AWS Control Tower vs Rapid7 InsightCloudSec comparison

"Turbonomic has helped optimize cloud operations and reduced our cloud costs significantly. Overall, we are at about 40 percent savings, and we spend about three million a year just in Azure. It reduces the size of the VMs, putting them into the right template for usage. People don't realize that you don't have to future-proof a virtual machine in Azure. You just need to build it for today. As the business or service grows, you can scale up or out. About 90 percent of all the costs that we've reduced has been from sizing machines appropriately."

"We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall."

"With Turbonomic, we were able to reduce our ESX cluster size and save money on our maintenance and license renewals. It saved us around $75,000 per year but it's a one-time reduction in VMware licensing. We don't renew the support. The ongoing savings is probably $50,000 to $75,000 a year, but there was a one-time of $200,000 plus."

"The solution has a good optimization feature."

"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like."

"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."

"With over 2500 ESX VMs, including 1500+ XenDesktop VDI desktops, hosted over two datacentres and 80+ vSphere hosts, firefighting has become something of the past."

"The most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs."

"AWS Control Tower helps to save a lot of work and manage multiple accounts."

"It offers automated recommendations for security and policies, creating a landing zone and providing a list of policies."

"One of the standout advantages is the fine-grained control it offers in terms of permissions and privileges."

"AWS Control Tower helps companies save costs."

"The most intriguing feature is the automatic generation of user accounts. Leveraging Active Directory and global company settings, AWS Cloud Tower enables the creation of AWS user accounts based on job descriptions in Active Directory. This establishes a direct correlation between the user's name, job definition, and the corresponding rules applied to each account."

"It provides a central point for account management, access control, and compliance monitoring."

"The solution's initial setup was easy for me."

"There are two features in Control Tower which are the most valuable. One is the guardrails because it has preventive and detective guardrails."

"I find the security frameworks and security tools valuable. I think they're good in the infrastructure of the code security. They are also good at threat protection."

"The tool provides centralized visibility through dashboards and alerts, allowing customers to receive reports on cloud vulnerabilities and security posture. Rapid7 InsightCloudSec provides customers with a robust understanding of cloud security."

"Agentless scanning is a possible use with Rapid7 InsightCloudSec."

"The tool's most valuable feature is workload protection for Kubernetes and container security. It has agents that identify bugs or lack of security on runtime containers."

"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."

"There is an opportunity for improvement with some of Turbonomic's permissions internally for role-based access control. We would like the ability to come up with some customized permissions or scope permissions a bit differently than the product provides."

"Some features are only available via changes to the deployment YAML, and it would be better to have them in the UI."

"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."

"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."

"Additional interfaces would be helpful."

"The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer."

"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."

"The process of closing an AWS account using Control Tower needs improvements to simplify it, especially when managing multiple accounts."

"It is essential to clarify that this isn't necessarily a drawback of the service, but having a clear and concise set of predefined guidelines from AWS for moving existing accounts under AWS Control Tower would be highly beneficial as it would simplify the process and make it more user-friendly."

"There should be more automation security tools in the Control Tower."

"AWS Control Tower should improve its fast execution. It also needs more tools for triggering and monitoring AWS services. AWS Control Tower needs more tracking as well."

"There aren't any additional features that I feel are missing. However, it's worth noting that Control Tower seems to function as a layer utilizing standard AWS products in the background. Occasionally, the interface may appear less streamlined, with changes in layout based on the underlying products being used. While this doesn't impact functionality, having a more standardized user interface, irrespective of the background products, could enhance the user experience."

"The product's affordability depends on the value it brings to specific organizations."

"The sole drawback is its restriction to enable only one Control Tower."

"By making APIs and organizational units more centralized, it would be simpler to pinpoint the source of issues in case of a breach and would ultimately benefit everyone involved."

"Technical support could be better. It could also be easier, more user-friendly, and intuitive. The API keys aren't easy to understand, and the cloud layouts aren't intuitive and user-friendly. We should be able to integrate IM governance and APIs into non-compliant workloads like legacy solutions."

"Rapid7 InsightCloudSec could be better at showing dashboards for virtual firewalls and appliances. Compared to other solutions like Palo Alto, this area is not as good. So, they should work on improving this for virtual devices."

"There are a lot of other solutions in the market, not only providing the features of a CSPM, but also CNAPP."

"The tool needs to improve its documentation."

"Everybody tells me the pricing is high. But the ROIs are great."

"IBM Turbonomic is an investment that we believe will deliver positive returns."

"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."

"What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."

"I'm not involved in any of the billing, but my understanding is that is fairly expensive."

"We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."

"Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."

"I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."

"The product's affordability depends on the value it brings to specific organizations."

"The cost is reasonable, but there are opportunities for improvement in terms of pricing for larger enterprises."

"The pricing structure is closely intertwined with the specifics of your environment and the billing strategy you employ."

"The pay-as-you-go model ensures you're only charged for what you use, which offers great flexibility for different types of companies."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing an eight."

"It is cost-effective and the associated cost is quite minimal."

"AWS Control Tower is not really that expensive."

"The solution is free."

"Companies generally buy this tool because the pricing is not that high."

"We're doing an annual subscription. There are additional expenses, but not within the confines of this platform."