We performed a comparison between OpenNebula and VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth 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."I also like the ability to build custom functions. I can define a function where I have two types of views and configure the dependencies. The virtual data centers concept allows me to define users. If a user wants to join certain kinds of machines, the host and the other user won't see them. It gives me the flexibility to define multiple views and data centers in one place."
"OpenNebula is easy to deploy and manage compared to other solutions like OpenStack."
"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."
"It is quite easy to deploy."
"The service feature appeals most to us, thus it is the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of OpenNebula is that it scales very well."
"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."
"It makes maintenance very easy and stress-free for our teams."
"The product is easy to use in terms of monitoring all the environments. It works for multiple clouds."
"We use dashboards quite heavily, but one of the features that have really stood out is some of the policies we've created to alert us of particular situations."
"The solution is good for cloud cost management."
"The solution is useful for cloud transparency and visibility in reports and dashboards that I have generated, especially the pre-populated dashboards."
"The pricing is rather competitive right now."
"We are able to create an internal price of the product that we can then sell to clients. We get the cost plan at a good discount and then resell it with a mark up to our enterprise-level clients. This flexibility in pricing is one of the solution's best features."
"The most valuable thing I have found is the cost saving recommendations"
"It's stable. For report presentation, it's been fast."
"An area for improvement in OpenNebula is the number of features it has. The solution doesn't have that many cloud features compared to other solutions. You'd say, "Okay, simplicity over a rich feature list?" Some say, "No, I need a big machine or a cloud interface for my customers to manage resources. I don't have to go and do it for them." Some people do it that way, and it works, but I'd like to improve the limited features in OpenNebula."
"The storage feature that they have is a bit confusing."
"They have been saying for the past two and a half years that they would develop a feature to hot-add RAM and CPU, but it does not work."
"The front-facing API can be improved to support lots of requests when the platform is huge with lots of virtual resources."
"As with all enterprise software licensing, the pricing is not intuitive and must be negotiated; grandfathered contracts are better than anything offered today."
"The protocol for clusterization is rough and doesn't work well."
"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."
"Backup features are only available in the enterprise edition. The community version lacks a good solution for making backups."
"The performance and accuracy of Cloud Health need to be improved."
"CloudHealth needs to start building out Turbonomics-types of features that help the customers who are using CloudHealth really understand everything down to the server level, the virtual machine level."
"If you are working with the OS you need help and other connectors to get more information."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile version or a tablet version, especially for people who are outside of the office."
"I would like to see better integration from CloudHealth to create easier setup and implementation."
"The solution doesn't offer the best functionality, unfortunately. Some features just simply aren't on offer. The solution needs to offer more product milestones."
"The export features regarding CSV files and specifically around identifying savings plans have room for improvement, as well as the drill-down features for reservation utilization."
"They should provide information or tools to tune the cloud resources according to the environment size."
More VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenNebula is ranked 6th in Cloud Management with 14 reviews while VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth is ranked 15th in Cloud Management with 9 reviews. OpenNebula is rated 8.2, while VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenNebula writes "Reliable, simple to manage, and offers great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth writes "Useful for Cloud transparency and visability". OpenNebula is most compared with CloudStack, VMware Aria Automation, Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM), vCloud Director and VMware Aria Operations, whereas VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth is most compared with Azure Cost Management, IBM Turbonomic, VMware Aria Operations, Cloudability and Densify. See our OpenNebula vs. VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth 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.
