We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Cloud Foundry based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."AWS is stable."
"It offers durability, high availability, fault tolerance, and a high TCO benefit."
"The compute and the elasticness of the compute is really great. Whenever there's a load, it automatically adds the servers and then reduces the servers based on the configuration. This is really wonderful, more cost-effective, and it's been really good for us."
"The solution offers a low footprint. We don't have to come up with a data center ourselves. We basically don't have to own any hardware. We just rent a slice of their platform and we have everything we need."
"The features with Amazon AWS that I have found most valuable are its flexibility and high availability. These are the most important and attractive points for me."
"Works very quickly and is well managed."
"Easy to upgrade, easy to expand storage and change your EC2 types."
"The cutting-edge design is valuable."
"Cloud Foundry builds the runtime environment directly without requiring dependency management from the user."
"My favorite component of IBM's solution is Node-RED, which greatly shortens the amount of time required to develop, test, and deploy new applications."
"IBM is the only vendor to offer integration with blockchain for smart contract development."
"Some of the storage services could be cheaper."
"Recently we had a long conversation about functionality that is missing in Alexa — in Mexico, specifically. Alexa for Business is a service and platform that Americans can use to make a call to an Amazon Echo device or a telephone via the app. But in Mexico, we are not allowed to use that technology. This is a significant disadvantage of AWS for those living in Mexico."
"The invoicing procedure of Amazon AWS needs to be improved. It can be difficult to manage."
"The solution is pretty mature."
"We have had some difficulty figuring out how to monitor how many EC2 instances have been networked into our entire enterprise. We usually try to create a diagram outside of AWS. The types of information we are trying to determine are, for example, what hardware devices are interconnected, and when was the interconnection made."
"The dashboard can be improved a little bit to provide more information."
"Amazon AWS could be improved with cheaper licensing costs."
"AWS has room for improvement on the Kubernetes side. I would like to go a little deeper into the Kubernetes target, Elastic, inner system, and all that. The EKS, target, and all these areas need to be improved, but that is not my key area because I am mostly working on the application side."
"In IBM Cloud, the product has been deprecated in favor of Kubernetes, which is a more complicated infrastructure to manage."
"After the initial excitement period with Node-RED is over, you crave the need of additional integrations to third-party services."
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in PaaS Clouds with 250 reviews while Cloud Foundry is ranked 21st in PaaS Clouds with 2 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Cloud Foundry is rated 5.0. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Reliable with good security but is difficult to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cloud Foundry writes "Quick to deploy but being deprecated by IBM and should be merged with Kubernetes ". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, Microsoft Azure, Red Hat OpenShift, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Cloud Foundry is most compared with Pivotal Cloud Foundry, VMware Tanzu Application Service, Red Hat OpenShift and Microsoft Azure. See our Amazon AWS vs. Cloud Foundry report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.