We performed a comparison between Cisco Piston Enterprise OS and Juniper AppFormix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management."We like that Turbonomic shows application metrics and estimates the impact of taking a suggested action. It provides us a map of resource utilization as part of its recommendation. We evaluate and compare that to what we think would be appropriate from a human perspective to that what Turbonomic is doing, then take the best action going forward."
"It is a good holistic platform that is easy to use. It works pretty well."
"Rightsizing is valuable. Its recommendations are pretty good."
"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 system automatically sizes and moves resources based on the needs of the applications."
"It also brings up a list of machines and if something is under-provisioned and needs more compute power it will tell you, 'This server needs more compute power, and we suggest you raise it up to this level.' It will even automatically do it for you. In Azure, you don't have to actually go into the cloud provider to resize. You can just say, 'Apply these resizes,' and Turbonomic uses some back-end APIs to make the changes for you."
"We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time."
"The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."
"It offers enough support so that you don't need to have the need to get another device."
"It's a stable product. I didn't find any issues with regard to stability. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"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."
"They have a long road map when we ask for certain things that will make the product better. It takes time, but that's understandable because there are other things that are higher on the priority list."
"Turbonomic doesn't do storage placement how I would prefer. We use multiple shared storage volumes on VMware, so I don't have one big disk. I have lots of disks that I can place VMs on, and that consumes IOPS from the disk subsystem. We were getting recommendations to provision a new volume."
"It would be good for Turbonomic, on their side, to integrate with other companies like AppDynamics or SolarWinds or other monitoring softwares. I feel that the actual monitoring of applications, mixed in with their abilities, would help. That would be the case wherever Turbonomic lacks the ability to monitor an application or in cases where applications are so customized that it's not going to be able to handle them. There is monitoring that you can do with scripting that you may not be able to do with Turbonomic."
"It can be more agnostic in terms of the solutions that it provides. It can include some other cost-saving methods for the public cloud and SaaS applications as well."
"Recovering resources when they're not needed is not as optimized as it could be."
"We're still evaluating the solution, so I don't know enough about what I don't know. They've done a lot over the years. I used Turbonomics six or seven years ago before IBM bought them. They've matured a lot since then."
"The deployment process is a little tricky. It wasn't hard for me because I have pretty in-depth knowledge of Kubernetes, and their software runs on Kubernetes. To deploy it or upgrade it, you have to be able to follow steps and use the Kubernetes command line, or you'll need someone to come in and do it for you."
"The solution is just too expensive, so maybe the pricing could be better."
"This solution has a yearly licensing. In my country, it's really expensive."
"My expectations were probably slightly more for the third-party tool integration; for example, regarding the analytics, I had some different tools. So, integration was not as good as I was expecting. So, analytics, configuration tool I was not really happy. So, there is room for improvement in context with integration with existing tools in our network environment."
Earn 20 points
Cisco Piston Enterprise OS is ranked 51st in Cloud Management while Juniper AppFormix is ranked 27th in Cloud Management with 2 reviews. Cisco Piston Enterprise OS is rated 9.0, while Juniper AppFormix is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Piston Enterprise OS writes "A simple interface and helpful support for a solution that grows with us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper AppFormix writes "Good scalability, useful in terms of collective analytics, and low latency ". Cisco Piston Enterprise OS is most compared with Abiquo, whereas Juniper AppFormix is most compared with .
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.
