Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Red Hat OpenShift

At one instance, there was a fire in our data center and the backup power had some issues because of which the whole DC went down. I believe with AKS and the replication it's easier to handle such a situation. Also, the scenario would have been pretty transparent to the end-users.

Incentivized

Have great user interface for new developers to adopt Kubernetes than a plain vanilla Kubernetes cluster. cluster management is getting easier and easier in each new version cost needs to be optimized to provide a competitive rate compared to other Kubernetes options in the market More approved / certified operator for other tools like New Relic will be great.

Incentivized

• Highly repeatable process
• Minimizes the amount of software to install
• Easily scale resources to meet demand

Incentivized

• Obviously, it does container orchestration very well because it's the main purpose of the product. Creating routes has been very easy with the product, creating accessible routes, managing quotas, managing our workspace and our workload has been very efficient with this as well as managing our horizontal scalability.

Incentivized

• Need to update cluster manually
• Policies cannot be updated for existing components
• if any change in policy every has to create cluster

Incentivized

• Because of how different virtualization is done, there is a learning curve to overcome when switching to it from another hypervisor.
• Documentation needs to be improved. Just finding the details to set it up is a burden that will keep some people using it.

Incentivized

Leverage OpenShift Online constantly at both the free and paid tiers. While AWS is convenient, it often brings more administration than I want to deal with for a quick application (i.e. Drupal or Wordpress blog). OpenShift also simplifies the DNS registration and ability to share application environments with team members

Incentivized

As I said before, the obserability is one of the weakest point of OpenShift and that has a lot to do with usability. The Kibana console is not fully integrated with OpenShift console and you have to switch from tab to tab to use it. Same with Prometheus, Jaeger and Grafan, it's a "simple" integration but if you want to do complex queries or dashboards you have to go to the specific console

Incentivized

During our peak season (holiday season October-January), when our loads on high-traffic weekends were up significantly, OpenShift reliably held its ground and adjusted to the spikes perfectly. We saw no disturbances or slowdowns in any of the applications, and our customers were able to buy what they needed during their holiday shopping with no disruptions.

Incentivized

Microsoft support was really good, whenever we raise any ticket they come back to us within a couple of hours.

Incentivized

Their customer support team is good and quick to respond. On a couple of occassions, they have helped us in solving some issues which we were finding a tad difficult to comprehend. On a rare occasion, the response was a bit slow but maybe it was because of the festival season. Overall a good experience on this front.

Incentivized

The ability to create new instances (i.e. elastic provisioning) is probably the fastest with Azure Kubernetes Service compared to the alternatives that I have looked at. From a pricing perspective, Microsoft always seems to find a way to be more competitive in this area, and literally every other field they play in.

Incentivized

From what I remember of Pivotal Cloud Foundry/Tanzu, OpenShift has a lot more features. Ultimately, our team went with OpenShift. After trialing multiple providers, we decided OpenShift was the best experience. We also had more confidence in Red Hat.

Incentivized

It's easy to understand what are being billed and what's included in each type of subscription. Same with the support (Std or Premium) you know exactly what to expect when you need to use it. The "core" unit approach on the subscription made really simple to scale and carry the workloads from one site to another.

Incentivized

• Positive impact in moving applications to cloud from the in-hose data center to save cost
• Sometimes got affected with some bugs on the AKS infrastructure but hasn't caused a big kios as our production footprint in AKS is not yet high

Incentivized

• Positive: Reduction in physical and virtual machine footprint
• Negative: Lack of native end to end o11y has caused a great deal of focus from our enterprise monitoring folks
• Positive: OCP has allowed developers to have a quick and easy space to experiment

Incentivized