We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr and OpenNebula 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."The solution is scalable for our purposes."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."
"The service feature appeals most to us, thus it is the most valuable."
"The ability to use it almost like a public cloud for an organization is a big asset, as it will create a value proposition and can control costs in a great way."
"What's best about OpenNebula that people like is that it's easy to deploy. It's also easy to manage. It's interesting because people choose OpenNebula over other solutions because of the ease of management."
"The solution provides templates for configurations that can easily be exchanged to VMs."
"With a single click, we could set things up and initiate them."
"For the entire data center, as a private cloud, I believe that user management, expert management, and the virtual data center is completely magic for the users."
"The live migration feature has been great and is something we use very often."
"OpenNebula has very good integration with SAP Storage."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"The solution must improve its user interface."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"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."
"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 solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"It should have a simple REST API like most other tools. It's the industry standard format. An XML-RPC API gives you an XML document that you have to convert and then do something with that. REST API endpoint provides outputs in a JSON document. I would also like to see support for user data or heat templates, which OpenStack offers, but OpenNebula doesn't have this yet."
"Most of the competitors are offering some sort of billing software to transform their installation to work as a small-sized public cloud, but those offerings from OpenNebula are still missing."
"There are no payment gateways in OpenNebula."
"The front-facing API can be improved to support lots of requests when the platform is huge with lots of virtual resources."
"The protocol for clusterization is rough and doesn't work well."
"As with all enterprise software licensing, the pricing is not intuitive and must be negotiated; grandfathered contracts are better than anything offered today."
"The storage feature that they have is a bit confusing."
"There are small things that are hard. For example, making sure that it is going to be installable on public clouds."
CloudCheckr is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 8 reviews while OpenNebula is ranked 5th in Cloud Management with 14 reviews. CloudCheckr is rated 7.6, while OpenNebula is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenNebula writes "Reliable, simple to manage, and offers great technical support". CloudCheckr is most compared with Azure Cost Management, AWS Trusted Advisor, Apptio One, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Cloudability, whereas OpenNebula is most compared with CloudStack, VMware Aria Automation, Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM), vCloud Director and VMware Aria Operations. See our CloudCheckr vs. OpenNebula 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.
