Aestron vs. IBM Cloud Functions

Aestron

IBM Cloud Functions

57 Reviews and Ratings

Overview
Product	Rating	Most Used By	Product Summary	Starting Price
Aestron	N/A	N/A	Aestron, a subsidiary of BIGO acquired by JOYY Inc. in 2019 (NASDAQ: YY), offers an enterprise platform as a service for real-time communication (RTC) solutions. The vendor boasts a dynamic and robust SDKs that developers can use to build real-time video, audio, live-stream, and chat functions with just a few lines of code. The vendor states Aestron powers some of the world's most popular live-streaming (BIGO), short-form video…	N/A
IBM Cloud Functions	Score8 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

Aestron

IBM Cloud Functions

No answers on this topic

Basic Cloud Functions Rate: $0.00017
per second of execution
API Gateway Rate: Free

Pricing Offerings
Aestron	IBM Cloud Functions
Free Trial
Yes	No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes	No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes	No

No setup fee

No setup fee

—

—

Best Alternatives
	Aestron	IBM Cloud Functions
Small Businesses	IBM Cloud Foundry Score6 out of 10	AWS Lambda Score8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies	IBM Cloud Private Score9.6 out of 10	AWS Lambda Score8.6 out of 10
Enterprises	AWS Elastic Beanstalk Score7.3 out of 10	AWS Lambda Score8.6 out of 10
All Alternatives	View all alternatives	View all alternatives

User Ratings
	Aestron	IBM Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend	- (0 ratings)	3.0 (7 ratings)

User Testimonials
	Aestron	IBM Cloud Functions
Likelihood to Recommend	Aestron No answers on this topic	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. Verified User Read full review
Pros	Aestron No answers on this topic	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. Incentivized Verified User Read full review
Cons	Aestron No answers on this topic	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 Incentivized Verified User Read full review
Alternatives Considered	Aestron No answers on this topic	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 Incentivized Badheka, Amit Technology Architect Read full review
Return on Investment	Aestron No answers on this topic	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. Incentivized Verified User Read full review
ScreenShots