Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cloud Foundry vs Microsoft Azure comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cloud Foundry
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
22nd
Average Rating
5.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
313
Ranking in other categories
Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Cloud Foundry is 1.0%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure is 21.2%, up from 20.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Carlos Bittrich - PeerSpot reviewer
Quick to deploy but being deprecated by IBM and should be merged with Kubernetes
We enjoy the fast deployment. Cloud Foundry builds the runtime environment directly without requiring dependency management from the developer or administrator. The autoscaling is great. It is just a switch that needs to be turned on, and autoscaling starts working. At this moment, you begin to see different meters about usage that helps you in updating the scaling limits, which help you tune the running instances. Besides this, autoscaling can be scheduled, so in times of low activity, you can have lower limits or increase in advance for special dates. It has good logging. CF has logging events that help identify when a transaction runs and its response time which helps in monitoring execution.
Nicolas Chabrier - PeerSpot reviewer
Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration
The only thing is regarding the management of multi-cloud environments. That's not really possible. So basically, it's wonderful if you manage Microsoft clearly and if you manage Microsoft Azure, but if you need to consume external services and have a global overview of all your consumption, it's not the case. Google, for instance, has tools that help you manage multiple environments, which makes sense because Google is really the cloud provider. So that's why they need to be compliant with the others. But for sure, Microsoft's approach is different, and it's wonderful when you're one hundred percent on Azure. But if you'd like to have something more of a multi-cloud strategy, that's a bit of a gap where they could improve.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"Provides a high level of availability and 99% uptime."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the integration between all of the components in Azure."
"It's a flexible solution."
"The most valuable features of Azure for me are its ease of management, recoverable virtual machines with backup support, excellent customer support, and user-friendly interface."
"Azure is very flexible and easy to manage."
"The advantage of Microsoft Azure is its simplicity. It's easy to launch a project. However, the problem with this kind of solution is the reliability for the customers. You have to be sure to stay with Microsoft."
"The stability is very good. The performance is excellent."
"Azure has improved my organization because it is a new technology and so the customers who don't have enough knowledge about the cloud delegate the administration of their cloud infrastructure to us. We incorporate and add a new service to our product lineup about how to manage their Azure. It impacts our business because we're able to incorporate this new service."
 

Cons

"In IBM Cloud, the product has been deprecated in favor of Kubernetes, which is a more complicated infrastructure to manage."
"After the initial excitement period with Node-RED is over, you crave the need of additional integrations to third-party services."
"Could be more user friendly; initial setup is difficult to understand."
"Monitoring options should be more sophisticated, as there are dashboards on which a end user is able to pin a lot of charts and a number of web parts, but for example, I would love to have some option like in Operational Management Suite."
"The security must be improved."
"Lacks flexibility in terms of storage or resource allocation."
"We have faced some challenges trying to deploy a new ESP application."
"They should create integrations with more platforms."
"It would be beneficial if Microsoft could enhance the free version to allow for more exploration and development. That's my only suggestion regarding Azure."
"Any time you use a cloud service, there are increased security risks. If you want more security, you have to have private hosting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM has a free tier and payment option depending on the products selected."
"You are allocated a minimum amount of resources in the free tier. This seems fair and highly scalable, as you pay per usage as per cloud pricing schemes."
"The pricing models should be reworked to the needs of a wider range of companies. Some customers will not be able to afford it until quite a few years into production, even after good PoC results and a successful launch."
"The licensing is pay per usage, so it can be both monthly and yearly."
"Its pricing model can be improved. It is variable, and if you do a simulation now, within a few months, the price can change, and your simulation would no longer be valid."
"Microsoft always provides the entry-level solution with a cheap license. Once you start to like the product, then you have to pay for the full package, which is more expensive than the entry-level solution. Every feature comes with a license and a cost. Some licenses have multiple features, and some features require a specific license."
"It is operational expenditure (OPEX). There is no cost upfront. When you start using it, you have to pay the charges. Initially, the cost is less, but after you start using it more and more, the cost will go higher. It is a little bit costly, but that is okay because you get better resources. You also get better support in terms of how you create the resources. Documentation is available, and the SLAs are met."
"The product is expensive."
"I rate the product price a seven or eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price, and ten is high price."
"The licensing fees are more than $1,000,000 USD annually."
"Monthly billing convenience reduced cost overheads up to 70 percent."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
817,354 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user8586 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 14, 2013
Amazon vs Rackspace vs Microsoft vs Google: Cloud Hosting Services Comparison
Amazon Web Services, Rackspace OpenStack, Microsoft Windows Azure and Google are the major cloud hosting and storage service providers. Athough Amazon is top of them and is oldest in cloud market, Rackspace, Microsoft and Google are giving tough competition to each other and to Amazon also for…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Educational Organization
43%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cloud Foundry?
Cloud Foundry builds the runtime environment directly without requiring dependency management from the user.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cloud Foundry?
Use autoscaling to define the right number of instances. Usually, the cloud providers define a default size for memory or the number of instances. Try to see if you can decrease these numbers so th...
What needs improvement with Cloud Foundry?
In IBM Cloud, the product has been deprecated in favor of Kubernetes, which is a more complicated infrastructure to manage. CF should be merged with the Kubernetes project. This could benefit both ...
Which is preferable - IBM Public Cloud or Microsoft Azure?
IBM Public Cloud is IBM’s Platform-as-a-Service. It aims to provide organizations with a secure cloud environment to manage data and applications. One of the features we like is the cloud activity ...
Which is better - SAP Cloud Platform or Microsoft Azure?
One of the best features of SAP Cloud Platform is that it is web-based and you can log in from anywhere in the world. SAP Cloud Platform is suitable for companies of any size; it works well with bo...
How does Microsoft Azure compare to Google Firebase?
I would recommend Google Firebase instead of Microsoft Azure, simply for the array of features that it has to offer. In particular, the Firebase library grants you access to a shared data structure...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Windows Azure, Azure, MS Azure
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Grape Up, c-Com, KONE, TITAN, CSAA, Bosch, Allstate, Verizon, West Corp., Telstra
BMW, Toyota, easyJet, NBC Sports, HarperCollins, Aviva, TalkTalk Business, Avanade, and Telenor.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloud Foundry vs. Microsoft Azure and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
817,354 professionals have used our research since 2012.