We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Red Hat OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"The management console is the most valuable feature."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"The product has built-in functionality that checks whether the service is available or not. In case the service is down, the tool will create a new instance by default. Hence, the web API will be always up irrespective of the server or the situation."
"Compliance is easy right out-of-the-box with integration to Azure Security, Azure Active Directory, and Azure Policies."
"The serverless capability and auto scale feature are the most valuable."
"The most valuable features of AKS are the full array of capabilities and robust security."
"AKS as a service is very good when you need to leverage applications or functions with much variability in their usage because you're trying to be as efficient as you can with resources."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution's technical support is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the diagnostic service."
"We have found the cluster management function to be very good with this product."
"It is a stable platform."
"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."
"In terms of implementation, OpenShift is very user-friendly, which is an advantage. We are using it along with GitLab for implementing CI/CD pipelines. That's a feature that other products also have, but in OpenShift, we find it good."
"The most valuable feature is the high availability for the applications."
"OpenShift offers more stability than Kubernetes."
"Overall, the solution's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is excellent."
"Provides support throughout the whole platform."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"While it is good, I think the solution's console could be improved."
"Its integration functions could be enhanced."
"The application firewall is lacking some features and there is room for enhancement."
"We would like to see the addition of a service report from the server for this solution, so that we can monitor the health of server operations."
"The initial setup of AKS is complicated. The setup depends on the cluster, nodes, and lots of other things. There are also lots of extremely critical small devices. Moreover, you will have to pay them even while setting up the solution. It is not like you setup first and then pay for it."
"There is room for improvement in automation processes, as well."
"AKS has the potential to enhance pricing by enabling us to explore ways to increase cost transparency. However, it's important to note that this refers to computation costs rather than client costs. Our objective is to optimize efficiency and minimize unnecessary expenses. Therefore, we aim to identify which services within the platform can benefit from improved consumption patterns. This is the focus of our ongoing research, with the goal of maximizing computational power within the cluster. We aim to avoid situations where resources are reserved but not utilized effectively. Additionally, our strong emphasis on security ensures that we adhere to all relevant compliance standards, bolstering our overall trustworthiness."
"The engineering team can reduce the management of the platform itself by improving the data plane part of the system to upload more management."
"I would like to see a graphical user interface."
"The latest 4.0 version of OpenShift disabled a few of the features we previously made use of, although this wasn't a huge deal."
"One area for improvement is the documentation. They need to make it a little bit more user-friendly. Also, if you compare certain features and the installation process with Rancher, Rancher is simpler."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets."
"One of the features that I've observed in Tanzu Mission Control is that I can manage multiple Kubernetes environments. For instance, one of my lines of business is using OpenShift OKD; another one wants to use Google Anthos, and somebody else wants to use VMware Tanzu. If I have to manage all these, Tanzu Mission Control is giving me the opportunity to completely manage all of my Kubernetes clusters, whereas, with OpenShift, I can only manage a particular area. I can't manage other Kubernetes clusters. I would like to have the option to manage all Kubernetes clusters with OpenShift."
"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."
"There is no orchestration platform in OpenShift."
"The tool lacks some features to make it compliant with Kubernetes"
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Red Hat OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Red Hat OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher, Qualys VMDR and Tenable.io Container Security, whereas Red Hat OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI).
We monitor all Container Security 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.
