Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) vs. Windows Server

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a Linux distribution mainly used in commercial data centers.N/A
Windows Server
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
Pricing
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)Windows Server
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)Windows Server
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)Windows Server
Considered Both Products
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
We used Windows Server. It has not been very painful but when I compare it with RHEL the patching process was lengthy. We also ran into occasional performance issues that were not very straight forward to diagnose.
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Windows Server's are perfect competition for RHEL as many people use Windows Servers for deploying their applications. Windows provides good GUI but it lacks in many aspects in which RHEL is a win-win. As earlier mentioned, the performance of RHEL is unbeatable cannot be …
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
While many enterprise applications offer Windows Server support, I never really seriously considered it for our application, as Windows simply Blue Screens too often for serving a business critical application. Instead, I took a look at Red Hat's upstream distro, CentOS. Had …
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Beats them all for reliability, security, ease of use and setup, as well as patching. It has fewer support problems and is easily serviced. Support is easy to find and quite helpful. Windows crashed all the time and Azure was at times spotty.
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
RHEL is very different than Windows, but in terms of just a simple operating system, RHEL is much more lightweight than Windows and in many cases runs more efficiently than Windows. Given the choice between the two, some application are preferable on RHEL, like Apache or …
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
  • Secure
  • Robust
  • Redundancy feature
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Each of the different flavors of Linux have their positives and negatives but ultimately for the projects that I chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux was due for the need of online and phone support just in case something came up and we could not solve it on our own. This happens …
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Linux has improved features and utilities over Unix. Scalability and ease of configuration management an improvement over Windows.
Windows Server
Chose Windows Server
Windows Server is more cost-effective and skills are easier to find to support the products. The deployment and management of the product can be automated with Microsoft SCCM. In my opinion, Linux seems to be more secured but takes more time and effort to learn than Windows …
Chose Windows Server
These are just very different products. They can all have the same functionality but the specific product knowledge with Linux is much higher. This slows down troubleshooting and can leave you with limited options for high end support. There are absolutely good use cases for …
Chose Windows Server
For our more experienced users and for simple web apps we will go the RHEL route but with Windows Server such an industry standard the the ease of use of the GUI it just makes more sense for most applications that use it. It also generally has a lot more interoperability …
Chose Windows Server
I have some basic experience using various builds of Linux and have always found myself coming back to Windows. Perhaps after years of working with Microsoft products they all have a similar feel and configuration options. Microsoft products are my typical first choice where …
Chose Windows Server
We have various servers or appliances that run on various flavors of Linux that do their jobs well, but we configure and manage them very lightly at the OS level. Most of the admin on these devices is sone inside the applications themselves. We don't shy away from new …
Chose Windows Server
For our purposes it came down to picking between Windows and Linux and at the end of the day we picked both. We use Windows for 80% of our server needs to run our Web, File, Print, DHCP, Internal DNS, Active Directory, SQL, Web and other windows based servers. We use linux …
Chose Windows Server
Windows Server is the only one that has an upfront cost for licensing before hardware is considered. Windows Server is generally better suited for multi-faceted approaches; however, for just backups, TrueNAS and Synology are cheaper and just as good. For standalone services …
Chose Windows Server
Windows runs some applications better and is easier for junior admins and non-technical users to administer and get started with. It obviously does not run everything better, so other operating systems are preferable in some situations. Compared to OSs like RHEL, they both have …
Chose Windows Server
When using a Linux system such as CentOS in a server situation to get certain features like Windows Server, it can take a lot of jerry-rigging and configuration to get the same results that can be set up with Windows Server in a lower amount of time.
Chose Windows Server
Windows Server is the most Enterprise/Business server around, easy to deploy and configure and to co-exist with other servers. Most if not every other server technology is usually very good for a very specific purpose but fail in the coexistence and integration when compared …
Chose Windows Server
A lot more industry-standard application support. Ease of use. Security patched happen more often.
Chose Windows Server
Windows Server has much broader support for the majority of business applications available today. Linux only has very specific application support. Windows Server is also much easier to get support for as it is not an open-source server platform and the developer provides …
Chose Windows Server
Choosing a server technology actually means what platform will the software product that your company uses, require.
Say that:
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)Windows Server
Small Businesses
Ubuntu
Ubuntu
Score 9.0 out of 10
Ubuntu
Ubuntu
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Ubuntu
Ubuntu
Score 9.0 out of 10
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Ubuntu
Ubuntu
Score 9.0 out of 10
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)Windows Server
Likelihood to Recommend
9.6
(52 ratings)
8.1
(62 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(1 ratings)
2.4
(5 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
4.3
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
8.5
(7 ratings)
2.8
(18 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
2.2
(3 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)Windows Server
Likelihood to Recommend
Red Hat
I guess to give it more context, my first job in the Linux ecosystem was in web hosting. And that was basically a Cintas shop and it was all run extremely lean and very bootstrappy do it on your own. You don't get any support. And for that environment, it was kind of just the way it is. It's very cutthroat. You have to move super fast. Once I moved over to the corporate side, every company I've worked with has been on rail. And the thing that really kind of makes it the best choice compared to using another operating system, another flavor of Linux and just kind of figuring out your own is the amount of support that Red Hat gives rail as far as extra tools like Satellite Insights and what's coming up now with Ansible and especially Ansible. Lightspeed, but also SLAs and stuff like that. Because yeah, I mean it was good learning in that first environment because there were no tickets, there was no support. It was figured out. But nowadays it's just nice to have an SLA agreement. I can just open a ticket. I say that that's something that does really well, but I also want to see it expanded, just more like vendor support at an enterprise level. I'm not sure yet what that would mean. I just have that every time we come up for renewal, I look at the price tag and it's like, what else can we do here? I like what Red Hat is doing just more.
