OpenNebula vs Red Hat CloudForms comparison

OpenNebula and Red Hat are both solutions in the Cloud Management category. OpenNebula is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.3, while Red Hat is ranked #27 with an average rating of 6.5. OpenNebula holds a 7.9% mindshare in CM, compared to Red Hat’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of OpenNebula users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 66% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Red Hat CloudForms and OpenNebula are competing tools in the cloud management platform space. Red Hat CloudForms is favored for its pricing satisfaction and support, while OpenNebula is often preferred for its robust feature set.

Features: Red Hat CloudForms excels in hybrid cloud management, automation capabilities, and offers advanced monitoring and reporting, whereas OpenNebula impresses with integrated multi-cloud orchestration, a focus on scalability, and simplicity.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat CloudForms can improve by simplifying its initial setup processes, enhancing ease of use, and expanding flexibility in integration. OpenNebula could benefit from enhanced support options, expanding its feature documentation, and increased focus on advanced analytics.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenNebula is known for straightforward deployment and efficient, tailored customer service. Red Hat CloudForms offers comprehensive support but may require more complex initial setup, which can be beneficial for enterprises needing deep customization.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat CloudForms generally presents a higher initial setup cost with significant ROI through its extensive feature suite, while OpenNebula offers a cost-effective entry with lower scripting overhead and operational expenses, delivering faster ROI due to streamlined deployment.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenNebula vs. Red Hat CloudForms Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

OpenNebula vs. Red Hat CloudForms

December 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 Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 6.3%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenNebula is 7.9%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat CloudForms is 1.7%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud 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

FOURES Jean-Philippe

Products Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

Reliable, simple to manage, and offers great technical support

The support of VXLAN fits with our network management. Thanks to this we can propose mixed solutions using virtual resources on OpenNebula and bare metal servers hosted in our facilities linked to each other on the sale network. This use case is very useful when some applications need bare metal power (Kubernetes workers, huge databases, AI models computations, et cetera). The cluster management is very useful for splitting our different clusters (mutual vs dedicated). We can manage deployments and capacity planning without pain. The API is also really simple and it helped us to develop the Terraform provider to manage OpenNebula like any other cloud infrastructure.

Read full review

Ilhami Arikan

Cloud Services Automation Technologies Manager at Garanti Teknoloji

A stable solution that helps to provision servers

We use the solution to provision servers. I am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs. The solution's provisioning engine needs to be improved. I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. I would rate the product's scalability a seven out of ten and…

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

"The automation and orchestration components are definitely the best part, as you can tell it what it can do and when, and just let it be."

"With over 2500 ESX VMs, including 1500+ XenDesktop VDI desktops, hosted over two datacentres and 80+ vSphere hosts, firefighting has become something of the past."

"We have a system where our developers automate machine builds, and that is constantly running out of resources. Turbonomic helps us with that, so I don't have to keep buying hardware. The developers always say, "They don't have enough. They don't have enough. They don't have enough," when they just configured it improperly. Therefore, Turbonomic helps us identify configuration issues on their side so it doesn't cost me money on the other end to buy resources that I don't really need."

"It became obvious to us that there was a lot more being offered in the product that we could leverage to ensure our VMware environment was running efficiently."

"The ability to monitor and automate both the right-sizing of VMs as well as to automate the vMotion of VMs across ESXi hosts."

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

"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 most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

"With a single click, we could set things up and initiate them."

"It's easy to integrate OpenNebula with our IT systems."

"What's best about OpenNebula that people like is that it's easy to deploy. It's also easy to manage. It's interesting because people choose OpenNebula over other solutions because of the ease of management."

"It makes maintenance very easy and stress-free for our teams."

"It is quite easy to deploy."

"The most valuable feature of OpenNebula is that it scales very well."

"I also like the ability to build custom functions. I can define a function where I have two types of views and configure the dependencies. The virtual data centers concept allows me to define users. If a user wants to join certain kinds of machines, the host and the other user won't see them. It gives me the flexibility to define multiple views and data centers in one place."

"The ability to use it almost like a public cloud for an organization is a big asset, as it will create a value proposition and can control costs in a great way."

More OpenNebula pros

"The multi-tenancy feature has been very helpful for our clients. It has been working fine and seamlessly for them. Its interface is also very simplified, and it is also an open and easy-to-scale solution."

"The solution is compatible and integrates with various infrastructures or providers."

"They are a very mature product."

"The optimization of the solution is quite interesting."

"I am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs."

"Red Hat CloudForms is stable once it is up and running."

"The most valuable features of Red Hat CloudForms are the benefit of the collective functionality."

"Red Hat CloudForms is a stable product. There is no issue with the stability."

More Red Hat CloudForms pros

Cons

"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."

"They could add a few more reports. They could also be a bit more granular. While they have reports, sometimes it is hard to figure out what you are looking for just by looking at the date."

"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 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."

"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 reporting needs to be improved. It's important for us to know and be able to look back on what happened and why certain decisions were made, and we want to use a custom report for this."

"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."

"Enhanced executive reporting standard with the tool beyond the reports that can be created today. Something that can easily be used with upper management on a monthly or quarterly basis to show the impact to our environment."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

"The UI, monitoring, and alerting could benefit from further improvements."

"Hosting platforms are limited so the deployment process needs improvement."

"An area for improvement in OpenNebula is the number of features it has. The solution doesn't have that many cloud features compared to other solutions. You'd say, "Okay, simplicity over a rich feature list?" Some say, "No, I need a big machine or a cloud interface for my customers to manage resources. I don't have to go and do it for them." Some people do it that way, and it works, but I'd like to improve the limited features in OpenNebula."

"The protocol for clusterization is rough and doesn't work well."

