Onica AWS Managed Cloud Services vs Rackspace Managed Public Cloud comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Ranking
Views
35
Comparisons
12
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Views
84
Comparisons
69
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Comparisons
Learn More
Overview

The Onica difference is one of ongoing innovation. Our pods provide low customer volume and high customer touch, allowing for partnership on long-term planning and automation. This makes our approach to Cloud Managed Services a more collaborative ‘do with’ instead of outsourced ‘do for.’ With our focus on enablement and transformation, we promote cloud native consumers.

No matter where you are in your cloud journey, Rackspace can provide real value to public cloud customers through 24x7x365 access to thousands of cloud engineers to provide proactive architecture advice and security guidance. With over 15 years of experience developing capabilities on the world’s leading technologies, Rackspace has the expertise necessary to provide a secure, multi cloud solution to meet your most critical business needs.

Sample Customers
eHarmony, Samsung, Tugg, Kasasa, MovieTickets.com, TrueCar
Bis2Bis

Onica AWS Managed Cloud Services is ranked 15th in Public Cloud Infrastructure Managed Service Providers while Rackspace Managed Public Cloud is ranked 4th in Public Cloud Infrastructure Managed Service Providers. Onica AWS Managed Cloud Services is rated 0.0, while Rackspace Managed Public Cloud is rated 0.0. On the other hand, Onica AWS Managed Cloud Services is most compared with , whereas Rackspace Managed Public Cloud is most compared with .

See our list of best Public Cloud Infrastructure Managed Service Providers vendors.

We monitor all Public Cloud Infrastructure Managed Service Providers 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.