IBM Cloud vs. AWS

The main difference between IBM Cloud and AWS lies in their focus areas. AWS provides an extensive set of products and services catering to various workloads, including powerful computing options. On the other hand, IBM Cloud emphasizes hybrid cloud, AI, and enterprise needs, offering strong integration with Red Hat’s open-source tools.

Continue reading for an in-depth comparison of IBM Cloud vs AWS

Comparing IBM Cloud and AWS

 

Platforms Supported

Cloud Storage

Integrations

Custom Branding

Pricing

IBM Cloud

Windows

Mac

SaaS/Web

Yes

Google Workspace, HubSpot, Slack, Zapier, Zoho, Salesforce, and more.

Yes

Custom/Pay As You Go

AWS

Windows

Mac

SaaS/Web

Yes

Google Workspace, HubSpot, Slack, Zoho, DropBox, Box, and more.

Yes

Custom/Pay As You Go

Storage Capacity

To understand the unique attributes of IBM Cloud vs AWS, we should start by evaluating their respective storage capacities.

IBM Cloud offers a range of storage solutions, each with varying capacities. The Lite plan provides 25 GB of storage per month. For more extensive needs, IBM Cloud Object Storage offers scalable storage. Secondary volumes in IBM Cloud can range from 10 GB to 16,000 GB, and block storage volumes for Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) can range between 10 and 16,000 GB. In terms of file storage, users can provision shares from 10 GB up to 32,000 GB in capacity. 

AWS offers a wide range of storage options with varying capacities. Individual Amazon S3 objects can range in size from a minimum of 0 bytes to a maximum of 5 terabytes (TB). If we make an average assumption that each object is around 1MB, AWS must have at least 100 exabytes of storage capacity. Furthermore, Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud storage platform S3 currently stores over 100 trillion objects.

IBM Cloud vs. AWS

Security

IBM Cloud provides robust security measures. These include threat management services to adapt to new threats and data encryption for data at rest and in transit. It also has identity and access management to control resource usage, firewalls and security groups for network protection, and a unified framework for managing security, risk, and compliance. Additionally, IBM Cloud uses secure engineering practices and layered security controls across its network and infrastructure to ensure data safety.

AWS provides a variety of security features to protect its customers’ data and applications. These include a secure and resilient infrastructure and inventory and configuration management tools. It also includes data encryption, identity and access control through AWS IAM, monitoring and logging tools for visibility and anomaly detection, and the AWS Security Hub for streamlined security checks, alert aggregation, and automated remediation.

Compliance Standards

IBM Cloud is compliant with several major regulations, including HIPAA and GDPR. IBM provides HIPAA-compliant cloud services, given that clients enter into a Business Associate Agreement with IBM. For GDPR, IBM Cloud has implemented measures to ensure data protection and give users control over their personal data. IBM Cloud also meets various other global and industry-specific compliance standards.

Similarly, AWS is compliant with both HIPAA and GDPR. Entities subject to HIPAA compliance can use AWS to process, maintain, and store protected health information. AWS also supports 143 security standards and compliance certifications, such as PCI-DSS, HIPAA/HITECH, FedRAMP, FIPS 140-2, and NIST 800-171.

Reliability and Uptime

IBM Cloud is recognized for its high reliability and uptime. Their IBM Z platform, for instance, has been reported to have the highest reliability, with 94% of enterprise organizations stating consistent achievement of these metrics. They employ strategies like service location decoupling and global traffic management to prevent downtime during both planned and unplanned outages. The architecture of IBM’s Blockchain Platform is designed to ensure reliability, low latency processing, and maximum uptime.

AWS is also known for its high reliability and uptime. AWS’s Well-Architected Framework emphasizes the importance of reliability, which requires a workload to be aware of failures as they occur and to take action to avoid impacting availability.

