We performed a comparison between IBM Public Cloud and Pivotal 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."What I like most in IBM Public Cloud is how easy it is to create serverless functions. They are called IBM functions, but in AWS, they are called Lambda functions. Those are pretty standard, and another thing I like the most is that you have fewer restrictions on the amount of data you can transfer across those functions. IBM Public Cloud is way more flexible than AWS. I also like that IBM Public Cloud is pretty straightforward to integrate. As long as you have all the tools IBM provides you, getting everything up and running is straightforward."
"It is easy to deploy what you need for the initial setup"
"The initial setup was very easy. It's quite straightforward. Deployment took about fifteen minutes. Everything is well organized."
"The availability is second to none. Customer support is very good."
"The beauty of cloud service providers, especially public cloud service providers, is that they are scalable every time when you need them because their payment model is pay-as-you-go."
"An advantage of IBM Public Cloud is the bare metal server. We can take the bare metal server. It's not shared with anyone. We can deploy our applications without sharing them with anyone. That is an advantage of IBM Public Cloud."
"There is no installation for this product because it is a cloud product."
"I've found the stability to be excellent. The performance is good."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very robust, especially for building Java."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring and the deployment is easier."
"The most valuable features of Pivotal Cloud Foundry are its ease of use and the command line interface has the ability to push instances to the cloud easily."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very easy to use compared to other cloud technologies. It has a very good performance."
"Stability is not a concern with this product."
"It supports CI/CD, and is integrated with the CI/CD very well."
"We find its stability and scalability valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is the UI, it is easy to use."
"They do not have a very good virtual network implemented, and the VPC is the most important feature that needs to be improved."
"It will be challenging to implement if you do not have any experience."
"There is not a lot of support for this solution, which is something that needs to be improved."
"The deployment can be a bit of a pain. There are a lot of packages and a lot of options and it can require complex configuration to get it right."
"Recently, we just faced some issues with the operating system due to the end of life of CentOS 6...So, then the client wanted to try it out under AWS instead of IBM. In short, it has some complexities."
"The solution needs to be more autonomous. It should let the DL go to allow for more jobs on the cloud. It could have a better interface as well."
"Maybe performance enhancers and reports could be better improved. If they do so, it would be better. Of all the drawbacks I saw, this would be the biggest enhancement."
"An area for improvement in IBM Public Cloud is getting up-to-date information on how to set up everything. It's hard to find new documentation."
"Something that can be done better is canary deployment. So, right now, we're using blue-green deployment. The support for canary deployment would be nice."
"The user interface should be simpler to navigate because it t can take time for users to learn it."
"There is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the future of Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
"In the next release, they should offer additional applications for the databases, and improve the deployment experience."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve on the technology it is a bit complex."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve the documentation. They are good, but they could improve more. Additionally, it would be beneficial if there were more use case examples."
"There are no synthetic application monitoring and real-time monitoring features."
"It is not straightforward to setup."
IBM Public Cloud is ranked 9th in PaaS Clouds with 16 reviews while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is ranked 7th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews. IBM Public Cloud is rated 8.0, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Public Cloud writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and has helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pivotal Cloud Foundry writes "Easy to use, simple to sign-in, but lacking graphical interface". IBM Public Cloud is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and Google Cloud, whereas Pivotal Cloud Foundry is most compared with OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS and Google Cloud. See our IBM Public Cloud vs. Pivotal 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.