Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CloudSphere vs OpenText Migrate​ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

CloudSphere
Ranking in Cloud Migration
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (31st)
OpenText Migrate​
Ranking in Cloud Migration
11th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Migration Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Cloud Migration category, the mindshare of CloudSphere is 1.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Migrate​ is 4.7%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Migration
 

Featured Reviews

Vibhor Gupta - PeerSpot reviewer
Great discovery, good support, and generally reliable
The area they need to focus most on is the capability of assessment and the landing zones. It’s lacking right now. Cloud transformation has four to five cases, including planning, discovery, assessment, and the MVC, which is called the minimal viable cloud. That comes with the architecture design or landing zone creation, where we will create resources on the cloud which we are provisioning. If we are moving onto the cloud platform, AWS, or zero GCP, we need an account. We need resources to be able to compute the network. Most organizations have their landing zone process and know how to create the resources account, compute the network layer and the security layer. However, this landing zone creation is not there in CloudSphere as a feature. It cannot create any of the cloud providers' accounts or their network security computing as a part of the orchestration layer. That orchestration layer is missing in this product. It will not discover all the applications, although they also have the catalog. They are constantly announcing their catalog to identify applications based on the service which we are discovering. 50% of the time, the application will discover automatically. However, for the other 50%, we need to find the application based on its running process. That's the automation method that we need to follow and that they call blueprint. We need to create those blueprints and then we need to tag those applications. That is the one process that takes time when we do the discovery. One of the cons of this product is that it will not discover all the applications running. It will not discover SAP or some kinds of applications that are running on those inside the application of the servers as well. When we start the scanning of, for example, 500 servers, it will not handle the scan. We need to differentiate the jobs - for example, one job for 100 servers, a second job for another 100 servers, et cetera. We cannot scan the 1,000 servers together. That causes it to take time. There’s a graph missing. It shows where all the servers have interdependencies; however, when we do actual work, it will not work properly in terms of what we present to the customer.
RM
A third-party migration tool that works well in Windows environments but needs improvement in Linux environments
Migration in RHEL and Linux environments can be improved. During RHEL migration with multiple data areas, you have to create a similar source environment at the destination. This can be challenging because you have to install it, create the VM, install over it, and mount it at the mount point. Only then can you do the migration. As a prerequisite in the case of a Windows platform, the .NET framework may cause some challenges as well. This can be done only in the latest version and is not possible in the earlier versions. We could do the migration for a customer with the older version but only after upgrading to the newer version of the .NET servers. This requires application downtime, and if the customer does not want any downtime during the migration, it can be very challenging. I would also like to see improvement in the data analytical loopholes in terms of Linux migration.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We do not need to install any appliances or any agents."
"When I started using CloudSphere, it wasn't mature, and it had multiple issues. For example, my team experienced server issues while using the solution, but recently, I noticed how much CloudSphere has improved. There used to be some latency issues with CloudSphere. It even gave error messages in the past when you select an option such as "the web server is not responding", but it has improved a lot, and now I don't get any errors from CloudSphere. What I like best about CloudSphere is that it has a lot of beneficial features, and it has a single pane for managing multi-cloud environments, which I find very helpful, and it's the main benefit you can get from CloudSphere."
"The product is helpful for the management, optimization, and utilization of resources."
"Provides multiple kinds of services for managing the clouds of multiple customers."
"For the customers I work with, it provides flexibility as far as storage is concerned, so it's security and access."
"Carbonite Migrate is helpful on an infrastructure level."
"Carbonite Migrate works well in Windows platform migrations and in the case of a VML platform. The migration is smooth in Windows environments."
"The solution is user-friendly."
 

Cons

"The main issue I experienced from CloudSphere was recently resolved, but an area for improvement in the solution is that it lacks the functionality of migrating resources from one public cloud to another. If CloudSphere could provide that functionality, that would be very beneficial to users and companies."
"There are quite a number of services that can't be deployed using CloudSphere."
"When we start the scanning of, for example, 500 servers, it will not handle the scan. We need to differentiate the jobs - for example, one job for 100 servers, a second job for another 100 servers, et cetera."
"The next feature I would like to have full disclosure of what's being done with the data."
"The solution must have a single management console for the resources and VMs."
"We find it very difficult to use these tools in a multi-cloud environment"
"Carbonite failed when moving GIS data."
"Migration in RHEL and Linux environments can be improved. During RHEL migration with multiple data areas, you have to create a similar source environment at the destination. This can be challenging because you have to install it, create the VM, install over it, and mount it at the mount point. Only then can you do the migration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It depends on how that model will be used. It might be anywhere between $4 and $15 per license per month. It’s less expensive than other options."
"The product is very expensive."
"In terms of pricing, I think it's an expensive tool."
"The licensing costs are really high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudSphere?
The product is helpful for the management, optimization, and utilization of resources.
What is your primary use case for CloudSphere?
I use the solution for our hyper-converged infrastructure within the organization for hospital management. We also access some of the integrated Active Directory and other integrated services relat...
What advice do you have for others considering CloudSphere?
We have a FortiGate license. The product is very good. The technical support is also very good. If the solution provides a single console to manage everything, it would be more convenient and power...
What needs improvement with Carbonite Migrate?
Carbonite failed when moving GIS data. Therefore, scalability is an issue as it struggles with migrating heavy data, specifically GIS data.
What is your primary use case for Carbonite Migrate?
We initially used Carbonite for cloud migration, specifically for moving data from one cloud to another. We moved from a RACS-based environment to VMware.
 

Also Known As

HyperCloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Affymetrix, Bell Helicopter, Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe, Porterville Unified School District, Interact for Health, VirtueCom, Warren Memorial Hospital, Front Porch, RMH Group, Meyers Nave, Intraworks, Information Technology, ETTE, Clackamas Community College
Computrade Malaysia
Find out what your peers are saying about CloudSphere vs. OpenText Migrate​ and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.