We performed a comparison between Dell ECS and Pivotal Cloud Foundry based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about MinIO, Dell Technologies, Red Hat and others in File and Object Storage."It is a stable platform."
"It is a stable solution."
"Dell's technical support team is good."
"We face very few hardware failures."
"The scalability is good."
"The performance is good."
"The tool is easy to use."
"The performance is good."
"Stability is not a concern with this product."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry is very easy to use compared to other cloud technologies. It has a very good performance."
"The solution is stable and resilient. In our company, we do not even see any challenges with the solution."
"The most valuable features of Pivotal Cloud Foundry are its ease of use and the command line interface has the ability to push instances to the cloud easily."
"We find its stability and scalability valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Pivotal Cloud Foundry is the UI, it is easy to use."
"I find the ease of deployment and management of microservices to be the most valuable features. The platform also has good auto-scaling capabilities."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring and the deployment is easier."
"Dell ECS could improve the price of the solution. It is expensive."
"The troubleshooting feature of this solution needs to be improved, to allow organizations to fix issues without having to contact the support team."
"Dell ECS needs to improve its performance."
"We have concerns about the write performance. We would also like it to be easier to scale out, to add more boxes to the system. And we want improved performance, to use a next-generation NFS service."
"The solution could be more cost-effective and secure."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"The solution needs to provide better integration between this solution and all other kinds of systems."
"Dell EMC ECS should support segregation of duty, particularly for role-based access controls. Having a single pane of glass for smarter observation and better control mechanism would also make this solution better."
"There are no synthetic application monitoring and real-time monitoring features."
"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."
"The user interface should be simpler to navigate because it t can take time for users to learn it."
"The Pivotal Cloud Foundry's initial setup has a learning curve for my team, but it was easy to use."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve the documentation. They are good, but they could improve more. Additionally, it would be beneficial if there were more use case examples."
"I'd like to see a larger service offering."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry could improve on the technology it is a bit complex."
"Pivotal Cloud Foundry doesn't have certain advanced features."
Dell ECS is ranked 5th in File and Object Storage with 25 reviews while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is ranked 7th in PaaS Clouds with 15 reviews. Dell ECS is rated 8.0, while Pivotal Cloud Foundry is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Dell ECS writes "Enables multiple protocol support, but its IOPS functionality needs improvement in terms of performance ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pivotal Cloud Foundry writes "Easy to use, simple to sign-in, but lacking graphical interface". Dell ECS is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), Amazon AWS, NetApp StorageGRID, MinIO and Red Hat Ceph Storage, whereas Pivotal Cloud Foundry is most compared with OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Google Cloud and VMware Tanzu Application Service.
We monitor all File and Object Storage 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.