AppFog (discontinued) vs. Azure Batch vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration

It was very good to use in small scale projects. Considering the high end projects with many instances and multi-platform architectures, it is better to test before the application is deployed. I think few of the questions can be general - who are the system users and what size is the application focussing on? How much resources are required? Will the application require any additional services?

Incentivized

To better serve their consumers, businesses that often interact with those clients who rely on Microsoft's software products may consider migrating to Azure. This program would be useful in any installation of a Microsoft product or suite that necessitates a test of the target environment. It is simple to maintain and implement, making it an ideal IT backbone. If a client doesn't have any use for this particular instrument, it's not going to be of any benefit to them.

Incentivized

The products are being paired by the company with different software to specifically fit multiple scenarios. As a standalone platform, it can answer any task with its build-in content or the ability to create your own content and solution.

• Quick deployment of pre-built virtual machines
• Some of the virtual machines also are readily available with a pack of softwares
• Good Stability. Using it as a student, I have never experienced any downtime issues with the projects deployed on AppFog.

Incentivized

• Managing the users
• Having multiple environments
• Creating multiple groups

Incentivized

• Allows for the quick disconnection of accounts that break our terms of service
• Seamless integration with our billing system
• Has the ability to house all member/client account information in one single location

Incentivized

• Though it is good and easy for developers, it lacks operational activities and monitoring tools.
• It is easy to deploy WAR on AppFog with its console but sometimes it can lack on the performance and feasibility.

Incentivized

• The user interface, in my opinion, might need further clarification.
• Any situation where a user's password has to be reset would benefit from this feature.
• Any accounts that were accidentally established more than once may be transferred over quickly and easily.

Incentivized

• The product build in portal need to be more flexible

Primarily because it used to have a good free tier earlier, which it does not anymore. It's simple, and things are available to use. Compared to it's competitors, it does has less features, but that kind of acts in its favor. That adds to the simplicity, and ease of use for a new user.

Incentivized

They both are great tools and provide the services they have implemented. They are two competing companies that have different cultures and forward mission agendas. I would say Azure is a little easier to support through their user interface for the IT support side of things. Both tools are useful and have their own strength and weakness. If you're a dynamic company with a multitude of customers then both are a required tool to have.

Incentivized

Most product works well enough, but none of them combine the non-agent/client approach to automation with an easy to develop mechanism (the drag&drop development approach) This alone put this solution on top of our preferred implantation product list

• Our project was deployed with good efficiency and easily accessible.
• The platform was much recommeded across the groups and peers.

Incentivized

• After initial setup, we now have significantly less time spent processing data.
• The automation of data formatting and display after processing is exciting because it frees us to focus on the data itself.
• Since using Batch, we have significantly decreased the number of items we previously utilized.

Incentivized

• If time is money, the time saved by using this all-in-one product has certainly saved time AND money.

Incentivized