IBM Cloud Private Reviews

Our core banking process was monolithic. To address this, we transitioned to a microservices-based architecture. Leveraging Microsoft technologies, including Terminals version 23, we’ve revamped our banking operations. Not all services are microservices; some remain monolithic for simplicity. Containerization is pivotal, with OpenShift (based on Kubernetes and Docker) managing our microservices.

I've noticed that the satellite services layer requires some improvement compared to platforms like Azure or Microsoft. While it's in development, I believe the satellite layer has room for enhancement. Additionally, the DevOps layer could benefit from closer integrations, especially for using external applications like Jenkins.

I have been working with the product for five years. 

I rate the product's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. My company has 5000 users who use it daily. 

We opted for the IBM Private Cloud due to the prevalence of IBM applications in our ecosystem, including IBM IIB, IBM API Connect, DataPower, IBM ESB, and IBM FileNet. The seamless integration with our middle layer, the IBM Integration Hub, was a key factor in our decision. Leveraging API Connect simplified the integration process, aligning well with our overall architecture.

IBM professionals facilitated the initial setup of the IBM private cloud, making it a relatively straightforward process. While the setup itself was easy, some configurations needed attention. Overall, I would rate the setup experience a seven out of ten. The process took a whole week to complete. We had one resource from our side to help with the deployment process. 

I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten. 

We had evaluated Oracle before IBM Private Cloud. 

In our DevOps environment, we've encountered a unique challenge as our mainframe is currently not integrated into the DevOps pipeline. However, for the rest of our OpenShift platform, we've successfully implemented a DevOps workflow using Jenkins, GitHub, etc. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution for data management.

The support and pricing need to improve.

I've used the solution for several years.

Our experience with tech support has not been good because the support is slow.

We leased BI for the solution, a service from IBM. We already run on classic IBM, so we did another recently to do the POC in the modern IBM cloud. During the POC, we had a hardware issue. We reported, and it took a week to fix the broken unit. The support asks many questions, such as whether we rebooted or did this and that, so there are delays. But imagine if this were a production environment. The experience is not so good.

The parameters for the experience are different from those of the public because they request the preparation of the environment. Regarding the console, IBM Cloud Private is simpler than Azure and AWS. It has a limitation in that when you do the build. You want a label or a description that explains what something is for. All the same, the interface looks very simplified compared to others.

The solution is expensive.

Our organization used IBM Cloud Private for compliance because it allows us to manage to the lowest layer. We have control of the ESXi. In GCE, we have no control over ESXi.

I would look for other solutions. IBM Cloud Private does monitor the environment. They just give you a set of provisions from their portal. I use IBM Cloud Private due to this compliance reason. But it makes no difference because I need to build all these BPCs and subscribe to all these links to connect. If I host it within, I think it's a lot simpler.

I rate IBM Cloud Private a five out of ten.

It is an AI-powered chatbot primarily designed for enhancing self-security features.

The most valuable attribute is the platform's ability to consistently deliver high reliability. When it comes to integrated solutions, it becomes even more significant for the platform to maintain a 99% uptime, even during upgrades or the installation of new features, ensuring uninterrupted service to customers in the most accessible manner possible.

One significant challenge is operational issues. When such issues arise, sometimes they can be attributed to bugs in the platform itself or in OpenShift. In a context where thousands and millions of customers rely on this platform daily, downtime is not an option. Upgrades are particularly challenging as they often involve major OpenShift upgrades to address specific product bugs. This can lead to delays and a complex upgrade process, requiring meticulous attention to operational configurations. Also, scaling can be problematic in high-traffic environments. Auto-scaling and managing pod scaling in the microservices architecture, a core feature of IBM Cloud Private, can pose challenges, especially when dealing with larger volumes of traffic.

I have been working with it for four years now.

The product is stable and performs well when dealing with smaller volumes of traffic. However, when you scale up to handle around fifteen million customers, each conducting approximately five thousand transactions per second, it faces scaling challenges. To address these issues, you must undertake numerous optimization efforts, such as reevaluating the number of pods needed per node. Even with these adjustments, it may not function optimally, requiring frequent recalibrations to maintain performance.

Its scalability capabilities can be somewhat challenging. When traffic increases, it is expected to auto-scale, but this functionality doesn't perform as expected, particularly when handling high-traffic loads.

When it comes to technical support from IBM, there are two distinct scenarios to consider. If you have already acquired principal support from Red Hat OpenShift, you can feel assured that you're in capable hands, because IBM OpenShift is a part of IBM Cloud Private, and you'll have a single contract with IBM that includes Red Hat's support. In this situation, the support process tends to be smoother. If you haven't obtained Red Hat OpenShift support and solely rely on IBM's standard support, things are challenging. When you need assistance, you're required to create a ticket. The platform may be experiencing live issues, and you'd expect round-the-clock support. In both scenarios, if I were to rate the support on a scale from one to ten, it would fall somewhere in the middle, leaning closer to four or five on the lower end. It's not particularly satisfactory, especially for industry-grade products.

