We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Object Storage and Portworx Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Software Defined Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."
"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."
"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."
"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."
"The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments."
"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."
"Portworx is a simple solution. It's similar to Pure Storage products. They're all easy to use and install. You need to have a little expertise with containers to use Portworx, but it will be no problem for you if you understand containers."
"A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Portworx virtualizes the aspects of the underlying block storage. That is good because they can also use block storage for their future deployment instead of just NFS."
"The best thing about Portworx is the Stork, they have called the VPS (Volume Replacement Strategy) and they also have topology awareness, and these are the three features I like."
"I like that you have a small dedicated file system that is fast and resilient for containerized workloads."
"IBM has limited cloud storage."
"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."
"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."
"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."
"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."
"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."
"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."
"They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."
"I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems."
"The integration has room for improvement."
"I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers."
"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately."
"The documentation could be better."
IBM Cloud Object Storage is ranked 10th in File and Object Storage with 7 reviews while Portworx Enterprise is ranked 2nd in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 6 reviews. IBM Cloud Object Storage is rated 8.0, while Portworx Enterprise is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Object Storage writes "Offers the ease with which you can move data between on-premises storage and the cloud and then retrieve it back on-premises when necessary". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Portworx Enterprise writes "A solution backed by strong customer support, that is stable and scalable". IBM Cloud Object Storage is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, MinIO, Dell ECS, IBM Spectrum Scale and NetApp StorageGRID, whereas Portworx Enterprise is most compared with Red Hat Openshift Data Foundation, Red Hat Ceph Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, IBM Spectrum Scale and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI). See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Portworx Enterprise report.
See our list of best Cloud Software Defined Storage vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Software Defined Storage 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.
