Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) is a scalable, high performance container management service that supports Docker containers.
N/A
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
OpenShift is Red Hat's Cloud Computing Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering. OpenShift is an application platform in the cloud where application developers and teams can build, test, deploy, and run their applications.
There is no additional charge for Amazon ECS. You pay for AWS resources (e.g., Amazon EC2 instances or Amazon EBS volumes) you create to store and run your application. You only pay for what you use, as you use it; there are no minimum fees and no upfront commitments.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
Red Hat OpenShift
Considered Both Products
Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
Some of the other services that are similar to Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) have an easier setup, but the longer term deployment is good with Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) and the total cost of ownership can be reduced if you are integrating …
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) is good abstraction/runtime for the container orchestration. No need to maintain and host own solution. Good integrated in AWS
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is a good beginner level orchestration service but lacks container management and scaling capabilities. EC2 is again not a managed cloud service. It is like just renting a computer on cloud and then managing it on our own. Compared to these ECS is a …
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
EKS is like a full-featured Kubernetes on AWS. ECS is a proprietary container orchestration service by AWS. ECS is much simpler to learn & use. It has built-in tight integration with other AWS services as well. Some key considerations: EKS is like Kubernetes; if …
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
EKS is a Kubernetes technology and you need to learn Kubernetes and build a cluster before using it. So there's a learning curve here. ECS was easier to implement and simpler to have in our use case. It takes less time to run a workload and make it available.
Director, eCommerce Analytics and Digital Marketing
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
The comparison between Amazon ECS versus Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) for us came down to the other services already in motion. A lot of companies tend to go really deep with a particular vendor (Amazon, Google, Microsoft etc) and we were already using a bunch of Amazon …
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
I chose Amazon ECS over Amazon EKS and other products because the whole infrastructure was decided to be designed on AWS cloud and Amazon ECS made it easier to make the clusters live in just a few minutes. Amazon ECS has better integration with other AWS services and we don't …
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
We like Elastic Containers better because of the simplicity to create an application without losing control over it. It is simple, yet powerful, exposing only the parts that are needed without complicating the access to the nuts and bolts when more complicated adjustments are …
Chose Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS)
If you are using AWS, you will be using Amazon ECS. I have also used Azure Container Instances and it works just as well in Azure as ECS does in AWS. It's really all a matter of what cloud provider you are utilizing. Because of the "Cloud Wars," it's difficult to measure …
Nothing like OpenShift. Actually, this was our first one. We toyed with maybe doing raw Kubernetes, but with an enterprise company you need an enterprise product.
Comparing the 2, open source Kubernetes is quicker to setup by about 75%, less restrictive, and free of course, but it lacks the security and support of Red Hat, and deploying features is much harder compared to with operators. For buisiness purposes, OpenShift is just more …
Even though Red Hat OpenShift has more overhead than many other Kubernetes flavors, we have selected Red Hat OpenShift because of it's focus on Security and because of it's excellent vendor support.
Red Hat OpenShift has a better security posture than EKS. I enjoy the console on Red Hat OpenShift more as well. I believe there is greater observability for Red Hat OpenShift.
The Tanzu Platform seemed overly complicated, and the frequent changes to the portfolio as well as the messaging made us uneasy. We also decided it would not be wise to tie our application platform to a specific infrastructure provider, as Tanzu cannot be deployed on anything …
Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS) is well suited where you need the ease of managing the clusters by letting AWS do the stuff for you. Obviously, whenever you want to run the docker based workloads, it is always better to go for either AWS ECS or AWS EKS. If you are interested in staying at AWS only and don't want to be cloud-agnostic, then go for AWS ECS instead of AWS EKS. AWS ECS is cheaper than AWS EKS and also more managed by AWS and better integrated with other AWS services. If you want to run those workloads as serverless, then AWS ECS Fargate is the best option to go with. If you already have a Kubernetes based setup that you want to migrate to AWS, then go for AWS EKS instead of AWS ECS.
Red Hat OpenShift, despite its complexity and overhead, remains the most complete and enterprise-ready Kubernetes platform available. It excels in research projects like ours, where we need robust CI/CD, GPU scheduling, and tight integration with tools like Jupyter, OpenDataHub, and Quiskit. Its security, scalability, and operator ecosystem make it ideal for experimental and production-grade AI workloads. However, for simpler general hosting tasks—such as serving static websites or lightweight backend services—we find traditional VMs, Docker, or LXD more practical and resource-efficient. Red Hat OpenShift shines in complex, container-native workflows, but can be overkill for basic infrastructure needs.
Well Integrated - As with the majority of AWS services, ECS works will with any other AWS product (Route 53, CloudWatch, IAM, etc).
Easy to get started with - It is easy to get started building just about anything in AWS and using ECS is no exception to this rule. Be careful though -- AWS lets you do/build anything in any way you could think of and allowing yourself to shoot yourself in the foot is no exception.
