We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Private and Pivotal Cloud Foundry based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location."
"We have control of the ESXi."
"Our core banking process was monolithic. To address this, we transitioned to a microservices-based architecture. Leveraging Microsoft technologies, including Terminals version 23, we’ve revamped our banking operations. Not all services are microservices; some remain monolithic for simplicity. Containerization is pivotal, with OpenShift (based on Kubernetes and Docker) managing our microservices."
"The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability."
"Excellent technical support."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very robust, especially for building Java."
"PCF is open, so the applications run really smoothly and with little downtime."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring and the deployment is easier."
"We find its stability and scalability valuable."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very easy to use compared to other cloud technologies. It has a very good performance."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to scale. The services that connect to the database are also very good."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is auto-healing and the plenty of other features that are provided."
"Stability is not a concern with this product."
"lacking in multi-cloud management."
"I've noticed that the satellite services layer requires some improvement compared to platforms like Azure or Microsoft. While it's in development, I believe the satellite layer has room for enhancement. Additionally, the DevOps layer could benefit from closer integrations, especially for using external applications like Jenkins."
"Auto-scaling and managing pod scaling in the microservices architecture, a core feature of IBM Cloud Private, can pose challenges, especially when dealing with larger volumes of traffic."
"One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect."
"The support and pricing need to improve."
"There are no synthetic application monitoring and real-time monitoring features."
"It is not straightforward to setup."
"In the next release, they should offer additional applications for the databases, and improve the deployment experience."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is not scalable, infinitely, because when you install it on a set of virtual machines it is very hard to scale. It's easy to scale on an application level, but not it is not similar to if you were using Amazon. Amazon you can scale thousands of applications."
"In the next release, I would like to see easy integration with external tools."
"It should offer more security features."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry doesn't have certain advanced features."
"Regarding the setup phase, every step is a hurdle. With Pivotal Cloud Foundry, I won't get any proper resources for that. Even if I Google it, there is no proper solution for Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
IBM Cloud Private is ranked 18th in PaaS Clouds with 5 reviews while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is ranked 7th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews. IBM Cloud Private is rated 6.8, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Private writes "Reliable platform with significant challenges related to performance capabilities when subjected to high traffic loads". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pivotal Cloud Foundry writes "Easy to use, simple to sign-in, but lacking graphical interface". IBM Cloud Private is most compared with OpenShift, Amazon AWS and Google App Engine, whereas Pivotal Cloud Foundry is most compared with Microsoft Azure, OpenShift, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud and IBM Public Cloud. See our IBM Cloud Private vs. Pivotal Cloud Foundry report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.