We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Cloud Foundry based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Oracle and others in PaaS Clouds."It is enough for us in terms of features. We don't have too many transactions, and it is sufficient for our current needs."
"AWS is easy to manage."
"It improves the speed for us to access vendors."
"The solution has very good Lambda functions within AWS."
"The most valuable feature is the backup ability. Most people are used to one type of backup solution that they're using, but most of these solutions have features that make it difficult to transfer to the cloud. I know that Veeam now gives people the opportunity to backup some on-premises solutions to the cloud. This feature is something that a lot of people are looking for."
"We write a lot of Lambda functions for various services, as well as serverless functions."
"Serverless computing: This can be more cost-efficient just regarding computing resources than renting or purchasing a fixed quantity of servers, which involves periods of underutilization or nonuse."
"I like the storage, all the codes like Lambda and Amazon EMR."
"IBM is the only vendor to offer integration with blockchain for smart contract development."
"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."
"The interface needs a bit of work. It's not intuitive."
"Some services which were easy to use through shortcuts are now more complicated to use."
"The availability could be better."
"The price could be better. Support for data analytics could be better. I don't see much support for data analytics. They have a lot of support in Azure, but I don't see a lot of innovation on the data analytics side in AWS."
"Amazon AWS should integrate AI capabilities."
"Our use case is limited to virtual services and RPA development. We are not using it quite heavily, and there are not many issues or problems so far. However, it would be great if it could be integrated with more AI features and proactive monitoring. It could also have more automatic capacity expansion features. For example, when renting out some space, memory, or computing power, the service can have the capacity to expand by itself without being manually handled by us."
"When you are first starting, the initial setup can be a bit complex, but it gets easier after that."
"AWS is very expensive."
"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, OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Cloud Foundry is most compared with Pivotal Cloud Foundry, VMware Tanzu Application Service, Microsoft Azure, OpenShift and Mendix.
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.