Microsoft Azure vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Microsoft Azure
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Azure is a cloud computing platform and infrastructure for building, deploying, and managing applications and services through a global network of Microsoft-managed datacenters.
$29
per month
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is a comprehensive service that offers fully managed OpenShift clusters, on IBM Cloud platform. It is directly integrated into the same Kubernetes service that maintains 25 billion on-demand forecasts daily at The Weather Company.N/A
Pricing
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Editions & Modules
Developer
$29
per month
Standard
$100
per month
Professional Direct
$1000
per month
Basic
Free
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsThe free tier lets users have access to a variety of services free for 12 months with limited usage after making an Azure account.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Features
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Microsoft Azure
8.5
Ratings
6% above category average
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
-
Ratings
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Dynamic scaling8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Elastic load balancing9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-configured templates8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Monitoring tools8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Operating system support8.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Security controls9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Automation8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
Microsoft Azure
-
Ratings
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
7.5
Ratings
3% below category average
Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Container Orchestration00 Ratings8.20 Ratings
Cluster Management00 Ratings7.20 Ratings
Storage Management00 Ratings6.90 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings7.40 Ratings
Discovery Tools00 Ratings6.90 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings7.50 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings7.50 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings6.80 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 8.7 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Likelihood to Recommend
8.9
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.4
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Availability
6.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.1
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Microsoft AzureRed Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Likelihood to Recommend
Actually, migrating to Microsoft Azure is a good solution for almost any situation, especially when all components of your network are ready to become cloud-based. The only drawback I personally encounter frequently is that older software packages cannot always be easily picked up and moved to Microsoft Azure in an optimal manner.
Read full review
RedHat OpenShift is not only suited for IBM Cloud but can run in ANY cloud. We installed in Azure Cloud, for example. It can also run on Linux servers or a Power 9 machine. It is built for multi-cloud or on-prem environments. IBM support provides such excellent guidance in the installation and configuration that no other product on the market can beat it.
Read full review
Pros
  • Azure simply provides end to end life cycle. Starting from the development to automated deployment, you will find [a] bunch of options. Custom hook-points allow [integration] on-premise resources as well.
  • Excellent documentation around all the services make it really easy for any novice. Overall support by [the] community and Azure Technical team is exceptional.
  • BOT Services, Computer Vision services, ML frameworks provide excellent results as compare to similar services provided by other giants in the same space.
  • Azure data services provide excellent support to ingest data from different sources, ETL, and consumption of data for BI purpose.
Read full review
  • Multiclick provisioning of resources makes it super easy to manage pods and deployments. We don't have to maintain code for the same
  • In built security features and customizability ensures that organization wide standards are integrated well into the containers
  • Automated backups, scale ups and fail recovery makes sure of minimal down time
Read full review
Cons
  • In our experience, Azure Kubernetes Survice was difficult to set up, which is why we used Kubernetes on top of VMs.
  • Azure REST API is a bit difficult to use, which made it difficult for us to automate our interactions with Azure.
  • Azure's Web UI does a good job of showing metrics on individual VMs, but it would be great if there was a way to show certain metrics from multiple VMs on one dashboard. For example, hard drive usage on our database VMs.
Read full review
  • I wish it had better compatibility with docker file syntax. We had issues when it couldn't build standard docker files
  • Wish it had better documentation
  • Wish they offered fully supported client libraries for the Openshift API rather than dumping it on a 3rd party
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
We have been very satisfied with Windows Azure and now a lot of our business depends on it as more teams are now deploying their applications into Azure. Our next step is to have our Infrastructure team move their resources to Azure. It will take awhile for that to happen but we are positive that it will.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
Microsoft Azure's overall usability has been better than expected. Often times vendors promise the world, only to leave you with a run-down town. Not the case with our experience. From an implementation perspective, all went perfect, and from the user-facing experience we have had no technical issues, just some learning curve issues that are more about "why" than "how"
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Reliability and Availability
It has proven to be unreliable in our production environment and services become unavailable without proper notification to system administrators
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Support is easy with all the knowledge base articles available for free on the web. Plus, if you have a preferred status you can leverage their concierge support to get rapid response. Sometimes they’ll bounce you around a lot to get you to the right person, but they are quite responsive (especially when you are paying for the service). Many of the older Microsoft skills are also transferable from old-school on-prem to Azure-based virtual interfaces.
Read full review
I think response time for IBM Cloud support should be improved.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
As I have mentioned before the issue with my Oracle Mismatch Version issues that have put a delay on moving one of my platforms will justify my 7 rating.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
I feel that Microsoft Azure typically outperforms Google Cloud Platform in hybrid cloud capabilities, integration aspects, and, primarily, security compliance features. Azure offered superior integration with Microsoft's enterprise software ecosystem, and it's second to none in my opinion. This made it the natural choice for most, especially if heavily invested in Windows, Office 365, or Active Directory deployments. We chose Azure over GCP because we simply needed Windows workload support as a strong driver, more access to global regions, and let's not forget that most tech teams in an organization are Microsoft Certified, which makes skillset transfer from on-prem to cloud a minimal learning curve over shifting to a different provider.
Read full review
We evaluated a number of potential solutions and ultimately chose Red Hat OpenShift because it was compatible with our existing technology. Time and costs savings have been realized throughout the company since we implemented Red Hat OpenShift, and the IT department has been freed up to focus on activities that are more valuable.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Times and growth went into it. By balancing on-premises maintenance with continuous cloud improvements, we’ve budgeted and planned endlessly increased capacity.
  • In today’s world of cyber-crime, clients can put even more faith in what they’ve heard. We built an innovative single-sign-on hub for all users. Also, other business platforms use Azure application gateways, reducing worker switching time and increasing productivity.
  • Its step can automate to improve the investment. In addition, we can integrate our organization’s credentials into an authorization for other systems.
Read full review
  • Our customer satisfaction and NPS score has had positive outcomes based on new architecture
  • We are focused on business outcomes vs running the service and maintenance
  • OpenShift on IBM Cloud has had a direct, positive impact on TCO, ROI, and payback period
  • Our staff is more focused on higher-level business activities, i.e. acquiring & customer retention
Read full review
ScreenShots