Red Hat OpenShift vs. VMware vCenter

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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.N/A
VMware vCenter
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
VMware vCenter is an advanced server management software that provides a centralized platform for controlling vSphere environments for visibility across hybrid clouds. VMware vCenter is no longer sold as a standalone product and is now available as a part of VMware Cloud Foundation.
$6,044
per year
Pricing
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic
6,044
per year
Production
6,244
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Considered Both Products
Red Hat OpenShift
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
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.
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
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 …
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
It definitely has additional bells and vessels like SM, UI and monitoring/logging stack
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
To benefit from premium support.
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Red Hat Quay
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
had troubles with the stability of the whole cluster system. Red Hat OpenShift worked from the beginning
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
It's a fairly different experience compared to the other environments due to the additional security
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
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.
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
It was microsoft hypervisor and vmware.
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) and Alibaba Cloud Elastic Compute Service (ECS)
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
scalability and ease of managing deployments
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
At agency there is no other competitor that can accomplish what we've been able to put together with a partnership with Red Hat.
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
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.
Chose 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 …
Chose Red Hat OpenShift
Ease of use and stability in one vendor support
VMware vCenter
Chose VMware vCenter
In my experience, Red Hat Virtualization was cumbersome. I think VMware vCenter is definitely a better product. Red Hat discontinued their Virtualization product but still offers other virtualization platforms that I haven't tested.

In my opinion, Proxmox isn't as polished but …
Chose VMware vCenter
We initially used Citrix XenServer and made the switch to VMware vCenter due to it being less expensive at the time. That was some 15yrs ago and is no longer the case as Broadcom has changed the licensing scheme for their products which greatly increased the costs.
Chose VMware vCenter
Not really a competition. Proxmox and Hyper-V both lacks the manageability and easy to use access for multiple nodes and clusters. Also Hyper-V has the ability to use Multiple nodes but it does not compare to the level of VMware vCenter Server.
All the integrations possible …
Chose VMware vCenter
VMware as a product was most advanced hypervisor when we made the decision for our datacenter. Over the years VMware vCenter has kept it's edge and we have seen no reason to change to any other product as we have gained experience over the years. We do still continue to …
Chose VMware vCenter
I was not involved in the evaluation, but my understanding from colleagues was that the years of experience in VMware vs. Hyper-V were very evident. VMware vCenter was simply a much more mature product.
Chose VMware vCenter
vCenter is much more complete as a solution than other products that I have looked at and it works very well for our environment. vCenter is very easy to configure and does not have the unnecessary steps to set up and configure. Also, the different storage vendor support …
Chose VMware vCenter
Citrix Xen Server.... Great Hypervisor but very limited in terms of functionality
MS Hyper-V... [VMware vCenter Server] is better for almost everything and appliance form makes a clear winner for security and ease of deployment
Chose VMware vCenter
VMware vCenter Server's biggest competitor is Microsoft's Hyper-V Server. We prefer VMware vCenter Server because the hypervisor is much less resource intensive. It also gives us a different environment so that a specific Microsoft bug wouldn't take down all of our VMs if the …
Chose VMware vCenter
[VMware vCenter Server] is the true leader in this space. The functionality and ability to offload tasks to other teams makes this a no brainer. The granularity in permission allows [VMware vCenter Server] to be secure and isolate teams to only the objects they are allowed to …
Chose VMware vCenter
There was not much competition, VMware has been in the market the longest and other systems are still catching up. VMware is proven, trusted, and has a good support base, the other main differentiator is VSAN for storage, reducing the need for physical SAN(s) which can become a …
Chose VMware vCenter
VMware runs in the cloud.
I do not have the experience with cloud based VMware to comment.
Chose VMware vCenter
Hyper-V is not a bad product by any means, and it does have the benefit of not costing money for the software itself since it comes with the OS. That being said, it did start quite far behind VMware in features when it first came to market. Microsoft has been catching up, and …
Chose VMware vCenter
vCenter beats the daylights out of Microsoft Hyper-V. Actions that take multiple clicks with Microsoft can be achieved in a single click with vCenter. It’s less expensive and easier to deploy and maintain.
Chose VMware vCenter
VMware vCenter Server is a much more simplified, in my opinion, platform for managing a virtual infrastructure stack. There are a number of features that are available at the Enterprise and Enterprise+ tiers of service that other hypervisor environments do not excel at, or do …
Chose VMware vCenter
Citrix XenCenter used an isolated client that directly connects to the hosts instead of using a management agent. This causes a number of issues if the host is not optimally configured. Microsoft Hyper-V has been behind VMware in feature set for many years, but is starting to …
Chose VMware vCenter
We considered Microsoft Hyper-V very briefly. At the time we considered Hyper-V you still needed to purchase an extra management product to get features similar to vCenter; and even then, it didn't seem fully baked, yet. The situation may, and probably has changed, with later …
Chose VMware vCenter
We only selected vCenter as there wasn't really any alternatives.
Chose VMware vCenter
Based on the Gartner leader board, VMware is a pioneer in terms of virtualization, it is also API based which is easy to integrate on other systems via REST API's, the technology itself is powerful and it's corresponding other added value features that makes administering …
Chose VMware vCenter
VMware is much easier to use, much easier to configure, and does not rely on having another OS layer like windows to run off of. This was they key for us because whenever we had to update windows we would have to migrate everything off just to apply some simple updates. VCenter …
Chose VMware vCenter
Our desktop team uses Citrix XenApp for remote connectivity of our employees. However, this environment runs on our VMware vSphere hosts which are managed by VMware vCenter Server. :) XenApp was never considered to replace VMware vCenter Server or our vSphere hosts.
Chose VMware vCenter
VMware vcenter server is way ahead of the competition in terms of features and thought that has gone into the product.
Chose VMware vCenter
Proxmox VE is also a very powerful tool and is free, but vCenter has really hit the nail on the head as far as simplicity and ease of use, as well as, reliability.
Chose VMware vCenter
When we were selecting a hypervisor a few years ago, VMware was the clear leader at the time. Now the gap has lessened but I still like the feature set and feel of VMware. VMware is also moving in a direction I generally like, so I don't have any reason to replace what we've …
Chose VMware vCenter
There are similar products in the market, both commercial as well as open source. We only tried open source products such as Ovirt and ProxMox, however they did not possess the range of features of this product. In addition, the majority of such options do not provide an easy …
Chose VMware vCenter
I've selected VMware vCenter Server among the other Virtual Server solutions because it reduces the amount of time and effort to run and set up maintenance tasks, create hosts and back them up. Replication is so easy when you have a second vCenter Server linked remotely that …
Features
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Red Hat OpenShift
8.2
Ratings
3% above category average
VMware vCenter
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform management overhead7.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability7.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control8.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration8.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification7.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery7.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes8.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.6 out of 10
NinjaOne
NinjaOne
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloud Private
IBM Cloud Private
Score 9.6 out of 10
NinjaOne
NinjaOne
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloud Private
IBM Cloud Private
Score 9.6 out of 10

