to pay VMware large amounts of money to only run in-house solutions."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"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."
"Great integration with Jenkins for constant integration and development. Supports all the major languages and environments - PHP, Java, Node.js, Ruby, etc."
"Its costing can be improved. There should be better cost management."
"The solution's email hosting pricing could be improved."
"The local support is fair but it is sometimes limited, the service could be better."
"They can add more documentation about the solution."
"Compared with other cloud solution providers, Microsoft is not good at local support."
"The solution must improve its pricing."
"Onboarding customers is a challenge. Sometimes our customers don't know how to deal with the cloud environment. Maybe the customers are more comfortable with the old-fashioned on-premise environment."
"The solution is too expensive."
"The tool lacks some features to make it compliant with Kubernetes"
"OpenShift can improve monitoring. Sometimes there are issues. Additionally, the solution could benefit from protective tools if something was to happen in our network."
"An enhancement to consider for the future might involve incorporating a comprehensive solution for CI/CD tailored specifically for OpenShift."
"This is a fairly expensive solution."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"There are challenges related to additional security layers, connectivity compliance for endpoints, and integration."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"We need some kind of a multi-cluster management solution from the Red Hat site."
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, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Pivotal Cloud Foundry and IBM Public Cloud, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), Google Cloud 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.