We performed a comparison between AWS Application Migration Service and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Live Migration's best feature is that it's free."
"The CloudEndure feature is most valuable because it is user friendly and very simple."
"The most valuable feature is the live, block-to-block replication."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...I rate the solution's support a ten out of ten."
"The biggest value I'm getting out of VMTurbo right now is the complete hands-off management of equalizing the usage in my data center."
"The feature for optimizing VMs is the most valuable because a number of the agencies have workloads or VMs that are not really being used. Turbonomic enables us to say, 'If you combine these, or if you decide to go with a reserve instance, you will save this much.'"
"The primary features we have focused on are reporting and optimization."
"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."
"The automated memory balancing, where it looks at whether it's being used in the most efficient way and adds or takes away memory, is the best part. If it didn't do that, it would be something that I would have to do. We have too many machines for one person to do that. The automation helps me in that it is done in a really efficient way and a balanced way because of the policies. It really helps."
"The tool provides the ability to look at the consumption utilization over a period of time and determine if we need to change that resource allocation based on the actual workload consumption, as opposed to how IT has configured it. Therefore, we have come to realize that a lot of our workloads are overprovisioned, and we are spending more money in the public cloud than we need to."
"I only deal with the infrastructure side, so I really couldn't speak to more than load balancing as the most valuable feature for me. It provides specific actions that prevent resource starvation. It always keeps things in perfect balance."
"On-premises, one advantage I find particularly appealing is the ability to create policies for automatic CPU and memory scaling based on demand."
"We would like to have a disaster recovery feature included in this solution."
"One drawback to using CloudEndure is that the default is to give one small, lightweight server, which is created in the cloud."
"I think it is important to have more logs, and more details would be great because we have just logged on the client's side, but there weren't many details on the cloud."
"I do not see any improvements required for the CloudEndure."
"Live Migration has some issues with target setups."
"Remove the need for special in-house knowledge and development."
"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."
"It sometimes does get false positives. Sometimes, it'll move something when it really wasn't a performance metric. I've seen it do that, but it's pretty much an automated tool for performance. We've only got about 500 virtual machines, so lots of times, I'm able to manage it physically, but it's definitely a nice tool for a larger enterprise that might be managing 2,000 or 3,000 virtual machines."
"The way it handles updates needs to be improved."
"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."
"Turbonomic can modernize the look and feel, making it more user-friendly to access and obtain information."
"I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added Azure App service, but they can do more."
More AWS Application Migration Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Application Migration Service is ranked 8th in Cloud Migration with 5 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 4th in Cloud Migration with 204 reviews. AWS Application Migration Service is rated 8.2, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS Application Migration Service writes "Well priced, easy to expand, and reliable". 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 ". AWS Application Migration Service is most compared with Zerto and Carbonite Migrate, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and VMware vSphere. See our AWS Application Migration Service vs. IBM Turbonomic report.
See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.
