Compare Cisco CloudCenter vs. Foglight Evolve Cloud

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Turbonomic Logo
8,296 views|4,167 comparisons
Cisco CloudCenter Logo
2,446 views|1,755 comparisons
Foglight Evolve Cloud Logo
63 views|38 comparisons
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Turbonomic, an IBM company, Cisco and others in Cloud Migration. Updated: September 2021.
536,548 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pricing and Cost Advice
"If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does.""It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year.""I'm not involved in any of the billing, but my understanding is that is fairly expensive.""We see ROI in extended support agreements (ESA) for old software. Migration activities seem to be where Turbonomic has really benefited us the most. It's one click and done. We have new machines ready to go with Turbonomic, which are properly sized instead of somebody sitting there with a spreadsheet and guessing. So, my return on investment would certainly be on currency, from a software and hardware perspective.""When we have expanded our licensing, it has always been easy to make an ROI-based decision. So, it's reasonably priced. We would like to have it cheaper, but we get more benefit from it than we pay for it. At the end of the day, that's all you can hope for.""I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault.""It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive.""The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."

More Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
536,548 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Pricing is pretty straightforward. We haven't seen any major increases in it. It's a flexible model. There aren't… more »
Top Answer: The GUI and policy creation have room for improvement. There should be a better view of some of the numbers that are… more »
Top Answer: We do vMotion through VMware. We let Turbonomic control our vMotion. We do server rightsizing and capacity management… more »
Top Answer: Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very… more »
Top Answer: Due to the branding reputation and field experience, the customers in our country are very confident about the Cisco… more »
Top Answer: We're an implementor, and therefore we deploy this solution for our clients. As a use case example, one client is a… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons
Also Known As
VMTurbo Operations Manager
CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter
Learn More
Overview

Turbonomic, an IBM Company, provides Application Resource Management (ARM) software used by customers to assure application performance and governance by dynamically resourcing applications across hybrid and multicloud environments. Turbonomic Network Performance Management (NPM) provides modern monitoring and analytics solutions to help assure continuous network performance at scale across multivendor networks for enterprises, carriers and managed services providers.

For further information, please visit www.turbonomic.com

www.turbonomic.com/resources/case-studies

The Cisco CloudCenter solution is an application-centric hybrid cloud management platform that securely provisions infrastructure resources and deploys applications to data center, private cloud, and public cloud environments.

With Cisco CloudCenter breakthrough application-centric technology, users
can:

  • Model: Quickly and easily build a cloud-independent application profile that defines the deployment and management requirements of an entire application stack.
  • Deploy: Use one click to deploy the application profile and related components and data to any data center or cloud environment.
  • Manage: Apply a wide range of application lifecycle actions to set policies to enable in-place scaling, support cross-environment bursting or high availability and disaster recovery, and stop the deployment.

Foglight Evolve Cloud helps you migrate workloads to the cloud with confidence, with predicted costs, cost-savings and impact to performance. ... After migration, you'll be able to fully manage all your workloads in the cloud easily.

Offer
Learn more about Turbonomic
Learn more about Cisco CloudCenter
Learn more about Foglight Evolve Cloud
Sample Customers
JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citi, ANZ, Credit Suisse, State Street, Morningstar, VOYA, TPICAP, LPL Financial, Cisco, BMC, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Agilysys, MetLife, Hiscox, Humana, Tokio Marine, Allscripts, SHARP, Providence St. Joseph Health, NBC Universal, pwc, KPMG, Wayfair, Carhartt, Tiffany & Co., UCLA, NASA, NIH
NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex
American Airlines, Bank of America, BARCLAYS, ebay, Ford, intel, MARS, MERCK, Microsoft, UBER, VISA
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company14%
Financial Services Firm13%
Manufacturing Company12%
Energy/Utilities Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider20%
Government6%
Financial Services Firm5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider49%
Computer Software Company21%
Government4%
Financial Services Firm3%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise27%
Large Enterprise63%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business16%
Midsize Enterprise50%
Large Enterprise34%
No Data Available
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Turbonomic, an IBM company, Cisco and others in Cloud Migration. Updated: September 2021.
536,548 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cisco CloudCenter is ranked 4th in Cloud Migration with 2 reviews while Foglight Evolve Cloud is ranked 22nd in Cloud Migration. Cisco CloudCenter is rated 7.6, while Foglight Evolve Cloud is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of Cisco CloudCenter writes "Scales well with good documentation and a very good reputation regionally". On the other hand, Cisco CloudCenter is most compared with Cisco Intersight, VMware vRealize Automation (vRA), CloudStack, Cisco UCS Director and Morpheus, whereas Foglight Evolve Cloud is most compared with Quest Foglight Hybrid Cloud Manager.

See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors and best Cloud Management 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.