Backup and Recovery

IBM Cloud provides robust backup and recovery services. IBM Cloud® Backup is a comprehensive, agent-based backup and recovery system managed through a web interface. This system allows for data backup between IBM Cloud servers. IBM also offers storage solutions to accelerate enterprise backup and recovery processes, enabling rapid data retrieval and IT service recovery. The IBM Cloud Object Storage can replace existing backup processes, providing high resiliency and low cost for infrequent-access storage classes.

AsAWS also provides comprehensive backup and recovery services. AWS Backup is a fully managed backup service that centralizes and automates the backup of data across AWS services. It simplifies data protection at scale, making it easy to back up data across AWS services in the cloud and on-premises. Another benefit of using AWS for backup is the access to cloud-native tools that can evolve your backup solution into a disaster recovery plan.

IBM Cloud vs. AWS

Pricing and Plans

To wrap up our comparison of IBM Cloud vs AWS, let’s delve into the aspect of costs.

IBM Cloud offers various pricing options, including a free tier, pay-as-you-go, and subscription plans. Prices vary based on the service used, such as IBM® Cloudant®, Cloud Object Storage, virtual server instances, and operational crypto units. The costs can be estimated using IBM’s Cloud cost estimator tool.

As an IBM Cloud alternative, AWS also follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model similar to utility bills, where you only pay for the services you consume. AWS Support Plans start at a minimum spend of $29 per month. EC2 instances can have varying costs, with a t2.micro instance costing about $10/month. Other services like Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) charge $0.10 per hour for each cluster. However, the exact cost can vary greatly depending on the specific services and resources used.

Fill: The Superior Alternative to IBM Cloud

While IBM Cloud is a strong contender in cloud storage, Fill emerges as an impressively superior alternative. Even though Fill is primarily an eSignature platform and not a cloud storage service, its features and scalable plans make it a compelling alternative to IBM Cloud.

One of Fill’s standout features is its comprehensive eSignature capabilities, offering a secure and user-friendly way to digitally sign, send, manage, and store documents. This alone makes Fill a powerful tool apart from traditional cloud storage services.

Moreover, Fill’s dedication to accessibility is evident in its mobile apps for both Android and iOS. This level of flexibility, which may not be consistently available with IBM Cloud, allows users to manage their documents anytime, anywhere, making Fill an exceptionally versatile solution.

Furthermore, Fill’s affordable Pro plan, starting at just $24.99, offers great value. This cost-effective plan, coupled with its wide range of features, positions Fill as an attractive alternative to IBM Cloud. In essence, Fill’s commitment to delivering comprehensive digital document management solutions makes it the preferred choice for businesses seeking an efficient and affordable solution.

Why wait? Enhance your workflow with Fill today.

Amara Chiaha

Amara is a copywriter at Amplify Ventures who uses her experience with UX writing to provide relevant content structure for clients exploring HIPAA compliant document management solutions.

Related Stories

Internxt vs. pCloud

Internxt vs. pCloud

The main difference between Internxt and pCloud lies in their approach towards collaboration.  Internxt provides a user-friendly service for team collaboration that allows collective work on diverse files like documents, sheets, and slides. pCloud features a robust suite of collaboration tools focusing on shared and simultaneous file editing.

pCloud vs. Mega

pCloud vs. Mega

The main difference between pCloud and Mega lies in their storage options. On their free plan, pCloud initially gives you 10GB of storage. They also offer 20GB, 2TB, and 2.5TB plans. Mega initially provides a generous free storage space of 50GB. It can be upgraded from 400GB to a massive 16.

Internxt vs OneDrive

The main difference between Internxt and OneDrive is their focus on privacy and data security. Internxt, a Valencia-based cloud service, offers a free 10 GB plan, prioritizing privacy with a "zero knowledge" approach and transparent practices. On the contrary, OneDrive by Microsoft is a Windows-friendly cloud storage that integrates Office 365, file sharing, and collaboration features.

Get great articles direct to your inbox

    We’ll never share your details with third parties.
    View our Privacy Policy for more info.

    Arrow-up