Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] vs CloudStack comparison

Cisco and Apache are both solutions in the Cloud Management category. Additionally, 87% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of Apache users who would recommend it.

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Read 9 Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] reviews

87% willing to recommend

CloudStack

Read 34 CloudStack reviews

2,508 Views
2,332 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

CloudStack

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] and CloudStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Nutanix, Broadcom, IBM and others in Cloud Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Cloud Management Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Management

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 890,027 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Average Rating

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

CloudStack

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Management (8th)

Featured Reviews

Zoom Tong

Director Of Technology at a non-profit with 11-50 employees

Useful features for configuring down to ports but extremely expensive

Our company uses the solution's GUI interface to configure and monitor ports. We look at usage and determine if there are any issues. Cisco is a very qualified company and has been in business for many, many years. The solution is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports. You…

Read full review

Tharun Kumar Reddy Thamatam

Senior Infrastructure Consultant at Infosys

Achieving seamless infrastructure management with optimized network and user access controls

I believe enhancements could be made in CloudStack, particularly in the management servers. I had the opportunity to collaborate with one of the Apache CloudStack developers, leading to the installation of additional agents for better information retrieval from hypervisors. We implemented configurations, ensuring consistency across hosts and VMs. We also utilized Ansible or YAML files to automate password upgrades during patching activities and database management, showcasing our customization efforts for improvement. For future releases, it would be beneficial if Apache enhanced CloudStack by integrating alerting systems directly. We've had instances where hypervisors experienced overloads without prior alerts, so proactive alerts within the tool would better prepare us for addressing issues swiftly, preventing disruption in business operations. A portal summarizing system metrics alongside alert capabilities would greatly enhance our operational efficiency.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"There are workflows, automated workflows, of different tasks between different infrastructure divisions, like your VMware, your firewall, and your network."

"The tool is really at the center of our whole digital transformation."

"The solution is very, very stable, it doesn't crash or freeze, and it's very reliable."

"The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports."

"The initial setup process is straightforward."

"Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well."

"You can scale it easily."

"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."

More Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] pros

"I have also explored setting up with OpenStack and I found it harder to use than CloudStack."

"You can use a single API to get things done, rather than multiple APIs on multiple modules."

"CloudStack has greatly helped integrate our existing infrastructure because we manage a massive cloud platform with thousands of VMs and around 1,200 to 1,500 hypervisors."

"In general I would say CS is a stable solution and, in my opinion, it will solve problems with administration of VMs."

"You can manage infrastructure with a few people, since product is monolithic. We had three engineers (storage, virtual, Linux admins) only. Also, CS supports different flavours of hypervisors."

"The product gives us the ability to orchestrate large virtual environments and is flexible enough to allow us to configure it for what we need. We value the flexibility of the networking feature set as well as the ability to build virtual private clouds."

"This is one of the major products that help to handle all of the NFV Infrastructure management services (IaaS), and it has helped us to quickly gain understanding and feel more powerful with respect to virtualization."

"The APIs for automation in CloudStack are excellent; everything is API-driven, and while the API is very rich and hard to learn, you can do everything you would want to do, including everything in the user interface and more."

More CloudStack pros

Cons

"The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together."

"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills."

"The product is very expensive."

"The solution needs to be more simple."

"I'm not a big fan of CloudCenter. I don't have anything against it, however, the on-premise version has been so hard to upgrade and maintain."

"Cisco can improve their product by being agnostic, not just specific to Cisco components but also supportive of other vendors."

"We're moving away from it due to the fact that they discontinued the product and introduced something new that does not fit our purpose."

"They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features."

More Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] cons

"I think that container technology in CloudStack is an area that needs to be improved."

"The main reason why we started looking for another solution: backups, replication, HA, and dependency on secondary storage."

"Accounts, domains, and user accounts are set up with public cloud in mind, not private."

"The area of Apache CloudStack that could stand the most improvement is the functionality/features around the virtual routers. They can be somewhat cumbersome to deal with at times and are the least stable piece of the product."

"The number of contributors to this solution is relatively small compared to other solutions. However, if more frequent users of CloudStack contribute to the open-source community, it will significantly enhance the overall community experience and make it more useful for everyone involved."

"We did encounter issues with stability, and the main issue was secondary storage. When it is not available, XenServers and hypervisors are affected. And CS doesn’t do anything to reboot, or fix. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn’t, considering their approach – CS just orchestrates everything else on the hypervisor and storage level."

