We performed a comparison between Amazon Elastic Container Service and Red Hat 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."The solution's technical support is good."
"For me, the best feature of ECS is Fargate because I don't have to manage anything. Instead, everything is managed by AWS and all I have to do, in essence, is configure my containers and deploy them."
"Amazon Elastic Container Service is more stable."
"We use the product for website and email database hosting."
"What I really like about Amazon ECS is its simplicity and ease of use. Amazon also has really good security."
"The cloud services are readily available."
"Scalability and availability are the most valuable features of Amazon Elastic Container Service."
"It has an Auto Scaling group feature. We can use this feature to have an Auto Scaling group to specify a minimum and maximum count for all types of configurations. Based on the specified values, Amazon Elastic Container Service scales the required CPU environmental metrics."
"The most valuable feature for me in the OpenShift Container Platform is the option to manage different containers and environments and also being able to switch among them."
"The console or the GUI of OpenShift is awesome. You can do a lot of things from there. You can perform administration tasks as well as development tasks."
"OpenShift is a user-friendly container platform with a solid GUI that helps you follow what is going on and gives you an overview of all your clusters. It's more user-friendly than the Kubernetes itself. The interface helps you learn the platform and provides access to some features or specific comments."
"I have found the ability to scale up is most valuable."
"The most valuable are security features, particularly when operating in the cloud."
"It is very lightweight and can be deployed very fast, especially when it comes to containers."
"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."
"Red Hat's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is good. It is a lightweight operating system. You don't have to worry about the security patches on the system. You can update the entire environment with security patches, which is a nice feature."
"There is room for improvement in the licensing costs. There can be better licensing costs."
"It's a complex tool and should be simplified."
"The orchestration of the workloads running in ECS needs improvement."
"The solution's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Amazon EC2 Container Service should include more enterprise project management features, typically available in an OpenShift environment."
"The product should improve its price."
"The product can become expensive if you don't choose what you want."
"The solution must improve backup and compatibility around OS like Windows and Mac."
"The support costs are too high."
"OpenShift Container Platform could improve by having better integration."
"Things are there and the documentation is there, however, there still needs to be quick guides available."
"The setup process is not great."
"Container Platform could be improved if we could aggregate logs out of the box instead of having to do it through integrations with other products."
"One area for improvement is that we can't currently run Docker inside a container, as it clashes with security consents. It would be good if we could change that."
"From a networking perspective, the routing capability can be matured further. OpenShift doesn't handle restrictions on what kind of IPs are allowed, who can access them, and who cannot access them. So it is a simple matter of just using it with adequate network access, at the network level."
"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."
More Amazon Elastic Container Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon Elastic Container Service is ranked 8th in Container Management with 46 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is ranked 1st in Container Management with 37 reviews. Amazon Elastic Container Service is rated 8.4, while Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon Elastic Container Service writes "An easy to compute solution that can be used to take complete workloads to the cloud". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform writes "Provides automation that speeds up our process by 30% and helps us achieve zero downtime". Amazon Elastic Container Service is most compared with Microsoft Azure Container Service, VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Google Kubernetes Engine and Linode, whereas Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform is most compared with Amazon EKS, VMware Tanzu Mission Control, Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE, Rancher Labs and Kubernetes. See our Amazon Elastic Container Service vs. Red Hat 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.