"Backup features are only available in the enterprise edition. The community version lacks a good solution for making backups."

"They have been saying for the past two and a half years that they would develop a feature to hot-add RAM and CPU, but it does not work."

"The storage feature that they have is a bit confusing."

"As with all enterprise software licensing, the pricing is not intuitive and must be negotiated; grandfathered contracts are better than anything offered today."

More OpenNebula cons

"I have issues with the solution's permissions. Unlike VMware, the product doesn't allow folder-type permissions."

"The problem is that the platform requires it to be maintained and updated. Also, a few cases are still pending with the Red Hat support team since they are not closed yet."

"It is difficult to create a complete dashboard that includes all the needed features or catalogs."

"Because the solution needs to integrate with other products that surround it, there is a lot of configuration required, and this can be quite complex. It's not as easy as it is with, for example, VMware."

"The solution is still quite immature."

"All of the areas of Red Hat CloudForms could improve. It doesn't do half of the things that it says it can do out of the box. It takes configuration to make any of it work, which is not uncommon for solutions similar to this. However, it is frustrating."

"The solution's provisioning engine needs to be improved."

"Our clients had challenges or issues with the updates. Its updates should be better managed. They should provide quicker and more stable updates. Its stability can also be better. We initially faced ease-of-use and compatibility issues while integrating it. We had a lot of compatibility issues with other products. Our clients are concerned about whether it is under IBM or it is still Red Hat. Clients are not very clear about the support, and they're not really happy with it. Currently, they're getting support from Red Hat, but going forward, they're not really clear about what would be the life cycle of the product, which is a concern for them."

More Red Hat CloudForms cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."

"I'm not involved in any of the billing, but my understanding is that is fairly expensive."

"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."

"I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."

"Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."

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

"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."

"It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

"The solution is open source so is free."

"The licensing for OpenNebula used to be free, but now it's no longer free. A customer contacted me asking to move to another provider because of the changes in the licensing terms for OpenNebula. I have no information on how much the OpenNebula license is because the customer pays for it, and I only do the integration."

"OpenNebula gives good value for money."

"We use the Community Edition, rather than the Enterprise Edition."

"VRA is very expensive but OpenNebula is free."

"OpenNebuoa has recently come up with a new subscription model that is economical and a lot of new customers are choosing this as it is an easy subscription model."

"The product's licensing is based on the number of servers."

"Red Hat CloudForms is a bit expensive."

"Red Hat CloudForms has a subscript-based pricing model. The cost is approximately $20,000 annually which allows you to use as many users as you want."

"It is definitely cheaper than VMware. Everything is included. There is no challenge there."

"The price of Red Hat CloudForms was not competitive, it was expensive."

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

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

Computer Software Company

23%

University

10%

Financial Services Firm

Educational Organization

Computer Software Company

29%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

11%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 OpenNebula?

The live migration feature has been great and is something we use very often.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenNebula?

OpenNebula gives good value for money.

See all answers

What needs improvement with OpenNebula?

The web interface could be better. It's not very difficult to use, but there's room for enhancement. Another area for...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat CloudForms?

I am impressed with the product's reports.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat CloudForms?

I have issues with the solution's permissions. Unlike VMware, the product doesn't allow folder-type permissions.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat CloudForms?

I would rate the product a four out of ten since its implementation is not as good as it sounds.

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

Cloudability vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

CloudStack vs OpenNebula

Compared 55% of the time

VMware Aria Automation vs OpenNebula

Compared 14% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM) vs OpenNebula

Compared 10% of the time

VMware Cloud Director vs OpenNebula

Compared 7% of the time

Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure vs OpenNebula

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenNebula Competitors

Morpheus vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 21% of the time

VMware Cloud Director vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 21% of the time

VMware Aria Automation vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 14% of the time

IBM Spectrum Computing vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 12% of the time

VMware Aria Operations vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 11% of the time

More Red Hat CloudForms Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

December 2024

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenNebula

December 2024

Download OpenNebula product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat CloudForms

December 2024

Download Red Hat CloudForms product report

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

No data available

Learn More

Video not available

IBM

Video not available

OpenNebula

Red Hat

Interactive Demo

IBM

Demo not available

OpenNebula

Demo not available

Red Hat

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.

OpenNebula provides the most simple but feature-rich and flexible solution for the comprehensive management of virtualized data centers to enable private, public and hybrid IaaS clouds. OpenNebula interoperability makes cloud an evolution by leveraging existing IT assets, protecting your investments, and avoiding vendor lock-in.

OpenNebula is a turnkey enterprise-ready solution that includes all the features needed to provide an on-premises (private) cloud offering, and to offer public cloud services.

Manage container, virtual, private, and public cloud infrastructures

Managing a complex, hybrid IT environment can require multiple management tools, redundant policy implementations, and extra staff to handle the operations. Red Hat® CloudForms simplifies IT, providing unified management and operations in a hybrid environment.

As your IT infrastructure progresses from traditional virtualization toward an Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) model, CloudForms evolves, protecting your investments and providing consistent user experience and functionality.

Sample Customers

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

Akamai, BBC, Fermilab, Terradue, Surf Sara, Produban, Netways, ESA, China Mobile, BlackBerry, Deloitte, Fuze, Telefonica, Trivago

Cox Automotive, Penn State, FICO, G-ABLE, Seneca College, ITandTEL, The Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), MyRepublic, Macquarie, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, CBTS, Network Data Solutions (NDS)

Buyer's Guide

OpenNebula vs. Red Hat CloudForms

December 2024

Free Report: OpenNebula vs. Red Hat CloudForms

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenNebula vs. Red Hat CloudForms and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenNebula vs. Red Hat CloudForms report.

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.