CloudFoundry vs. IBM Cloud Functions

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
CloudFoundry
Score 7.1 out of 10
N/A
CloudFoundry is a free, open source cloud computing platform supported by the non-profit CloudFoundry. It is not tied to any particular cloud service, but can be self-hosted or run on any cloud service preferred.N/A
IBM Cloud Functions
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
IBM Cloud Functions is a PaaS platform based on Apache OpenWhisk. With it, developers write code (“actions”) that respond to external events. Actions are hosted, executed, and scaled on demand based on the number of events coming in. No servers or infrastructure to provision and manage.
$0
per second of execution
Pricing
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic Cloud Functions Rate
$0.00017
per second of execution
API Gateway Rate
Free
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
CloudFoundry
9.8
1 Ratings
18% above category average
IBM Cloud Functions
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Small Businesses
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Score 9.0 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloud Private
IBM Cloud Private
Score 9.5 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloud Private
IBM Cloud Private
Score 9.5 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(1 ratings)
3.0
(7 ratings)
User Testimonials
CloudFoundryIBM Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend
CloudFoundry
It's well suited if:
  • The organization has large number of applications that needs to be deployed frequently.
  • The organization is tied to the DevOps mindset.
  • The organization has programs in different languages.
  • The applications does not need EJB's support that servers like web logic provide.
It's less suited if:
  • The applications needs security configuration within the same CloudFoundry instance.
  • The organization, for whatever reason does not want developers to manage the instances.
Read full review
IBM
IBM Cloud Functions [is] not the worse product on the IBM cloud. I decided to write this review as I thought it would be balanced. I would still use functions to set up a serverless architecture where execution time is pretty quick and the code is relatively simple. I wouldn't use IBM Cloud Functions for async calls obviously, as costs could be higher. The functions documentation is lacking in terms of CI/CD, and there are unexplainable errors occurring - like the network connection that I mentioned. So I wouldn't just rely on IBM Cloud Functions too much for the entire system, but make sure it's diversified.
Read full review
Pros
CloudFoundry
  • Support for Orgs and Spaces that allow for managing users and deployables within a large organization.
  • Easy deployment, deploying code is as simple as executing single line from CLI, thanks to build-packs.
  • Solid and rich CLI, that allows for various operations on the instance.
  • Isolated Virtual Machines called Droplets, that provide clean run time environment for the code. This used to be a problem with Weblogic and other application servers, where multiple applications are run on the same cluster and they share resources.
  • SSH capability for the droplet (isolated VM's are called droplets), that allows for real time viewing of the App code while the application is running.
  • Support for multiple languages, thanks to build-packs.
  • Support for horizontal scaling, scaling an instance horizontally is a breeze.
  • Support for configuring environment variable using the service bindings.
  • Supports memory and disk space limit allocation for individual applications.
  • Supports API's as well as workers (processes without endpoints)
  • Supports blue-green deployment with minimal down time
Read full review
IBM
  • Great substitute for a simple API calls to run non-complicated code.
  • Easy way to run Python/Java/Javascript to get something done.
  • File validation.
Read full review
Cons
CloudFoundry
  • Does not support stateful containers and that would be a nice to have.
  • Supports showing logs, but does not persist the logs anywhere. This makes relying on Cloud Foundry's logs very unreliable. The logs have to be persisted using other third party tools like Elk and Kibana.
Read full review
IBM
  • Billing can be a hassle, not the most responsive customer service/support team
  • Handles & executes most functionalities, but other platforms offer more scalability if you're seeking consistent and stable growth
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
CloudFoundry
While Docker shines in providing support for volumes and stateful instances, Cloud foundry shines in providing support for deploying stateless services. Heroku shines in integrating with Git and using commits to git as hooks to trigger deployments right from the command line. But it does not provide on-premise solution that Cloud foundry provides.
Read full review
IBM
  • ICF is a lightweight service and does not require runtime configurations
  • Scalable on demand and hence there is no need to pay for runtime costs
Read full review
Return on Investment
CloudFoundry
  • Positive impact, since it simplifies the deployment time by a huge margin. Without cloud foundry, deploying a code needs coordination with infrastructure teams, while with cloud foundry, its a simple one line command. This reduces the deployment time from at least few hours to few minutes. Faster deployments promote faster dev cycle iterations.
  • Code maintenance such as upgrading a Node or Java version is as simple as updating the build-pack. Without cloud foundry, using web logic, the specific version only supports a specific version of Java. So updating the version involves upgrading the version of web logic that needs to involve few teams. So without cloud foundry, it takes at least few days, with cloud foundry, its a matter of few mins.
  • Overall, happier Developers and thats harder to quantify.
Read full review
IBM
  • It directly affected our expenses since we do not need to deploy and maintain a set of separate applications.
  • It allowed us to pay for only the amount of time cloud functions run.
  • It saved on maintenance and monitoring of the applications it replaced.
Read full review
ScreenShots