Neutral

There were many compelling reasons to opt for IBM Cloud Private. First and foremost, the organization had a strong commitment to innovation and was eager to invest in experimentation. This appetite for trying out new ideas was driven by the organization's desire to embark on a journey of digital transformation. The second key factor was that, as part of this digital transformation journey, the organization was exploring the potential of artificial intelligence. The primary objective was to harness the power of AI and determine how it could benefit the organization. The third crucial aspect was IBM's active promotion of its product, along with its well-structured approach to fitting within the organization's hierarchy. It also offered an economically competitive price, making its solution attractive.

The initial setup posed significant challenges and figuring out how to deploy it initially was a complex task. One approach considered was to set it up on bare metal, essentially building everything from scratch using the Red Hat operating system as the base, but there was a lack of comprehensive documentation available both on the Internet and through official support channels. This led to the need for numerous support tickets to gain a clear understanding of the deployment process.

Due to the scarcity of information, we had to opt for an alternative approach. VMware was initially installed, and subsequently, IBM Cloud Private was installed on top of the VMware setup. While this method got the system up and running, it came with its financial implications, as it required licenses for both VMware and IBM, including OpenShift and other software components in the suite. The lack of readily available documentation made the initial setup a challenging process, particularly when it came to installing OpenShift on the network.

In general, the cost is on the higher side. The annual license fee that we acquired four years ago was approximately $900,000.

There are a couple of guidelines that I would suggest to consider when evaluating IBM Cloud Private. Firstly, it's important to determine your specific goals. If you're looking to establish a microservices-based architecture, there are alternative options in the market that might be more cost-effective. Secondly, ease of use is a crucial factor. There are other solutions on the market, such as VMware Tanzu, that provide additional benefits, including a reporting system, alarms, and monitoring tools under the same license, making it more operationally efficient. It should be noted that IBM has reportedly stopped selling it in certain regions, so I would suggest paying attention to that as well. Furthermore, the flexibility of buying individual software components independently may be more attractive than being tied to the bundled offerings in ICP. Lastly, if cost is a concern, open-source solutions like plain Kubernetes (K8s) offer more budget-friendly alternatives. You can select the features and licenses that fit your financial constraints. Overall, I would rate IBM Cloud Private a six out of ten because of performance concerns. It struggled when subjected to high traffic loads, and troubleshooting was challenging.

Our company has a staff of ten who use the solution to provide cloud integration for our clients. Administration of API Connect runs in the cloud and other components are managed on-premises. 

We are IT architects who provide consulting services and recommend different infrastructures. We are not partners with IBM but have a good relationship with them and other providers.

The product's framework is good, it integrates well with API Connect, and the private cloud allows for use in any location. 

One issue with the solution is latency because there is lag time when we connect from Argentina to IBM's data centers in Washington and Dallas. It would be a benefit to have a data center in Latin America. 

The solution does not offer many routes over the cloud that are available with other solutions such as AWS which is a leader in the industry. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

We pay annual licensing fees. 

Some colleagues believe AWS is more expensive but I don't find that to be the case. 

We believe AWS is the leader in cloud services and ranks as the top solution. Azure and IBM rank within the top five solutions. 

We are currently evaluating IoT and Elasticsearch solutions for other standardized services we might offer. 

The solution is not at the same level as AWS or Azure but it is a good IBM product.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Initially, we were using the platform for POC, carrying out tests. We've recently started delivering our main banking applications and mobile banking app on the Cloud Private platform. Half of our main banking services are now on that platform. I am the administrator of the platform and we provide it to our customers. 

The support provides crucial value because the culpability issues that we have faced are very challenging. The IBM Turkey support personnel helped us with those issues. We chose the product because we knew the support was good. It makes a big difference. 

From a technical perspective, there are some things lacking including some defects around multi-cloud management. If you install a second one, you cannot manage both of them from one dashboard. That's a problem for us and needs to be solved.

I've been using this solution for over two years. 

The solution is scalable and stable. 

Our company is in Turkey and IBM provides good support. We don't have any complaints.

The setup is fully automated, so there was no problem there. We have 13 users in our company who manage the system but many of our customers also use it. The users in our company our general admins, cloud admins and project admins. At the peak, there would have been a million customers throughout Turkey.

The licensing fee is paid annually. 

I think this IBM solution is the best for the industry because they support legacy systems, and since we're dealing with regulations, it's the best way for us to stay safe. The stability of the system is more important than anything. From a financial point of view, I recommend it.

I rate the solution seven out of 10.