AppFog was a cloud-agnostic application and infrastructure management platform used to manage workloads across on-premises and third-party cloud environments. It has been discontinued.
$0
IBM Cloudability
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
IBM Cloudability is a cloud cost management and optimization (FinOps) tool that enables IT, finance, and business teams to optimize their cloud spend across all cost sources, all maturity levels, and for all stakeholders.
N/A
Microsoft Azure
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Azure is a cloud computing platform and infrastructure for building, deploying, and managing applications and services through a global network of Microsoft-managed datacenters.
$29
per month
Pricing
AppFog (discontinued)
IBM Cloudability
Microsoft Azure
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Developer
$29
per month
Standard
$100
per month
Professional Direct
$1000
per month
Basic
Free
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AppFog (discontinued)
IBM Cloudability
Microsoft Azure
Free Trial
No
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
The free tier lets users have access to a variety of services free for 12 months with limited usage after making an Azure account.
Appfog was one of the requirements of our project since it was the fastest growing PAAS provider. Also it was easy to deploy an application with multiple options to choose for the development environment for our application. It was "ALL in ONE."
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?
I don't have much exposure to the tool. I mean, I'm relatively new to using it as a platform, but I haven't really seen the benefit, especially with the actual renewal talks at the company. I'm not seeing what AWS native solutions are, how probability improves on that as opposed to just using AWS and just, I don't know. I'm not seeing the benefit, at least in my eyes.
Azure is particularly well suited for enterprise environments with existing Microsoft investments, those that require robust compliance features, and organizations that need hybrid cloud capabilities that bridge on-premises and cloud infrastructure. In my opinion, Azure is less appropriate for cost-sensitive startups or small businesses without dedicated cloud expertise and scenarios requiring edge computing use cases with limited connectivity. Azure offers comprehensive solutions for most business needs but can feel like there is a higher learning curve than other cloud-based providers, depending on the product and use case.
Microsoft Azure is highly scalable and flexible. You can quickly scale up or down additional resources and computing power.
You have no longer upfront investments for hardware. You only pay for the use of your computing power, storage space, or services.
The uptime that can be achieved and guaranteed is very important for our company. This includes the rapid maintenance for security updates that are mostly carried out by Microsoft.
The wide range of capabilities of services that are possible in Microsoft Azure. You can practically put or create anything in Microsoft Azure.
For me, it is a lot of anomaly detection and I think there's a lot of improvement that can be made to show anomalies that happen over time because if it's just day to day or week to week, you may not see the change. But if you see the trend over a period of time, show me something that has grown 40%, 50% over the past three months and maybe you can do those things and we just haven't figured them out yet. So we are very new to the product, but I think anomaly detection for me is one of the bigger things.
The cost of resources is difficult to determine, technical documentation is frequently out of date, and documentation and mapping capabilities are lacking.
The documentation needs to be improved, and some advanced configuration options require research and experimentation.
Microsoft's licensing scheme is too complex for the average user, and Azure SQL syntax is too different from traditional SQL.
Cloudability has been one solution for almost all of our FinOps needs. Except for Data transfer costs, we have covered all use cases and have made significant savings across our cloud infrastructure. Reporting has provided management a deeper analysis into their spending and helped them forecast their budgets for next year
Moving to Azure was and still is an organizational strategy and not simply changing vendors. Our product roadmap revolved around Azure as we are in the business of humanitarian relief and Azure and Microsoft play an important part in quickly and efficiently serving all of the world. Migration and investment in Azure should be considered as an overall strategy of an organization and communicated companywide.
I gave the IBM Cloudability a 7/10 because it is good, but it could improve in some places. It is easy to get data uploaded and ready to view, but it is only up to a certain point in time, and not live data. As for how it looks, the interface is good for viewing, however navigation could be a little better, maybe supported with a roadmap.
As Microsoft Azure is [doing a] really good with PaaS. The need of a market is to have [a] combo of PaaS and IaaS. While AWS is making [an] exceptionally well blend of both of them, Azure needs to work more on DevOps and Automation stuff. Apart from that, I would recommend Azure as a great platform for cloud services as scale.
While there have been few support cases where the experience was good. But in multiple support cases it's firstly delayed and even after weeks or months of time, team is not able to provide us with the RCA of the issue. All they are claiming is the issue is now fixed which I still see coming back after few days or weeks as we've never identified and addressed the root cause.
We were running Windows Server and Active Directory, so [Microsoft] Azure was a seamless transition. We ran into a few, if any support issues, however, the availability of Microsoft Azure's support team was more than willing and able to guide us through the process. They even proposed solutions to issues we had not even thought of!
Training was adequate, but the real learning begins when you start using the product, like most things. All major functions were covered so as an entry point, was a good introduction to the product. The training pace was good as well, the areas were covered in decent depth, without being too much of an information overload.
As I have mentioned before the issue with my Oracle Mismatch Version issues that have put a delay on moving one of my platforms will justify my 7 rating.
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.
Before Apptio we extensively used the cloud native and in house automated and developed cost optimization tool using python , powershell and leveraging the various cloud native services like AWS systems manager , Azure Functions and Azure automation run books.
As I continue to evaluate the "big three" cloud providers for our clients, I make the following distinctions, though this gap continues to close. AWS is more granular, and inherently powerful in the configuration options compared to [Microsoft] Azure. It is a "developer" platform for cloud. However, Azure PowerShell is helping close this gap. Google Cloud is the leading containerization platform, largely thanks to it building kubernetes from the ground up. Azure containerization is getting better at having the same storage/deployment options.
For about 2 years we didn't have to do anything with our production VMs, the system ran without a hitch, which meant our engineers could focus on features rather than infrastructure.
DNS management was very easy in Azure, which made it easy to upgrade our cluster with zero downtime.
Azure Web UI was easy to work with and navigate, which meant our senior engineers and DevOps team could work with Azure without formal training.