Cloudability vs Harness comparison

Apptio and Harness are both solutions in the Cloud Cost Management category. Apptio is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.1, while Harness is ranked #15 with an average rating of 7.5. Apptio holds a 13.6% mindshare in CCM, compared to Harness’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 75% of Apptio users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Harness users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cloudability and Harness based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Cost Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Cloudability vs. Harness Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Cloudability vs. Harness

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Cloud Cost Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 16.6%, up from 14.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cloudability is 13.6%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Harness is 1.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Cost Management

Featured Reviews

SubashSubbiah

Assistant Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

It can tell us where performance is lagging on the hardware layer, but the reporting on the application layer is lacking

The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer. I would like them to add some apps for physical device load resourcing and physical-to-virtual calculation. It gives excellent recommendations for the virtual layer but doesn't have the capabilities for physical-to-virtual analysis. Automated deployment is something else they could add. Some built-in automation features are helpful, but we aren't effectively using a few. We want a few more automated features, like autoscaling and automatic performance optimization testing would be useful.

Read full review

Vijay More

Technical Lead at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Helps to understand and manage spending across clouds, but has dashboard limitations

Cloudability offers valuable insights into data engineering and analytics platforms. With access to the same data Cloudability utilizes, one could recreate similar dashboards on their own data platform. This implies that Cloudability's role could be replaceable with some organizational effort, provided they have the necessary data sources and expertise. However, for organizations looking to streamline processes without investing extensive time, money, and resources into building their solution, Cloudability serves as a convenient option. Moreover, it offers benefits for both single-cloud and multi-cloud users. While it's beneficial for single-cloud users, it becomes particularly advantageous for organizations with multi-cloud environments, as it helps manage costs and optimize resources across different cloud providers.

Read full review

Linwei Yuan

Software Engineer at Citi

Streamline microservices deployment with integrated execution pipelines and comprehensive monitoring

Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place. It is very convenient since we have many microservices, so having one platform for all of them is beneficial. The dashboard allows me to monitor all core services' deployment status in one place, making it easier to find bugs and check logs.

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

"Turbonomic helps us right-size virtual machines to utilize the available infrastructure components available and suggest where resources should exist. We also use the predictive tool to forecast what will happen when we add additional compute-demanding virtual machines or something to the environment. It shows us how that would impact existing resources. All of that frees up time that would otherwise be spent on manual calculation."

"We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time."

"I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software."

"We have VM placement in Automated mode and currently have all other metrics in Recommend mode."

"The system automatically sizes and moves resources based on the needs of the applications."

"The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature."

"I like the analytics that help us optimize compatibility. Whereas Azure Advisor tells us what we have to do, Turbonomic has automation which actually does those things. That means we don't have to be present to get them done and simplifies our IT engineers' jobs."

"The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

"The support from IBM is fantastic"

"Cloudability takes care of identifying and managing the cloud."

"It has already given us insight into how to optimize. So, we are now ramping up steadily its usage."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to create reports and dashboards."

"All the tagging and mapping, which helps to create some virtual tags are useful features."

"Transparency and visibility are the key features."

"One of the standout features of the solution is its groups and views functionality. The solution is highly-stable. The solution is highly-scalable. The customer support is good. They can be easily contacted. The initial setup is straightforward. It's an excellent tool, especially when dealing with multiple clouds. It streamlines the process, eliminating the need to check each cloud individually."

"Each user can have their own dashboard that they want to consume. Instead of having to share one dashboard for multiple users, you can create individual views for each user to view, and that view will contain only their own accounts, which allows for separation of data."

More Cloudability pros

"Harness starts integrating with organizations, making everything automated without the need for manual interruption."

"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place, making it convenient."

"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place."

"It's a highly customizable DevOps tool."

Cons

"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."

"The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer."

"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."

"Turbonomic doesn't do storage placement how I would prefer. We use multiple shared storage volumes on VMware, so I don't have one big disk. I have lots of disks that I can place VMs on, and that consumes IOPS from the disk subsystem. We were getting recommendations to provision a new volume."

"There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."

"The GUI and policy creation have room for improvement. There should be a better view of some of the numbers that are provided and easier to access. And policy creation should have it easier to identify groups."

"After running this solution in production for a year, we may want a more granular approach to how we utilize the product because we are planning to use some of its metrics to feed into our financial system."

"I do not like Turbonomic's new licensing model. The previous model was pretty straightforward, whereas the new model incorporates what most of the vendors are doing now with cores and utilization. Our pricing under the new model will go up quite a bit. Before, it was pretty straightforward, easy to understand, and reasonable."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

"We would like them to have a linear regression, so we can be predictive for budgets, allocations, and the year's follow ups. We also want to have a longer window of analytics with better certainty that our workload will fit the model, not just in a two week window."

"I wish there was a feature to temporarily remove certain recommendations from the list for teams that couldn't implement them immediately. I believe Cloudability could improve its automation functionality and enhance cost allocation modeling."

"I would like the API functionality to improve. The update time after uploading data could also be improved."

"Cloudability needs to improve on data collection from cloud sources."

"We have dealt with a few technical support people where we ask for one thing and they might not deliver straightaway. It seems like they are a stretched across multiple customers."

"There is always room for improvement in education and training. We are not that mature in terms of our automation. It could help us identify where we could optimize in terms of build."

"The API is not well-documented. It is not straightforward and difficult to use. This needs to be improved, as it is very difficult for our developers to develop automation around it."

"In general, I feel Cloudability wasn't able to support many resources."

More Cloudability cons

"I prefer the previous less compact UI version of Harness, which showed more details on the screen."

"Even with automation, there's a requirement for manual change requests for approvals."

