We performed a comparison between CloudStack and vCenter Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management."CloudStack is simple to stand up and get off the ground in a hurry. Its centralized design allows for easier troubleshooting when compared to OpenStack. Out of the box, it’s very well suited for white labeling and IaaS."
"Killer features for me were: support for many hypervisors, ability to match business logic, "everything in one box," available APIs."
"CloudStack, by default, gives us a zone-based setup which makes it easier to manage datacenters located in different geographical areas."
"The most valuable feature from my point of view is access to environment via console through separate browser window."
"CloudStack supports every operating system that supports hypervisors, which makes the product more attractive, compared to vCloud Director or Azure."
"My company could implement a lot of customizations and integration with load balancers and DNS. When we started using CloudStack, we didn't have that integration, so we developed that. We could fix anything missing in the solution."
"I have been impressed by CloudStack's most recent updates around Kubernetes. In particular, they have worked with Kubernetes to support the Cluster API, and you can now easily integrate Kubernetes into CloudStack and get access to a lot of good features."
"Over the years, we have valued CloudStack for its stability."
"In regards to the workflows, the fact that we can actually have a full dashboard library of all the existing workflows on this is great. We can see all the workflows and what all the actions do and can work with scripts."
"I am impressed with the tool's easiness to work with VMware solutions."
"The most valuable feature is that it's simple and very ergonomic to use the product compared to other virtualizing product. Out of Microsoft, Red Hat, and IBM, we found VMware to be the best one."
"If I need to do DR, VMware can enable me to use vMotion, which requires use of vCenter. You cannot do vMotion without vCenter. We do a lot of automation, orchestration, and simplification for that purpose."
"It's 100% stable, it's always stable. We haven't had any bugs. The solution works very well and we haven't had any problems."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is that this solution is complete, and you don't need any add-ons."
"What I like best about vCenter Orchestrator is that it makes life easier through automation. People can request to automate all processes with vCenter Orchestrator, such as adding storage, creating VMs, removing VMs, and extending VMs."
"For time consuming operations like storage migrations, volume Snapshot restore and the like, we faced issues like MySQL operations timing out and status update failures. Those areas needs improvement."
"Environment is sensitive, so, unlike VMware, you can not afford middle-skilled engineers, they will ruin everything."
"It would be a good to have more specific error messages within administration processes (e.g. problem with creating new instance)."
"The main reason why we started looking for another solution: backups, replication, HA, and dependency on secondary storage. CS is quite sensitive for infrastructure, and any kind of network disruption between CS and secondary storage leads to VM hanging."
"We did encounter issues with stability, and the main issue was secondary storage. When it is not available, XenServers and hypervisors are affected. And CS doesn’t do anything to reboot, or fix. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn’t, considering their approach – CS just orchestrates everything else on the hypervisor and storage level."
"The product does not have an easily implementable payment gateway."
"The user can't upload SSH keys from the UI. We have to use the API for this, and it is not always convenient."
"There are some minor things that can be improved even more such as, perhaps, a bit more polishing on the GUI side to catch up with the API possibilities (which are really extensive) but otherwise nothing critical."
"The licensing is expensive and should be improved."
"It could be integrated with third-party hypervisors."
"Storage has room for improvement. It's a big problem for our solution. The interface also needs improvement, it should be simplified."
"As we work towards more stability on the solution, sometimes we'll try something and it breaks and it's easier to restart the service. That's the only drawback. We've experienced this with other applications as well."
"The response time of vCenter Orchestrator's support could be improved."
"Its technical support team takes a long time to escalate the issues."
"We would like more flexibility in sizing data storage and virtual machines, as the current options aren't very adaptable."
"The GUI should be enhanced in the future."
CloudStack is ranked 12th in Cloud Management with 29 reviews while vCenter Orchestrator is ranked 9th in Process Automation with 44 reviews. CloudStack is rated 8.0, while vCenter Orchestrator is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CloudStack writes "A solution that strikes a balance between user-friendliness, scalability, and stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of vCenter Orchestrator writes "Enables us to do administration on a centralized layer when using multiple VMware ESX servers". CloudStack is most compared with OpenNebula, vCloud Director, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure and VMware Aria Automation, whereas vCenter Orchestrator is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, VMware Aria Operations, vCloud Director, Cisco UCS Director and ServiceNow Orchestration.
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.