No answers on this topic

All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Likelihood to Recommend
9.3
(0 ratings)
8.5
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.8
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.6
(0 ratings)
7.7
(0 ratings)
Availability
5.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.7
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.3
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
In-Person Training
7.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.6
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Red Hat OpenShiftVMware vCenter
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
VMware vCenter Server is suited for pretty much any environment using virtual servers. It allows a centralized management view of the virtual servers and the physical servers that the virtual servers run on. There are so many things that VMware vCenter Server can do, including large Enterprise options that are cost-prohibitive for most organizations.
Read full review
Pros
  • 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.
Read full review
  • First and foremost, it provides a platform for us to virtualize our servers and it does it very well. Having the ability to spin up a new server from a template in a matter of seconds is amazing and saves precious time and resources.
  • VMware vCenter Server also provides the ability to view performance & statistical data that assists my team in balancing our host environment. Leveraging the vMotion functionality, we can quickly move VMs from one host to another for maintenance purposes, etc...
  • VMware vCenter Server also make it easy to add / modify hardware configurations within the VMs setup. Adding RAM, hard drive space, processor cores, etc...is as easy as it gets.
  • VMware vCenter Server makes it easy to backup and restore a VM from the console. You can quickly create a backup of any VM and store it during upgrades, etc...for easy roll backs.
Read full review
Cons
  • 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."
Read full review
  • I still am not happy with the web interface. While convenient in that I can access vCenter from anywhere I have a browser connection, It feels slower than the thick client and if I'm doing anything that takes longer than a few minutes, I'll always opt for the thick client.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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
Read full review
We are very dependent on this software, it has become a much needed tool to perform the daily tasks that are required to maintain the virtual server environment. VMware has become very pricey over the years, so we are looking for alternatives for cost savings strategy, but nothing has been found to be on par to what we are currently using
Read full review
Usability
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
Read full review
I work with vCenter for 10+ years and i love it. I can find my way around and can help building and expanding the platform. It is easy to use and there are a lot good communities for the extra support when needed. Even the Homelab community is of great value.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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
Read full review
VMware support has always been fantastic and they have been invaluable in solving tougher issues that have been run into. Most of the time, any oddities encountered are fixed by available updates. This can be deduced by support quickly with logs within vCenter. We have not run into something yet that support was unable to help with. They either have a solution already, or they are able to find one quickly.
Read full review
In-Person Training
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Online Training
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
The learning curve is quite high but worth it.
Read full review
Since moving away from the Windows Server hosting the vCenter application and instead using a virtual appliance, it has become much easier to implement and deploy the new versions. We can easily create a snapshot or clone of the vCenter vApp to ensure any problems encountered during the upgrade can be mitigated with a fall back to the old version to prevent unscheduled downtime.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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.
Read full review
vCenter is much more complete as a solution than other products that I have looked at and it works very well for our environment. vCenter is very easy to configure and does not have the unnecessary steps to set up and configure. Also, the different storage vendor support makes it easy to configure and maintain without having to use separate applications or consoles.
Read full review
Scalability
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
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • 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.
Read full review
  • Significantly reduced the number of standalone control system servers on site
  • Allowed scaling up of existing systems and migrating other systems onto new infrastructure without additional hardware outlay
  • The initial licensing and hardware purchase cost was high, however will pay off by the reduction in hardware costs required for planned systems
Read full review
ScreenShots