We performed a comparison between Red Hat CloudForms and Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) 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 am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs."
"They are a very mature product."
"The multi-tenancy feature has been very helpful for our clients. It has been working fine and seamlessly for them. Its interface is also very simplified, and it is also an open and easy-to-scale solution."
"The stability of the solution is very good. We haven't had any issues with it."
"Red Hat CloudForms is a stable product. There is no issue with the stability."
"The optimization of the solution is quite interesting."
"Red Hat CloudForms is stable once it is up and running."
"The solution is compatible and integrates with various infrastructures or providers."
"Service Bus topic subscription monitoring turned out to be the most useful for us."
"It offers all the core capabilities we need to manage and monitor our Azure services."
"Our clients had challenges or issues with the updates. Its updates should be better managed. They should provide quicker and more stable updates. Its stability can also be better. We initially faced ease-of-use and compatibility issues while integrating it. We had a lot of compatibility issues with other products. Our clients are concerned about whether it is under IBM or it is still Red Hat. Clients are not very clear about the support, and they're not really happy with it. Currently, they're getting support from Red Hat, but going forward, they're not really clear about what would be the life cycle of the product, which is a concern for them."
"I have issues with the solution's permissions. Unlike VMware, the product doesn't allow folder-type permissions."
"It is difficult to create a complete dashboard that includes all the needed features or catalogs."
"Red Hat CloudForms could improve by allowing more customization of reports. We have to do a lot of coding to accomplish what we want. Additionally, the compatibility with the multi-cloud could improve. The latter versions of the solution removed Google support and the cost comparison between other clouds was high."
"The complexity of the solution is a bit high in comparison to VMware."
"The solution is still quite immature."
"The solution's provisioning engine needs to be improved."
"The problem is that the platform requires it to be maintained and updated. Also, a few cases are still pending with the Red Hat support team since they are not closed yet."
"The user interface of Serveress360 could be improved a bit to make the platform even easier to use."
"Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications."
Red Hat CloudForms is ranked 7th in Cloud Management with 10 reviews while Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is ranked 29th in Cloud Management with 2 reviews. Red Hat CloudForms is rated 6.4, while Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat CloudForms writes "Easily integrates with various out-of-the-box or third-party vendors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) writes "Great topic subscription monitoring, helpful management, and useful for audits". Red Hat CloudForms is most compared with Morpheus, VMware Aria Automation, vCloud Director, OpenNebula and IBM Cloud Automation Manager, whereas Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is most compared with Azure Monitor. See our Red Hat CloudForms vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) 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.
