We performed a comparison between Cradlepoint NetCloud and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Fortinet, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions."Cradlepoint NetCloud is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the automatic failover."
"It is easy to set up and requires a single administrator to maintain it."
"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like."
"The system automatically sizes and moves resources based on the needs of the applications."
"We have a system where our developers automate machine builds, and that is constantly running out of resources. Turbonomic helps us with that, so I don't have to keep buying hardware. The developers always say, "They don't have enough. They don't have enough. They don't have enough," when they just configured it improperly. Therefore, Turbonomic helps us identify configuration issues on their side so it doesn't cost me money on the other end to buy resources that I don't really need."
"In our organization, optimizing application performance is a continuous process that is beyond human scale. We would not be able to do the number of actions that Turbonomic takes on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It is humanly impossible with the little micro adjustments that it can make. That is a huge differentiator. If you just figure each action could take anywhere very conservatively from five to 10 minutes to act upon, then you multiply that out by thousands of actions every month, it is easily something where you could say, "I am saving a couple of FTEs.""
"The primary features we have focused on are reporting and optimization."
"The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."
"Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated."
"We have VM placement in Automated mode and currently have all other metrics in Recommend mode."
"In our situation, the initial setup was complex."
"It is missing important settings options."
"The performance of group-based clouds should be enhanced."
"There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."
"In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings."
"It would be good for Turbonomic, on their side, to integrate with other companies like AppDynamics or SolarWinds or other monitoring softwares. I feel that the actual monitoring of applications, mixed in with their abilities, would help. That would be the case wherever Turbonomic lacks the ability to monitor an application or in cases where applications are so customized that it's not going to be able to handle them. There is monitoring that you can do with scripting that you may not be able to do with Turbonomic."
"Enhanced executive reporting standard with the tool beyond the reports that can be created today. Something that can easily be used with upper management on a monthly or quarterly basis to show the impact to our environment."
"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."
"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."
"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."
"Turbonomic can modernize the look and feel, making it more user-friendly to access and obtain information."
Cradlepoint NetCloud is ranked 18th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 3 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 2nd in Virtualization Management Tools with 204 reviews. Cradlepoint NetCloud is rated 7.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cradlepoint NetCloud writes "Simple to install and reliable, but technical support should improve their response time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". Cradlepoint NetCloud is most compared with Peplink SpeedFusion, Meraki SD-WAN, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco SD-WAN and VMware SD-WAN, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and VMware vSphere.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.
