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.
"The solution is useful for application support and automations."
"Until now, RHEL has been the most stable OS I have ever seen. Nothing seems to break, with frequent updates. I have been running it 24/7 for the past 18 months and it runs flawlessly."
"The robust networking capabilities offered by Red Hat Enterprise Linux were highly valuable. They have numerous partnerships and dedicated efforts in low-latency technologies, which are particularly beneficial for trading firms. They possess extensive expertise in external tuning and similar aspects."
"The features and tools help us to maintain security overall."
"From a security perspective, the most valuable feature is SELinux. SELinux provides good security. It's doing a good job of protecting my real estate."
"The security updates and the support that comes along with it for applications are valuable."
"By implementing Red Hat Enterprise Linux, we wanted to solve some of the reboot problems of Windows. Every patch on Windows affected our applications because the system had to be rebooted. Red Hat Enterprise Linux has improved the uptime of the applications."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The features that I like the most are that it's easy to use and the integration."
"The solution is user-friendly, the UI looks good, and there are new versions every year. Each new version is very different, better, and cleaner."
"I like that it's simple and the users are happy."
"It's quite stable."
"This is quite a stable product."
"The main feature of the solution is the ease of use."
"The scalability it offers is great."
"The most valuable feature is Active Directory."
"The GUI has room for improvement. It needs to be managed by many administrators. It has basic command lines. They could improve it with better automation. We'd like to be able to create a script, and then have the ability to deploy it where we don't need to write everything manually. That part can be useful for automating."
"Sometimes they don't have new versions for applications like Apache or PHP. I understand it's because they have to have support for them, so they can't have the latest version all the time, but that's the main thing I see that could be improved."
"The product should be made more accessible to someone who isn't experienced with Linux."
"We would like to have a better understanding of what to expect when we move to a different version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux."
"Red Hat should provide a way to mirror repositories or at least provide a solution for us to bubble up packages throughout the entire process."
"We had issues migrating from the old to the new RHEL version in the virtual environment. It forced us to spin up a new virtual environment to have the new RHEL version."
"Network management can be easier. It is getting more complex."
"Deployment is simple if you have been using the solution for a long time. However, it can be complex if you are new to it."
"The solution could offer higher availability."
"In the next release, I would like to see better pricing."
"When it comes to virtualization, VMware is a bit more advanced in terms of security. Hyper-V does provide facilities, but it probably has to do a bit more work in terms of encryption. People will normally go for VMware because of the features that it has as a server, particularly the virtualization feature."
"We have not had an issue with the stability of this solution. However, there could be some improvements."
"It could be more stable. Windows has certain problems that Unix platforms don't have. It requires more administrative effort as compared to Unix. I don't know why Microsoft has not changed that. It generates a lot of trash data, so slowly and steadily, you find more and more space being utilized. There is some kind of administrative load, which doesn't happen with Unix."
"The reporting, event logging, and event management functionalities need to be improved."
"I have found the stability to be good but it could improve."
"If it had more integration capabilities, that would be ideal."
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 4th in Operating Systems (OS) for Business with 180 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, Windows 10, CentOS and Oracle Linux, whereas Windows Server is most compared with Ubuntu Linux, Windows 10, Oracle Linux, Windows 11 and CentOS. 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.
