StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Platform as a Service
  4. Realtime Backend API
  5. AWS CloudFormation vs Pusher

AWS CloudFormation vs Pusher

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Pusher
Pusher
Stacks618
Followers1.4K
Votes234
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Stacks1.6K
Followers1.3K
Votes88

AWS CloudFormation vs Pusher: What are the differences?

Introduction: In this comparison, we will explore the key differences between AWS CloudFormation and Pusher, two popular tools used in managing cloud infrastructure.

  1. Infrastructure Management Approach: AWS CloudFormation is an Infrastructure as Code service that allows you to define and provision AWS infrastructure using declarative JSON or YAML templates. On the other hand, Pusher is a hosted service that provides real-time communication APIs and libraries to help developers build interactive applications.

  2. Ecosystem Integration: AWS CloudFormation is deeply integrated with the AWS ecosystem, allowing seamless integration with other AWS services such as EC2, S3, and RDS. Pusher, on the other hand, focuses on real-time communication and does not have the same level of integration with cloud services.

  3. Complexity and Flexibility: AWS CloudFormation offers a high level of control and flexibility in managing infrastructure resources, with support for complex dependencies and configurations. Pusher, on the other hand, simplifies real-time communication tasks but may lack the same level of flexibility when it comes to customizing infrastructure settings.

  4. Cost Structure: AWS CloudFormation is a service offered by AWS as part of their cloud platform, and users are billed based on the resources provisioned. Pusher, on the other hand, offers different pricing plans based on the volume of messages sent through their service, which may vary based on usage requirements.

  5. Target Audience: AWS CloudFormation is primarily targeted towards DevOps engineers and infrastructure managers who need to provision and manage infrastructure resources at scale. Pusher, on the other hand, caters to developers who require real-time features in their applications without having to manage infrastructure complexities.

  6. Service Scope: AWS CloudFormation is a comprehensive tool for managing all aspects of infrastructure deployment and configuration within the AWS ecosystem. Pusher, on the other hand, is focused specifically on real-time communication features and may not cover the breadth of infrastructure management capabilities offered by AWS CloudFormation.

In Summary, AWS CloudFormation and Pusher differ in their approach to infrastructure management, ecosystem integration, complexity, cost structure, target audience, and service scope.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Pusher, AWS CloudFormation

Timothy
Timothy

SRE

Mar 20, 2020

Decided

I personally am not a huge fan of vendor lock in for multiple reasons:

  • I've seen cost saving moves to the cloud end up costing a fortune and trapping companies due to over utilization of cloud specific features.
  • I've seen S3 failures nearly take down half the internet.
  • I've seen companies get stuck in the cloud because they aren't built cloud agnostic.

I choose to use terraform for my cloud provisioning for these reasons:

  • It's cloud agnostic so I can use it no matter where I am.
  • It isn't difficult to use and uses a relatively easy to read language.
  • It tests infrastructure before running it, and enables me to see and keep changes up to date.
  • It runs from the same CLI I do most of my CM work from.
385k views385k
Comments
Daniel
Daniel

May 4, 2020

Decided

Because Pulumi uses real programming languages, you can actually write abstractions for your infrastructure code, which is incredibly empowering. You still 'describe' your desired state, but by having a programming language at your fingers, you can factor out patterns, and package it up for easier consumption.

426k views426k
Comments
Sergey
Sergey

Contractor at Adaptive

Apr 17, 2020

Decided

Overview

We use Terraform to manage AWS cloud environment for the project. It is pretty complex, largely static, security-focused, and constantly evolving.

Terraform provides descriptive (declarative) way of defining the target configuration, where it can work out the dependencies between configuration elements and apply differences without re-provisioning the entire cloud stack.

Advantages

Terraform is vendor-neutral in a way that it is using a common configuration language (HCL) with plugins (providers) for multiple cloud and service providers.

Terraform keeps track of the previous state of the deployment and applies incremental changes, resulting in faster deployment times.

Terraform allows us to share reusable modules between projects. We have built an impressive library of modules internally, which makes it very easy to assemble a new project from pre-fabricated building blocks.

Disadvantages

Software is imperfect, and Terraform is no exception. Occasionally we hit annoying bugs that we have to work around. The interaction with any underlying APIs is encapsulated inside 3rd party Terraform providers, and any bug fixes or new features require a provider release. Some providers have very poor coverage of the underlying APIs.

Terraform is not great for managing highly dynamic parts of cloud environments. That part is better delegated to other tools or scripts.