One thing is the way how it works with the GitHubs model on an enterprise business, how the hub and spoke topology works. Hub cluster topology works the way how there is a governance model to enforce policies. The R back models, the Red Hat OpenShift virtualization that supports the cube board and developer workspace is one big feature within. So yes, these are all some features I would call out.
The user interface sometimes seem to be confusing and cumbersome. It can be improved so that people can understand clearly which section to go for which functionality.
When a container fails, the error logs are not readily available on the ECS console. If it can be provided it would be easier to debug from there itself instead of going to our log manager.
Sometimes the old EC2 containers become stale and need to be restarted manually. There should be a notification for such scenarios. We have mostly been finding it out on our own and then fixing it by manually restarting EC2 instances.
If this could be proactively monitored and notified, it would be great.
So I don't know that this is a specific disadvantage for Red Hat OpenShift. It's a challenge for anything that Kubernetes face is. There's an extremely large learning curve associated with it and once you get to the point where you're comfortable with it, it's really not bad. But beating that learning curve is a challenge. I've done a couple presentations on our implementation of Red Hat OpenShift at various conferences and one of the slides I always have in there is a tweet from years ago that said, "I tried to teach somebody Kubernetes once. Now neither of us knows what it is."
This is the current strategy for the company, most of the products in the organisation are aligning to Openshift and various use cases it support. Also lot of applications are being developed for AI use case, openshift.AI provides opportunity to host and leverage the AI capabilities for these applications
Aside from some ECS-specific terms to learn at first, learning & starting to use ECS is relatively straightforward. AWS docs on the topic are also of high quality, with sound & relevant examples to follow. Troubleshooting container issues is also a breeze thanks to CloudWatch integration & helpful error messages on the AWS console.
The virtualization part takes some getting used to it you are coming from a more traditional hypervisor. Customization options are not intuitive to these users. The process should be more clear. Perhaps a guide to Openshift Virtualization for users of RHV, VMware, etc. would ease this transition into the new platform
Redhat openshift is generally reliable and available platform, it ensures high availability for most the situations. in fact the product where we put openshift in a box, we ensure that the availability is also happening at node and network level and also at storage level, so some of the factors that are outside of Openshift realm are also working in HA manner.
Overall, this platform is beneficial. The only downsides we have encountered have been with pods that occasionally hang. This results in resources being dedicated to dead or zombie pods. Over time, these wasted resources occasionally cause us issues, and we have had difficulty monitoring these pods. However, this issue does not overshadow the benefits we get from Openshift.
Support is relatively good, although the documentation sometimes is lacking, as well as outdated in our experience, especially when we initiated the process of using this service. But once we found how to assemble things, we haven't really required support from anyone at AWS, the service works without problems so we haven't had the need to contact support, which speaks well of how ECS is built.
Every time we need to get support all the Red Hat team move forward looking to solve the problem. Sometimes this was not easy and requires the scalation to product team, and we always get a response. Most of the minor issues were solved with the information from access.redhat.com
I was not involved in the in person training, so i can not answer this question, but the team in my org worked directly with Openshift and able to get the in person training done easily, i did not hear problem or complain in this space, so i hope things happen seamlessly without any issue.
We went thru the training material on RH webesite, i think its very descriptive and the handson lab sesssions are very useful. It would be good to create more short duration videos covering one single aspect of openshift, this wll keep the interest and also it breaks down the complexity to reasonable chunks.
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is a good beginner level orchestration service but lacks container management and scaling capabilities. EC2 is again not a Managed cloud service. It is like just renting a computer on cloud and then managing it on our own. Compared to these ECS is a comprehensive solution that provides management, scaling, containerization and other service connectivity out of the box.
We utilized the Thycotic Secret Service to manage all our application secrets, resulting in seamless integration with our applications. We developed all the applications using Red Hat Fuse (currently migrated to Quarkus). We used the built-in Kali Linux support of OpenShift to manage and configure the services and API. Additionally, the Red Hat Developer Studio facilitates faster development.
This is a great platform to deployment container applications designed for multiple use cases. Its reasonably scalable platform, that can host multiple instances of applications, which can seamlessly handle the node and pod failure, if they are configured properly. There should be some scalability best practices guide would be very useful
We run 8 web applications (demo instances) on a single machine. At a particular time, no more than 3 applications run simultaneously. So, we keep only required containers up. This helps us to provision small EC2 machines without compromising performance.
Overall Amazon ECS helps to have less number of dedicated machines as more than one solution can be deployed on a single instance. This reduces costs a lot.
It has allowed us to see where we need to be in the container world. I'm going to call it a net neutral impact, not negative or positive. It has given us a sense of what we are ready for and what we're not ready for. You know where you stand.
You don't know what you don't know, so it helps us know what we want to know.