We performed a comparison between Cisco Piston Enterprise OS and RightScale Cloud Management Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management."Before implementing Turbonomic, we had difficulty reaching a consensus about VM placement and sizing. Everybody's opinion was wrong, including mine. The application developers, implementers, and infrastructure team could never decide the appropriate size of a virtual machine. I always made the machines small, and they always made them too big. We were both probably wrong."
"Turbonomic has helped optimize cloud operations and reduced our cloud costs significantly. Overall, we are at about 40 percent savings, and we spend about three million a year just in Azure. It reduces the size of the VMs, putting them into the right template for usage. People don't realize that you don't have to future-proof a virtual machine in Azure. You just need to build it for today. As the business or service grows, you can scale up or out. About 90 percent of all the costs that we've reduced has been from sizing machines appropriately."
"We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall."
"It became obvious to us that there was a lot more being offered in the product that we could leverage to ensure our VMware environment was running efficiently."
"I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software."
"With Turbonomic, we were able to reduce our ESX cluster size and save money on our maintenance and license renewals. It saved us around $75,000 per year but it's a one-time reduction in VMware licensing. We don't renew the support. The ongoing savings is probably $50,000 to $75,000 a year, but there was a one-time of $200,000 plus."
"It has automated a lot of things. We have saved 30 to 35 percent in human resource time and cost, which is pretty substantial. We don't have a big workforce here, so we have to use all the automation we can get."
"The primary features we have focused on are reporting and optimization."
"It offers enough support so that you don't need to have the need to get another device."
"The most valuable feature is Optima, which is something that we use quite extensively."
"With this platform, users could migrate to the cloud on the go and use public cloud services like Oracle database while integrating with their own local storage."
"They could add a few more reports. They could also be a bit more granular. While they have reports, sometimes it is hard to figure out what you are looking for just by looking at the date."
"I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added Azure App service, but they can do more."
"They have a long road map when we ask for certain things that will make the product better. It takes time, but that's understandable because there are other things that are higher on the priority list."
"The way it handles updates needs to be improved."
"It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."
"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."
"I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge."
"It can be more agnostic in terms of the solutions that it provides. It can include some other cost-saving methods for the public cloud and SaaS applications as well."
"The solution is just too expensive, so maybe the pricing could be better."
"Technical support is an area that can be improved."
"There is a problem with integration due to invalid private node security certificates."
More RightScale Cloud Management Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco Piston Enterprise OS is ranked 51st in Cloud Management while RightScale Cloud Management Platform is ranked 25th in Cloud Management with 4 reviews. Cisco Piston Enterprise OS is rated 9.0, while RightScale Cloud Management Platform is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Piston Enterprise OS writes "A simple interface and helpful support for a solution that grows with us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RightScale Cloud Management Platform writes "Good CMPs for cloud provisioning and excellent scalability". Cisco Piston Enterprise OS is most compared with Abiquo, whereas RightScale Cloud Management Platform is most compared with .
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Management 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.
