F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall) vs. IBM Power Virtual Server

So a lot of companies that have a digital side and they have a lot of applications in the cloud, this is one of those areas that it can protect the net so it can lock 'em down, it'll build a baseline so you understand what that application's doing. So if it sees something not normal, it'll get protected against that.

Incentivized

Due to its reliability, it is well-suited for mission-critical applications. It is also well suited for running multiple applications on a single server and fully utilizing the server's full capacity. However, it is not well suited for servers that require dedicated IO resources.

• Layer seven attacks are becoming far more common. Traditionally it was always layered three, layer four, where you get an additional firewall, but with the application layer attacks become more frequent, more popular, et cetera. So having the web application firewall protecting us, and then with the recent Log4j, that's the most recent use case when it gave us that instant level of protection whilst we remediated the Log4j that we had that and the F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was protecting us.
• I have a great relationship with the account manager, my account manager, and I think he drives the best price possible, um, for me, and I'm happy with that price.
• F5 Distributed Cloud WAF is always innovating and evolving.
• We run a very competitive proof value where we run numerous competitors against each other, and then we evaluate from that and then make the selection, and F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was the winner.

Incentivized

• It is easy to segregate test environment with production environment
• security and compliance
• IBM server are scalable with - with increase in data it can dynamically allocate the resources with saves the company cost
• it is very convenient to use with help of its hardware management console and integrated virtualization manager.
• The best part it , it support our legacy system.

Incentivized

• So we just had some performance issues when it comes to routing. Because the web application firewall sits in front of our website, which is hosted on-site, we had some trouble with the VGP protocols between the two sites and it took us a while to figure it out. So that is probably one area where we could improve. Otherwise, when it comes to the WAF functionality itself, it's really good.

Incentivized

• Having a wider selection of software to work with would be welcome.
• Training and education is daunting at first and could be simplified.
• Much of the automation is wonderful after it is set up but getting started has a steep learning curve.

Incentivized

At the moment we are 100% satisfied with the performance and our support team is well used to the process involved. So unless we have some major issues in adopting, we are sure to be with IBM itself.

Incentivized

Power Systems Virtual Server on IBM Cloud for IBMi's overall usability is good, but it can be difficult for new users, some learning is needed, but there are tonns of online documentation.

Incentivized

Very easy to use.

Incentivized

Easy to use.

Incentivized

As with most IBM products the ongoing support for IBM Power Virtual Server is solid and consistent. IBM provides a clear roadmap for receiving support of their products. Both voice and online response is offered. It is obvious that IBM has the internal systems and culture to maintain support functions. This starts from the initial support call to the problem analysis and continues through the problem resolution. Documentation and communication are consistent within this process.

Incentivized

It is economic.

Incentivized

Basically, Cloudflare is a more economical solution at the level of DNS balancing, easy to use with a few simple clicks and that has gained an advantage in the market, however, compared to F5, it falls short of the entire protection panorama that the solution provides since F5 does not It's just DNS that goes further and that's where it differentiates and stands out.

Incentivized

They both have their own ups and downs and it totally depends on the team which suits them best. IBM Power Virtual Server has Performance, Scalability, Reliability and Availability, Compatibility, and Good Vendor Support. The specific use case and workload requirements played a significant role. Some workloads may benefit from IBM Power Systems' architecture, while others may perform equally well on alternative platforms.

Incentivized

It is efficient.

Incentivized

• Accelerated time to value as it was a requirement for a workload being provisioned on that cloud
• As an existing f5 customer, access to their solutions integrator (GridZero) made the sizing, licensing, purchases, and downloading of the software very quick and painless

Incentivized

• We have had a return on investment of 30%.
• There have also been 80% fewer application crashes due to a lack of resources that previously ran on the X86 platform.
• Administration management has been simplified and staff can dedicate themselves to the development of applications, instead of providing support to users when the applications do not respond efficiently, this made staff 45% more productive.

Incentivized