I usually work with Cloudability for cost optimization, cost analysis, reporting, and resource and cost management, mostly focusing on the FinOps side.

The features of Cloudability I find most valuable depend on the kind of report I need and which resource type I want to optimize. I find the reports to be extensive and elaborate, and I get whatever information I require.

If I don't get what I need, I build automation tools that can read the reports and provide the required cost optimization outputs in the needed format. If there are any VMs, SQL storage, or other resources that are not right-sized, I identify them and report that.

At this moment, I don't have specific opinions on how Cloudability could be improved or enhanced. I'm using it as a major source of information for my team, but I'm not the right person to suggest enhancements.

I believe that automating all manual processes in Cloudability would be beneficial, providing a proactive prescriptive analysis on what needs to be done to lower costs; however, this might also keep us out of business.

Enhancements could be made in the user interface and customization, and leveraging GenAI would be an area for improvement in Cloudability.

I have been working with Cloudability for the last one year.

I work on the cloud platform primarily. I work on Google Cloud Platform's cost optimization where I identify opportunities and resources to optimize costs for customers, including infrastructure costs and BigQuery costs. This also encompasses managing unused backups, data, decommissioning, archiving, right-sizing VM instances, and slot consumption.

I am a consultant, not an end user of this solution. I use it internally in my company, and I collect data for the customers as I work in LTI Mindtree.

Cloudability's customizable alerts help me maintain budgetary goals by providing recommendations and alerts on slot usages. It also alerts me if some VM suddenly causes a spike in cost and usage. We look at the policies in place for infrastructure optimization concerning Compute Engine, persistent disks, MIGs, and VMs, and we leverage decommissioning of VMs or persistent disks and right-sizing the Compute Engine to ensure the customer doesn't go on demand and has an appropriate size of reserved instances allocated, thereby lowering costs proactively.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cloudability a six out of ten.

We had a multi-cloud environment using both AWS and Azure to keep track of costs in one place. We used Cloudability to understand and manage the spending across both clouds effectively.

We use Cloudability to monitor costs and track the expenses of our subscriptions.

Cloudability takes care of identifying and managing the cloud. If you want to do it yourself, you must handle all the underlying data engineering, interface with all the tables, and generate the reports. Cloudability does that for you, providing many options to prepare dashboards within the product. You don't have to build code; you must provide the data interface or input. It helps you manage your spending across different clouds.

There are also some limitations with the dashboards and data representation in Cloudability. For example, if you choose Power BI, you have many options for data representation that are not necessarily available in Cloudability.

I have been using Cloudability for two years.

Cloudability offers valuable insights into data engineering and analytics platforms. With access to the same data Cloudability utilizes, one could recreate similar dashboards on their own data platform. This implies that Cloudability's role could be replaceable with some organizational effort, provided they have the necessary data sources and expertise. However, for organizations looking to streamline processes without investing extensive time, money, and resources into building their solution, Cloudability serves as a convenient option. Moreover, it offers benefits for both single-cloud and multi-cloud users. While it's beneficial for single-cloud users, it becomes particularly advantageous for organizations with multi-cloud environments, as it helps manage costs and optimize resources across different cloud providers.

We have created our dashboards, which gives us more control. For instance, we can refresh them weekly, whereas, in Cloudability, the setup is monthly. This provides us with more real-time data. However, it's worth noting that the level of detail varies for different resources and billing types. Sometimes, you may need to delve into the actual billings from Microsoft Azure to obtain insights that aren't directly available from Cloudability.

Cloudability is beneficial if you understand the attributes well and if the billing configuration is optimized. Yet, if you require more control over reports and dashboards, similar to what other BI tools like Power BI offer, Cloudability might not be as robust. Improvements in this area could make it more appealing to different organizations.

Cloudability has yearly charges based on usage. It's not cheap.

Some dashboards are directly reported to management and cover all the applications we have on the cloud. Each application should have specific dashboards focusing on spending and resource utilization, and most should have these features.

For example, you can compare spending in a single cloud environment using Microsoft's Azure portal insights. From the tenant portal, you get detailed information that can be fed into Power BI to create custom dashboards. However, if you use a multi-cloud environment with AWS, Google Cloud, and Azure, it's more challenging to consolidate these insights. Cloudability is beneficial as it provides a unified view of spending and resource utilization across the entire organization, helping management track expenditures.

Cloudability is particularly useful for large organizations wanting to understand where they are spending more and make decisions about continuing with specific cloud providers. However, they need to consider the cost of Cloudability and whether they already have an in-house data platform. If they do, building similar capabilities internally might be more cost-effective.

Cloudability also provides insights about rightsizing resources, which is valuable at the organization or department level. However, it doesn't predict future scaling of data volumes; that knowledge lies with the application owners. If the data volumes are expected to remain stable, Cloudability's recommendations can be beneficial.

CloudOps with Cloudability is relatively straightforward and has an easy-to-use interface. It is more user-friendly than the Azure portal, making it easier to find relevant data. Users need to understand the cloud-specific terms and attributes to apply the correct filters.

Cloudability remains valuable, especially for teams or organizations not wanting to delve deeply into data engineering. It's an organization's go-to product, provided they have the budget. On the other hand, organizations committed to a single cloud setup with established data platforms and engineering capabilities might prefer building in-house solutions rather than using Cloudability, which might not offer all the customized features they need.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use the product to get a detailed level of transparency on the cloud strengths.

Cloudability needs to focus on more cloud providers.

I rate the tool's stability a seven out of ten.

I rate Cloudability's scalability a seven out of ten.

The tool's deployment is easy and doesn't take much time. I rate it an eight out of ten. It takes two months to complete the deployment.

I rate the product a seven out of ten. It gives you granular details.