We performed a comparison between IBM Public Cloud and Microsoft Azure based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Azure is the winner in this comparison. It is a robust and reliable solution with a good user interface and a proven ROI. Microsoft Azure does come out on top in the ease-of-deployment and pricing categories, however.
"It's straightforward, has a good environment and is cost-effective."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Public Cloud is the AI integrations."
"For non-complex applications, the IBM Cloud works fine and the price is much lower than the competitors."
"One of the features that I really like about IBM Cloud is the flexibility where you can order your own hardware."
"What I like most in IBM Public Cloud is how easy it is to create serverless functions. They are called IBM functions, but in AWS, they are called Lambda functions. Those are pretty standard, and another thing I like the most is that you have fewer restrictions on the amount of data you can transfer across those functions. IBM Public Cloud is way more flexible than AWS. I also like that IBM Public Cloud is pretty straightforward to integrate. As long as you have all the tools IBM provides you, getting everything up and running is straightforward."
"This is a predictable and dependable service."
"The availability is second to none. Customer support is very good."
"The beauty of cloud service providers, especially public cloud service providers, is that they are scalable every time when you need them because their payment model is pay-as-you-go."
"The redundancy across different regions is the most valuable. It provides a big value for cloud services, especially for Microsoft."
"The most valuable features I have found to be the auto-scaling feature and the interface."
"I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy."
"I think Azure's level of automation to achieve efficiency or agility is valuable. I also like the change capability cadence, the showback capabilities, and understanding what our costs are."
"It has multiple features that can be used from the start."
"It is quick and easy to deploy. It is flexible, and we can deploy a resource anytime. We like and prefer the pay-as-you-go model."
"The solution provides multiple well integrated services which happen to work together seamlessly and provide flexibility and scalability for use cases all around the industry."
"The solution is completely scalable."
"It could be more secure."
"Recently, we just faced some issues with the operating system due to the end of life of CentOS 6...So, then the client wanted to try it out under AWS instead of IBM. In short, it has some complexities."
"The initial setup and the pricing are areas that need improvement."
"There is not a lot of support for this solution, which is something that needs to be improved."
"The product should offer more computing, similar to Amazon."
"It will be challenging to implement if you do not have any experience."
"They could improve on customizing reporting capabilities."
"They do not have a very good virtual network implemented, and the VPC is the most important feature that needs to be improved."
"The diagnostics should have more logs."
"It should have a better hybrid-cloud central analysis. Their support service also needs to be improved. Our main concern is support calls. Our issue is basically related to the technical functionality of the services that we use. It doesn't behave as expected, and support often fails to solve the problem."
"Stability can suffer in the context of a large architecture."
"Support could be improved. If you pay for a higher plan, it's okay, however, the lower plans don't offer as good of a service experience."
"We have reported some bugs we encountered, and it would be good if those bugs were resolved more quickly."
"The license price could be lower."
"The market place can be raised, and the CMT can be more sophisticated to create more opportunities for the end users."
"If the price were reduced then it would be an improvement."
IBM Public Cloud is ranked 9th in PaaS Clouds with 16 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 299 reviews. IBM Public Cloud is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Public Cloud writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and has helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". IBM Public Cloud is most compared with Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Google Cloud, Salesforce Platform and Heroku, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Pivotal Cloud Foundry and SAP S4HANA on AWS. See our IBM Public Cloud vs. Microsoft Azure report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.