We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Director and CloudCheckr based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Feature-wise, the solution helps one to add multiple environments in one place...It is a scalable product."
"The solution is helpful for centralized management."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the fabric sharing."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"An easy and strong configuration, along with its low cost, are some of the features of the solution."
"The reason we went with Cisco is that it comes at a very negligible cost as part of the BOQ. Compared to the competition's products, which are incredibly expensive, UCS Director is low-cost."
"A product that really aids in systems management without complexity."
"I can manage multiple workloads whether it's on AWS, Azure, or on-premises. They can be managed by using the UCS Director."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"The solution is scalable for our purposes."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."
"The best feature I like about CloudCheckr CMx High Security is its simplicity. I love that it's not rocket science to use the solution. Even if you're not familiar with the cloud, you can easily figure out how to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You can use AWS, you can use Azure, and you can use GCP with the solution because the integration is quite simple. You can also use multi-cloud with it, and you could see the billing part. You'll have complete visibility into your cost which I love about the solution. I also love that data on any security issues and vulnerabilities are available on the go with CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You don't need to do anything different. Just run the scan and you'll have all these open findings in the tool, in terms of the priority level, so if it's critical, it will tell you, "It's critical," and you need to fix it right away."
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The areas where this product can be improved are the integrations and the UI. These features are not as friendly compared to VMware products."
"Normally, UCS Director is used primarily for orchestration, but when we look at a non-Cisco data infrastructure components, the UCS Director needs a bit more improvement in terms of integration with third-party systems and with existing older systems."
"There are a lot of bugs in the solution. This is an area in the solution that can be improved."
"The tool should be a lot more intuitive and make it easy for us to understand and migrate."
"Simplifying the user interface would go a long way to making it more usable."
"The product could allow more programmatic opportunities through better development of the API."
"It is not easy to add or expand the product."
"The product's pricing needs to improve."
"The solution must improve its user interface."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."
"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration. All the clouds are going quite fast, for example, all the cloud providers: Microsoft, Google, etc. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is good with AWS, no doubt about it, but with Azure and Google Cloud, I find that the solution is slow in that direction. If the vendor planned for CloudCheckr CMx High Security to be automated just for AWS, then it does make sense. If not, if the vendor is also targeting good integration with Google and Microsoft, then CloudCheckr CMx High Security integration needs improvement, in particular, it has to be faster. At the moment, its integration with Azure is not as good as its integration with AWS. With GCP, integration is nowhere."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"CloudCheckr CMx High Security is complex. There are a lot of menus, and if you do not know what you are looking for you can get lost. However, the interface is self-explanatory. It's easy to understand where to go to get what you want."
Cisco UCS Director is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 13 reviews while CloudCheckr is ranked 23rd in Cloud Management with 8 reviews. Cisco UCS Director is rated 7.2, while CloudCheckr is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Director writes "A compact and flexible solution with a lot of features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support". Cisco UCS Director is most compared with Cisco Intersight, vCenter Orchestrator, VMware Aria Automation, VMware Aria Operations and vCloud Director, whereas CloudCheckr is most compared with AWS Trusted Advisor, Azure Cost Management, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, Apptio One and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our Cisco UCS Director vs. CloudCheckr report.
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Management 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.