We performed a comparison between AWS Application Migration Service and CloudStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Zerto, IBM and others in Cloud Migration."The most valuable feature is the live, block-to-block replication."
"Live Migration's best feature is that it's free."
"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."
"Valuable features include that it is a user-friendly portal, VPN P2S and S2S possibilities, and it's easy to manage accounts and limits."
"It has become easy to deploy new devices with no or minimal hardware changes. Now, a user can be ready to use a firewall within a few minutes, as compared to the traditional physical model which involved purchase, shipping, hardware configuration, cabling, power, etc."
"You can manage infrastructure with a few people, since product is monolithic. We had three engineers (storage, virtual, Linux admins) only. Also, CS supports different flavours of hypervisors."
"It gives us the ability to manage and segregate a guest network with openvSwitch and VLAN IDs."
"I have been impressed by CloudStack's most recent updates around Kubernetes. In particular, they have worked with Kubernetes to support the Cluster API, and you can now easily integrate Kubernetes into CloudStack and get access to a lot of good features."
"The back-end database design is simple and straight forward. The user interface is designed with external users in mind. Billing is relatively straightforward with this product. Not being restricted to just one hypervisor was nice."
"It was easy to deploy, both for PoC and production (with HA)."
"CloudStack’s private gateway networking feature is what enables us to offer utmost security and confidentially to our customers and partners, by enabling them to connect to their virtual data centers via dedicated, encrypted, private fiber lines that never touch the public internet space. Ease of setup and management are certainly important additional benefits for us on the engineering team."
"One drawback to using CloudEndure is that the default is to give one small, lightweight server, which is created in the cloud."
"I do not see any improvements required for the CloudEndure."
"We would like to have a disaster recovery feature included in this solution."
"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."
"Live Migration has some issues with target setups."
"The main reason why we started looking for another solution: backups, replication, HA, and dependency on secondary storage. CS is quite sensitive for infrastructure, and any kind of network disruption between CS and secondary storage leads to VM hanging."
"There are some minor things that can be improved even more such as, perhaps, a bit more polishing on the GUI side to catch up with the API possibilities (which are really extensive) but otherwise nothing critical."
"It would be great to have a couple of “external” networks for VPC and have the possibility, for each domain, to choose they type of “external” network."
"Lack of support for third-party software vendors such as Veeam and Zerto creates limitations on comprehensive offerings which would include backup and disaster recovery."
"Companies need to be knowledgeable about cloud technology. It's not for novice users."
"CS has very descriptive logging, and every time I faced issues and asked for help, I didn’t get any reply from the community. Reason? Its quite obvious. CS runs on specific environments, unique to each case. So, unless it is a functional issue of CS, nobody can help you. All issues were resolved by myself going through logs. This is another reason why you need smart enough people to manage it. Engineers must have knowledge of hypervisors and understand how CS interacts with them."
"VPN P2S is cutting all connections except the CloudStack environment for the user when he is connected. I would like to have VPN like Cisco's AnyConnect."
"My teammates have complained about the upgrade. The source code had massive files that had to be merged with our own development to upgrade to the latest version of CloudStack. It was quite painful for them. CloudStack could add some cost management tools to give me some control over the costs associated with the number of users of my services."
More AWS Application Migration Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Application Migration Service is ranked 8th in Cloud Migration with 5 reviews while CloudStack is ranked 12th in Cloud Management with 29 reviews. AWS Application Migration Service is rated 8.2, while CloudStack is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS Application Migration Service writes "Well priced, easy to expand, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CloudStack writes "A solution that strikes a balance between user-friendliness, scalability, and stability". AWS Application Migration Service is most compared with Zerto and Carbonite Migrate, whereas CloudStack is most compared with OpenNebula, vCloud Director, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure and VMware Aria Automation.
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.