"The user can't upload SSH keys from the UI. We have to use the API for this, and it is not always convenient."

More CloudStack cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."

"The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."

"The tool's pricing is expensive."

"CloudStack is an open-source product."

"CloudStack is an open source solution, so you don't need to pay anything for it. When our company develops something specially for CloudStack, it is donated to the Apache Software Foundation and provided to anyone that wants to use it."

"The solution is open-source and free."

"Give an effort to planning. If possible, contract a specialized consultant company for the initial setup and knowledge transfer."

"There is no license, so the product is free unless you are buying professional technical support services."

"The Apache CloudStack is open source, so you do not have licenses to purchase."

"As far as I know, CS is still free of charge. If you want to pay some money, Citrix Cloud Platform is based on CS, I think. As for hypervisors – everything as usual, you need to pay for VMware and vCenter. As for XenServer, recently they changed the free feature list, so you may need to pay some money to get useful features like XenMotion."

"It is a 100% open-source solution needing just an Apache license. Also, there are no hidden fees to be paid."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

890,027 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Construction Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

10%

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	12

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudStack?

CloudStack is open-source, so there is no cost apart from learning. Billing solutions, if outsourced, come at a moderate cost.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudStack?

Enhancements for CloudStack can focus on integrating more hypervisors, as mentioned regarding current features. We're working on a new feature that will allow for certain limited functions, but ove...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for CloudStack?

My usual use cases for CloudStack involve an AWS style private cloud or public cloud. I can deploy an AWS style cloud using the open source tool that is CloudStack. The use case depends on the cust...

See all answers

Comparisons

Azure NetApp Files vs Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Compared 14% of the time

VMware Aria Automation vs Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Compared 14% of the time

IBM Turbonomic vs Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Compared 13% of the time

IBM Spectrum Computing vs Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Compared 12% of the time

Cisco UCS Director vs Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

Compared 10% of the time

More Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] Competitors

OpenNebula vs CloudStack

Compared 17% of the time

VMware Aria Automation vs CloudStack

Compared 8% of the time

Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure vs CloudStack

Compared 5% of the time

Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) vs CloudStack

Compared 5% of the time

CloudCheckr vs CloudStack

Compared 4% of the time

More CloudStack Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]

April 2026

Download Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

CloudStack

April 2026

Download CloudStack product report

Also Known As

CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter

Vmops, Cloud.com

Overview

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] is utilized for tenant creation, VM management, hybrid deployment, cloud management, and port configuration.

Primary users include DevOps teams, telecom companies, and service providers. It integrates well with ACI and ASX-T, offering stability, initial setup ease, and extensive documentation. Known for high trust in Latin America, it excels in workflow automation through Action Orchestrator and supports detailed configuration down to ports. However, improvements are required in DevOps alignment, upgrades, automation, and cost management.

What are the most important features of Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]?

Stability: Provides a robust platform with minimal downtime.
Ease of Setup: Simplifies the initial setup process to get users started quickly.
Documentation: Extensive guides and resources available for user support.
Workflow Automation: Action Orchestrator enables cross-infrastructure automation.
Blueprint Pattern: Defines middleware and dependencies effectively.
API Integration: Offers agility and flexibility with API support.

What benefits or ROI should users look for in reviews?

High Trust Level: Recognized reliability, especially in Latin America.
Configuration Support: Capability to configure down to individual ports.
Integration: Seamless integration with ACI and ASX-T.
Agility: Enhanced flexibility and adaptability to changes.

Among its features, Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] serves industries like telecom and service providers needing hybrid deployment and cloud management. DevOps teams utilize it for tenant creation and VM management. Known for stability and initial setup ease, it supports Latin American regions highly. Action Orchestrator aids in workflow automation, benefitting user workflows. Improvements in DevOps alignment, UI, multi-tenancy, YAML abstraction, and cost management are desirable. It requires better security for XDR and comprehensive cloud offerings, including architecture and network security features.

Cisco

Apache CloudStack is open source software designed to deploy and manage large networks of virtual machines, as a highly available, highly scalable Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) cloud computing platform.

Apache

Sample Customers

NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex

GreenQloud, Exoscale, TomTom, ASG, PC Extreme, ISWest, Grid'5000

Find out what your peers are saying about Nutanix, Broadcom, IBM and others in Cloud Management. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

890,027 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.