Read full review
Microsoft
If you have one user or 1000's of users (especially using Windows), Windows Server is a no-brainer! The only reason I would suggest going with a Linux server is if you have old hardware (Windows Server is more process intensive than Linux). But, Linux is open-source, so anyone can publish updates/security updates, but on the flip side, malicious people also have full access to Linux's codebase allowing for much easier writing of exploitations/viruses/malware/ransomware.
Read full review
Pros
Red Hat
  • For us, it's going to be the deployment and the patching. It does a good job because you can put your no reboot tags and things like that because working with production systems and so we don't want them just rebooting suddenly because they were patched in the Linux world. So the non-reboot tags and the operating system deployment is the biggest thing we find that saves time and that's the biggest thing that we like. The tools. The tools that save time.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Easy to use due to its intuitive graphical user interface.
  • Very popular and makes integration easier.
  • Lots of software drivers available.
  • Has many functionalities such as Active Directory, DNS, DHCP, VPN, RDP, VDI server, etc.
  • Many patches and updates available. Maybe abit too much too often.
  • Cost effective and with budget.
  • Remote desktop feature simplifies remote access to this server.
  • It has a built in VPN and ssl certificate feature.
  • Event viewer is available for alerts, although it seems too cumbersome to go through the logs.
  • If you got too many Windows systems to manage, then SCCM is an option.
Read full review
Cons
Red Hat
  • From an automation perspective. RHEL is really moving forward, but some of their ideas are still not ideas, but their implementations of it still feel half-baked, like the functionality's there, but it's not the kind of functionality that to me makes it a full-on solution with OpenShift in particular as we're bringing this in and we're getting more into containers because it's more important for the banking industry and other industries. Justice General, well you can do this by script and we don't have an interface for this and sort of things sort of like that. I'm trying to think if there's anything else that RHEL does that bothers me as a general rule.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • DHCP Server could be better - we use the router for DHCP Routing
  • Print Server - not a fan of using the server as a print server since you have to license it. Direct access to printers via IP addresses is a much more efficient way to go
  • Better backup program - we utilize a third-party program that gives us more flexibility when restoring individual files.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Red Hat
We find RHEL to be a superior OS with stable operations and long life. It is also easier to use and fix then most other OS's.
Read full review
Microsoft
I've carefully reviewed the servers and services currently running on Windows Server 2012, and given the opportunity would renew them as is going forward. There are two systems I currently have in place, one is a very large Linux implementation for a large ecommerce site, and one is a very large backup solution front ended by FTP servers running Linux. Neither are well suited for Windows, but the overall network infrastructure is and will be Windows Server for the foreseeable future.
Read full review
Usability
Red Hat
RHEL has most of the features that are required by an ERP solution. If you need any additional packages, RHEL has a great repository and a very easy package installation/upgrade process.
Read full review
Microsoft
There are simply too many different parts of Windows Server to make it a cohesive piece of software. While some of the newer features found in Windows Server 2012 and 2016 have nice UIs that are logically laid out, there are enough parts of the system that is still based on old code with clunky UIs and confusing options to make Windows Server a particularly user-friendly experience.
Read full review
Support Rating
Red Hat
Red Hat support has really come a long way in the last 10 years, The general support is great, and the specialized product support teams are extremely knowledgeable about their specific products. Response time is good and you never need to escalate.
Read full review
Microsoft
Microsoft's support is hugely wide-ranging from articles online to having to contact them directly for the more serious issues. In recent years when I have contacted them directly, I have found the support o be excellent as I have found myself connected to very knowledgeable people in the field in which I needed the support. The online support available is vast and I tend to find most of the time that there is always someone out there who has had the same issue as me in the past and knows something about how to resolve it! This is the advantage of using industry standard and long-established systems such as Windows Server.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Red Hat
Don't be afraid of it, its easy to install and configure for the tasks needed.
Read full review
Microsoft
Make sure that you have detailed processes in place for every server instance you plan to install/upgrade, if possible get the base OS loaded and Windows Updates applied ahead of time, and if using a VM take a snapshot prior to installing each role, as well as along the way.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Red Hat
The biggest thing about RHEL that makes it stand out for enterprise users is the support that we get from the vendor. Whereas with the other ones, you're basically left on your own. There's no official repo, there's no satellite for patching. You're very left on your own with the community.
Read full review
Microsoft
I didn't use any other system which gives the same functionality and I am not aware of any. The full integration between all components and especially the ability to integrate mail via Exchange or even via a hybrid setup with the Ofice365 cloud, including the ability to directly manage the cloud from the server, using Power Shell, is something I didn't see anywhere else.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Red Hat
  • Auditors are happy that we use an enterprise class distribution
  • Patch process is easy and fairly predictable
  • Information Security is fully satisfied with the speed of the fixing the errata and general state of the security patches, including the backporting process
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Because of our Microsoft Campus Agreement, Windows products are fairly affordable for us and that has been a huge blessing. We are considering some Azure cloud options and some of that is covered under our Campus Agreement, making it a nice incentive to start migrating certain apps and functionality to the cloud
  • I don't have access to our budgets so I cannot give a good answer as far as the impact of ROI on our institution, but if your company can afford it, you cannot go wrong with Windows server. Not having to send your sys admins to Linux or Unix school alone is a big savings as well as not having to train your staff on using a Linux desktop instead of a Windows-based one.
  • The compatibility with end users of all varieties and platforms will definitely impact your ROI in a positive way. We have Apple users, Android, Windows, and even a few Linux end users on our campus and Windows server works quite well with all of them.
Read full review
ScreenShots