"There's also room for improvement in debugging pipeline issues, which can sometimes become complex."

"When integrating Harness with more than twenty applications in one place, it becomes less stable, causing improvements to be necessary."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."

"When we have expanded our licensing, it has always been easy to make an ROI-based decision. So, it's reasonably priced. We would like to have it cheaper, but we get more benefit from it than we pay for it. At the end of the day, that's all you can hope for."

"What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."

"It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."

"We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."

"The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."

"If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."

"Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

"The price of the license or the usage is a percentage of the top consumption. So it varies from year to year."

"My team is one of the most expensive teams, and we look at it quite a bit. We have probably easily saved around $400,000 USD a year."

"Cloudability is a bit expensive."

"We have seen ROI with the reserved instances, and having the ability to predict what reserved instances you can get. We can save tens of thousands of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in some cases."

"It justifies the cost and is worth it."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

34%

Computer Software Company

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?

It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Turbonomic?

The implementation could be enhanced.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?

We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting...

See all answers

What do you like most about Cloudability?

The most crucial feature in reducing my cloud costs has been the rightsizing recommendations, along with the dashboar...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cloudability?

I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, where one is very cheap and ten is very expensive. Pricing is one of th...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cloudability?

The first one is, how to help users, especially practitioners, stick to their commitment plan. For example, how can I...

See all answers

What do you like most about Harness?

It's a highly customizable DevOps tool.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Harness?

Even with automation, there's a requirement for manual change requests for approvals. If this is corrected, we could ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Harness?

We use Harness as a deployment tool. It allows us to define environments like OpenShift or Kubernetes or Linux server...

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware Aria Operations vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 19% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 13% of the time

VMware vSphere vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 9% of the time

Cisco Intersight vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 8% of the time

VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

Azure Cost Management vs Cloudability

Compared 18% of the time

Apptio One vs Cloudability

Compared 17% of the time

VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth vs Cloudability

Compared 12% of the time

Densify vs Cloudability

Compared 11% of the time

Finout vs Cloudability

Compared 4% of the time

More Cloudability Competitors

Jenkins vs Harness

Compared 22% of the time

Tekton vs Harness

Compared 16% of the time

GitHub Actions vs Harness

Compared 15% of the time

TeamCity vs Harness

Compared 14% of the time

AWS CodePipeline vs Harness

Compared 2% of the time

More Harness Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

December 2024

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloudability

December 2024

Download Cloudability product report

Buyer's Guide

Build Automation

December 2024

Download Harness product report

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

No data available

Armory

Learn More

Video not available

IBM

Apptio

Video not available

Harness

Interactive Demo

IBM

Demo not available

Apptio

Demo not available

Harness

Overview

IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by companies to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions.

IBM Turbonomic leverages AI to continuously analyze application resource consumption, deliver insights and dashboards, and make real-time adjustments. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. By integrating with various cloud platforms, on-premise infrastructures, and containers, IBM Turbonomic provides a holistic view of the environment, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently.

The solution is designed to support complex IT environments, offering actionable insights and automated actions that help IT teams proactively manage application performance and infrastructure resources. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years.

IBM Turbonomic manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers to ensure efficiency and financial impact awareness. It automates resource allocation, balances memory dynamically, and provides robust performance metrics. Users benefit from its ability to prevent resource starvation and offer cost-saving recommendations through continuous management. Executive Dashboards provide insights for cost justification and resource management, making IT operations simpler with AI-driven automation and actionable recommendations.

What are the most important features of IBM Turbonomic?

Automated Resource Allocation: Dynamically allocates resources for optimal performance.
Dynamic Memory Balancing: Adjusts memory allocation to prevent resource shortages.
Right-Sizing: Sizes VMs accurately for Azure and on-prem environments.
Single Platform Management: Manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers.
Proactive Performance Optimization: Continuously optimizes performance to prevent issues.
Kubernetes Support: Enhances container management with robust support.
Cost-Saving Recommendations: Provides actionable tips for reducing expenses.

What benefits should users look for in IBM Turbonomic reviews?

Cost Reduction: Helps minimize expenses through efficient resource management.
Performance Improvement: Enhances application performance by preventing resource starvation.
Detailed Insights: Offers comprehensive analytics to justify costs and resource utilization.
Simplified IT Processes: Uses AI automation to streamline operations.

IBM Turbonomic is implemented across multiple industries, including finance for optimizing peak payroll processing, IT for enhanced virtual server management, and healthcare for reliable performance monitoring. Organizations benefit from its robust automation, ensuring maximum efficiency and cost savings.

Cloudability is a financial management tool for monitoring and analyzing every cloud expense across any organization. It brings transparency to how and where organizations spend money on cloud resources, giving them the power to reap the most value from cloud usage possible. It aggregates expenditures into accessible and comprehensive reports, helps identify new opportunities for reducing spend and increasing cloud efficiency, offers budget alerts and recommendations via SMS and email, provides APIs for connecting cloud billing and usage data to any business or financial system, and more.

Harness offers a comprehensive toolset for automating deployment processes and enhancing software update efficiency. It's lauded for its CI/CD capabilities, feature flagging, and real-time deployment monitoring. Key features include an intuitive UI, secret management, and robust rollback functionalities, all contributing to improved productivity and reduced errors in DevOps environments.

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.

Adobe, Uber, Pega, imgur, Pixable, Blackboard, Keboola, Avalara

Linedata, Openbank, Home Depot, Advanced

Buyer's Guide

Cloudability vs. Harness

November 2024

Free Report: Cloudability vs. Harness

Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudability vs. Harness and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cloudability vs. Harness report.

See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Cost 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.