We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and OpenShift Container Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Microsoft Defender has a lot of features including regulatory compliance and attaching workbooks but the most valuable is the recommendations it provides for each and every resource when we open Microsoft Defender."
"It works seamlessly on the Azure platform because it's a Microsoft app. Its setup is similar, so if you already have a Microsoft account, it just flows into it."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive. It's very intuitive."
"The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative."
"The security alerts and correlated alerts are most valuable. It correlates the logs and gives us correlated alerts, which can be fed into any security information and event management (SIEM) tool. It is an analyzed correlation tool for monitoring security. It gives us alerts when there is any kind of unauthorized access, or when there is any malfunctioning in multifactor authentication (MFA). If our Azure is connected with Azure Security Center, we get to know what types of authentication are happening in our infra."
"The security policy is the most valuable feature for us. We can go into the environment settings and attach any globally recognized framework like ISO or any benchmark."
"Most importantly, it's an integrated solution. We not only have Defender for Cloud, but we also have Defender for Endpoint, Defender for Office 365, and Defender for Identity. It's an integrated, holistic solution."
"On OpenShift, it's easy to scale applications. We can easily scale up or scale down."
"The usability and the developer experience. The platform has a centralized consultant that is easy to use for our development, operations and security teams."
"The stack in the software supply chain is one of the main reasons that we use OpenShift. When I came to this company, we bought hardware from IBM named Bluemix, and they used ICP, which stands for IBM Cloud Private."
"Everything is packaged into OpenShift Container Platform."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its scalability on demand, which allows for potentially lower costs, and Built-in resiliency."
"The solution is stable. However, it depends on the integrations of the solution on how stable it will be, such as what tools you integrate with."
"The solution's security throughout the stack and the software supply chain is very reliable. When it was on-prem, it was by default secured by our company firewalls and security tools, and now it's in the cloud, which has its security and systems in place. This provides stability to our infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature is that the solution can be deployed in the cloud which removes the expense of a server."
"The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."
"Microsoft Defender could be more centralized. For example, I still need to go to another console to do policy management."
"Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."
"One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."
"It needs to be simplified and made more user-friendly for a non-technical person."
"Azure is a complex solution. You have so many moving parts."
"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."
"There is no perfect product in the world and there are always features that can be added."
"With the recent trend of cloud-native, fully managed serverless services, I don't see much documentation about how a customer should move from on-prem to the cloud, or what is the best way to do a lift-and-shift. Even if you are on AWS OCP, which is self-managed infra services, and you want to use the ROSA managed services, what is the best way to achieve that migration? I don't see documentation for these kinds of use cases from Red Hat."
"In my experience, the issues are not always simply technical. They do stem from technical challenges, but they struggle with the topic of adoption. When you encounter all of the customer pull, there are normally several tiers of your client pop that can adopt either the fundamental features or a little more advanced ones. The majority of the time, the challenge is determining how to drive adoption, how to sell the product to the customer, and how much time they can spend to really utilize those advanced features. If we get into much more detail, but this is from my perspective as the platform engineer and not the end customer, the ability of the end user to be able to debug potential issues with their application That is arguably the most important, let's say, work throughput in my area."
"It is difficult to deploy the OpenShift cluster in a bare-metal environment."
"My impression is that this solution is pretty expensive so I think the pricing plan could improve."
"I want to see more incorporation of native automation features; then, we could write a code, deploy it directly to OpenShift, and allow it to take care of the automated process. Using this method, we could write one application and have elements copy/pasted to other applications in the development process."
"There should be a simplification of the overall cluster environment. It should require fewer resources. Just to run a simple Hello World app, it requires about seven servers, and that's just crazy. I understand that it is fully redundant, but it's prohibitively expensive to get something simple going."
"The setup process is not great."
"The initial setup can be hard."
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 10th in Container Management with 46 reviews while OpenShift Container Platform is ranked 1st in Container Management with 36 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while OpenShift Container Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift Container Platform writes "Provides automation that speeds up our process by 30% and helps us achieve zero downtime". Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas OpenShift Container Platform is most compared with Amazon EKS, VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Amazon Elastic Container Service and NGINX Ingress Controller. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. OpenShift Container Platform report.
See our list of best Container Management vendors.
We monitor all Container Management 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.
