We performed a comparison between AWS Application Migration Service and Cisco CloudCenter based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The CloudEndure feature is most valuable because it is user friendly and very simple."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...I rate the solution's support a ten out of ten."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"The most valuable feature is the live, block-to-block replication."
"Live Migration's best feature is that it's free."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."
"You can scale it easily."
"The solution is agile and it has APIs for integration."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well."
"The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports."
"I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services."
"Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."
"We would like to have a disaster recovery feature included in this solution."
"One drawback to using CloudEndure is that the default is to give one small, lightweight server, which is created in the cloud."
"Live Migration has some issues with target setups."
"I do not see any improvements required for the CloudEndure."
"I think it is important to have more logs, and more details would be great because we have just logged on the client's side, but there weren't many details on the cloud."
"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills."
"I'm not a big fan of CloudCenter. I don't have anything against it, however, the on-premise version has been so hard to upgrade and maintain."
"Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution."
"For many clients, the main problem with the solution is the price. Cisco is very expensive. If they could somehow make the pricing more competitive, that would be a big draw."
"The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together."
"The solution needs to be more simple."
"You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches."
"The tool should improve its security on the XDR part."
More AWS Application Migration Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Application Migration Service is ranked 8th in Cloud Migration with 5 reviews while Cisco CloudCenter is ranked 9th in Cloud Migration with 9 reviews. AWS Application Migration Service is rated 8.2, while Cisco CloudCenter is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AWS Application Migration Service writes "Well priced, easy to expand, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco CloudCenter writes "Useful features for configuring down to ports but extremely expensive". AWS Application Migration Service is most compared with Zerto and Carbonite Migrate, whereas Cisco CloudCenter is most compared with Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Automation, Cisco UCS Director, CloudStack and Faddom. See our AWS Application Migration Service vs. Cisco CloudCenter report.
See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.
