We performed a comparison between Cloud Foundry and Microsoft Azure 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."My favorite component of IBM's solution is Node-RED, which greatly shortens the amount of time required to develop, test, and deploy new applications."
"Cloud Foundry builds the runtime environment directly without requiring dependency management from the user."
"IBM is the only vendor to offer integration with blockchain for smart contract development."
"Technical support, from what I understand, is quite helpful and we speak with them regularly."
"We use the cognitive service, virtual machines, and customer DB. Microsoft Azure is also scalable and easy to install."
"Azure offers broad compatibility with both structured and unstructured data. For example, we use PostgreSQL for storing Azure's official data and manage various types of data, including tabular and image data, accommodating the storage of all data types we handle. So, in many ways, Azure simplified the data storage and management needs."
"In Azure, everything is pretty straightforward. Once you know it, the platform is very easy to use."
"The solution is easy to use and flexible."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure is the Area feature. Additionally, the SQL Server DB as a serverless pool is useful, storage-wide external tables are helpful, and PolyBase is very good at reading external data. The capacity of Synapse to analyze in analytics is very good and it supports a range of data."
"The scalability is good."
"There is the potential to scale."
"After the initial excitement period with Node-RED is over, you crave the need of additional integrations to third-party services."
"In IBM Cloud, the product has been deprecated in favor of Kubernetes, which is a more complicated infrastructure to manage."
"Azure ARM console can be a bit overwhelming at the beginning."
"Establishing the account in the beginning was very difficult."
"They can improve the number of requests. Maybe they can increase it from 5,000 requests to 10,000 requests a month. Sometimes when you try to connect, it is quite unresponsive. When you want to communicate using the API, you get an internal error."
"It is impossible to sell a cloud-based model here in Venezuela because we have strong inflation and most of our clients are immigrating to on-premises solutions."
"They should create integrations with more platforms."
"Dashboards and reporting could be improved."
"The cost of the product is too high. It would be ideal if they could lower it a bit for their customers."
"It would be ideal if they could reduce costs a bit. Right now, we find the product to be expensive."
Cloud Foundry is ranked 21st in PaaS Clouds with 2 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 299 reviews. Cloud Foundry is rated 5.0, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cloud Foundry writes "Quick to deploy but being deprecated by IBM and should be merged with Kubernetes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". Cloud Foundry is most compared with Pivotal Cloud Foundry, VMware Tanzu Application Service, Red Hat OpenShift and Amazon AWS, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Alibaba Cloud and Pivotal Cloud Foundry. See our Cloud Foundry vs. Microsoft Azure 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.