We performed a comparison between Cloud Foundry 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."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."
"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."
"Stability is not a concern with this product."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is auto-healing and the plenty of other features that are provided."
"PCF is open, so the applications run really smoothly and with little downtime."
"It is a scalable product...We are not facing any particular issues since most of the applications in our company are written in Java and .NET."
"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 the UI, it is easy to use."
"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."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve on the technology it is a bit complex."
"There is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the future of Pivotal Cloud Foundry."
"Something that can be done better is canary deployment. So, right now, we're using blue-green deployment. The support for canary deployment would be nice."
"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."
"It is not straightforward to setup."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry doesn't have certain advanced features."
"The user interface should be simpler to navigate because it t can take time for users to learn it."
"In the next release, they should offer additional applications for the databases, and improve the deployment experience."
Cloud Foundry is ranked 21st in PaaS Clouds with 2 reviews while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is ranked 7th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews. Cloud Foundry is rated 5.0, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is rated 7.6. 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 Pivotal Cloud Foundry writes "Easy to use, simple to sign-in, but lacking graphical interface". Cloud Foundry is most compared with VMware Tanzu Application Service, Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, OpenShift and Mendix, whereas Pivotal Cloud Foundry is most compared with OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud and Heroku. See our Cloud Foundry 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.