Terraform state may go out of sync with the target environment or with the source configuration, which often results in painful reconciliation.

426k views426k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Pusher
Pusher
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation

Pusher is the category leader in delightful APIs for app developers building communication and collaboration features.

You can use AWS CloudFormation’s sample templates or create your own templates to describe the AWS resources, and any associated dependencies or runtime parameters, required to run your application. You don’t need to figure out the order in which AWS services need to be provisioned or the subtleties of how to make those dependencies work.

Easily build scalable in-app notifications, chat, realtime graphs, geotracking and more in your web & mobile apps with our hosted pub/sub messaging API.;Send programmable push notifications to iOS and Android devices with delivery and open rate tracking built in.;Easily add 1-1 and group Chat to your web & mobile apps. Presence, message storage, rich media, notifications, typing indicators and more.;Embed a realtime collaborative editor in your app in seconds to empower your users to do more, together.
AWS CloudFormation comes with the following ready-to-run sample templates: WordPress (blog),Tracks (project tracking), Gollum (wiki used by GitHub), Drupal (content management), Joomla (content management), Insoshi (social apps), Redmine (project mgmt);No Need to Reinvent the Wheel – A template can be used repeatedly to create identical copies of the same stack (or to use as a foundation to start a new stack);Transparent and Open – Templates are simple JSON formatted text files that can be placed under your normal source control mechanisms, stored in private or public locations such as Amazon S3 and exchanged via email.;Declarative and Flexible – To create the infrastructure you want, you enumerate what AWS resources, configuration values and interconnections you need in a template and then let AWS CloudFormation do the rest with a few simple clicks in the AWS Management Console, via the command line tools or by calling the APIs.
Statistics
Stacks
618
Stacks
1.6K
Followers
1.4K
Followers
1.3K
Votes
234
Votes
88
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 55
    An easy way to give customers realtime features
  • 40
    Websockets
  • 34
    Simple
  • 27
    Easy to get started with
  • 25
    Free plan
Cons
  • 11
    Costly
Pros
  • 43
    Automates infrastructure deployments
  • 21
    Declarative infrastructure and deployment
  • 13
    No more clicking around
  • 3
    Infrastructure as code
  • 3
    Atomic
Cons
  • 4
    Brittle
  • 2
    No RBAC and policies in templates
Integrations
Slack
Slack
Datadog
Datadog
Librato
Librato
No integrations available

What are some alternatives to Pusher, AWS CloudFormation?

Firebase

Firebase

Firebase is a cloud service designed to power real-time, collaborative applications. Simply add the Firebase library to your application to gain access to a shared data structure; any changes you make to that data are automatically synchronized with the Firebase cloud and with other clients within milliseconds.

Socket.IO

Socket.IO

It enables real-time bidirectional event-based communication. It works on every platform, browser or device, focusing equally on reliability and speed.

PubNub

PubNub

PubNub makes it easy for you to add real-time capabilities to your apps, without worrying about the infrastructure. Build apps that allow your users to engage in real-time across mobile, browser, desktop and server.

SignalR

SignalR

SignalR allows bi-directional communication between server and client. Servers can now push content to connected clients instantly as it becomes available. SignalR supports Web Sockets, and falls back to other compatible techniques for older browsers. SignalR includes APIs for connection management (for instance, connect and disconnect events), grouping connections, and authorization.

Ably

Ably

Ably offers WebSockets, stream resume, history, presence, and managed third-party integrations to make it simple to build, extend, and deliver digital realtime experiences at scale.

Syncano

Syncano

Syncano is a backend platform to build powerful real-time apps more efficiently. Integrate with any API, minimize boilerplate code and control your data - all from one place.

NATS

NATS

Unlike traditional enterprise messaging systems, NATS has an always-on dial tone that does whatever it takes to remain available. This forms a great base for building modern, reliable, and scalable cloud and distributed systems.

SocketCluster

SocketCluster

SocketCluster is a fast, highly scalable HTTP + realtime server engine which lets you build multi-process realtime servers that make use of all CPU cores on a machine/instance. It removes the limitations of having to run your Node.js server as a single thread and makes your backend resilient by automatically recovering from worker crashes and aggregating errors into a central log.

Packer

Packer

Packer automates the creation of any type of machine image. It embraces modern configuration management by encouraging you to use automated scripts to install and configure the software within your Packer-made images.

deepstream.io

deepstream.io

Scalable Server for Realtime Web Apps with JSON structures that can be read, manipulated and listened to, messages that can be sent to one or more subscribers, and request response workflows, between two clients or servers.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot